#a player with agency in this conflict

[gingerswagfreckles]

hey the post you made abt the israeli/palestine conflict is so much more conplicated than tumblr "activists" are making it out to be is literally so correct and so fucking important to have been said thank you so much

@manicpoetic Thanks so much! I'm really glad I made it. While I was typing I was like what am I even writing this for no one is gonna read it especially the people who probably need to bc it's longer than 3 sentences....but it has gained more traction than I had expected which has been encouraging.

I really am not an expert but that's sort of the point, like... I have read the news every day for at least the past 6 years and have read almost every article several newspapers have published on this conflict in that time, and I am still not sure of all the details nor do I think my stupid takes would be very helpful to anyone. Yet I knooooow I am more informed than Steven Universe Blogger #77 who is suddenly very confidently advocating for terrorist organizations and comically oversimplified solutions?? Like man some people on this site really need to learn to get humbled. Not every issue can be simplified down to a 3 sentence text post and you in your college dorm are probably not coming up with solutions that haven't been considered by international organizations. Some stuff is simple, yeah, and sometimes it really is just that the powers that be won't adopt these solutions. But there are still a lot of aspects to most issues that aren't being discussed on social media, and a lot of the time people refuse to engage with the fact that The Powers That Be do exist whether we like them or not.

Willing the roadblocks to solutions away through text posts isn't going to happen, like, ever, and there are some issues that can't be solved through mass social media campaigns just to shift public opinion. The confidence with which people make really violent and reductive posts without doing the bare minimum of research on what they are talking about is really alarming, and the whole "I'm not reading all that 😂🤪" attitude about anything that challenges the 2 sentence quippy slogan they reblogged is doing serious damage.

Anyway, sorry to write a whole nother essay, but it is nice to hear some people are pushing back against this kind of simplified thinking. Not everything is a sports team type game and not everyone engaging with an issue beyond hashtags is trying to obscure The Truth. Like some people just really need to accept the fact that just because you refuse to educate yourself on a topic doesn't mean there is nothing to learn.

[sun-marie]

Out of the original four champions, Revali is the best character specifically because he doesn't think highly of Link and isn't convinced by a shiny relic saying he's special

[thealexchen]

thoughts on LIS: Double Exposure?

This is probably gonna be my hottest take in awhile, but: I deeply dislike the idea of an official LiS1 direct sequel game existing. Excluding all my thoughts on the gameplay, story, Max's character, etc. I don't think a game like Double Exposure is necessary.

This isn't a new take either; back in 2020 I made a Reddit post saying I was glad we never got a continuation of Max and Chloe's story, because in order to have a plot, you have to have conflict. And to have conflict means your characters are forced to change or struggle in some way, and I simply wasn't interested in seeing that again. I never even read the comics. As long as Max and Chloe's future existed only in the fanbase's collective imagination and not in an officially licensed game, Pricefield could be as happy as I wanted and I wouldn't have to witness DN or D9's version of canon.

A lot of fans, including myself, are also confused and upset as to where Chloe could be in Double Exposure. Even if Chloe winds up having a surprise role, it would likely be too logistically difficult to write Chloe into one version of the story and not the other. Either way, DE is strongly pointing to Chloe no longer being the deuteragonist. If D9 was going to make a direct sequel with Max and Chloe, I could at least be intrigued by how they might write their dynamic and how they'd use Max's power in new and interesting ways. But instead there's... none of that. Chloe's nowhere to be seen and Max can't time travel anymore.

On a narrative level, Max and Chloe are the heart of the original Life is Strange. They represent the game's central relationship, and their very first interaction (Max saving Chloe's life) kicks off the entire story. Throughout the story, their dynamic advances the plot and mutually motivates their character arcs. You can't have LiS1 without either Max or Chloe; the story simply wouldn't exist without them. Now in DE, they don't even seem to be in each other's lives anymore. It's true, this series is meant to reflect universal feelings and experiences, which could include breakups, but the romantic catharsis of Pricefield as canon soulmates who defied time and space itself to stay together forever is something you can only get from the beauty of fiction. To jab DE's story with a dose of reality and go, "Eh, they grew apart. Shit happens," totally undermines everything the Bae ending stood for.

On a technical level, Max's rewind was an objectively brilliant game mechanic. LiS1 arrived onto the scene after Telltale had paved the way for the resurgence of choice-based, episodic games, but LiS1 totally reinvented the wheel by giving the player the option to go back and weigh each option before continuing, essentially save-scumming in-game. But the right choice was never that easy to determine, and Rewind brilliantly complemented Max's character arc of overcoming her indecision and learning to live with her choices. Not to mention, you could also use Rewind to solve puzzles, instead of the endless fetch quests the later games had. No other LiS game since then has given the player that kind of agency and interactivity. LiS2 had telekinesis, but the player couldn't use it, only Daniel. D9 tried with Backtalk and Empathy, but Max's Rewind was truly the narrative and gameplay jackpot that they haven't been able to recreate since.

So if you take away one half of the central relationship that made the first game so memorable, and the supernatural power/game mechanic that made it so fun to play... why even bring Max back at all? It just feels like D9 threw away their golden opportunity to build upon the major selling points of the first game and are only relying on name recognition of the Life is Strange "brand" and Max Caulfield.

What upsets me most of all about a direct sequel existing is that it proves that Life is Strange, as a series, now stands more for profits than originality. Life is Strange will always be an IP meant to make money for Square, I know that, but back when LiS1 was just a brand new episodic game, it stood out for how different it dared to be. In a landscape saturated with shooters, sexualized female characters, and casual misogyny, LiS1 instead featured a teenage girl in a contemporary setting that took her seriously and made her the hero of her story. Before it was a franchise, LiS wasn't concerned with the bottom dollar; it was a piece of art that just wanted to tell a thoughtful, unique story.

Whether you love it or hate it, Life is Strange 2 was an insanely risky follow-up to Life is Strange that refused to rely on the convenience of a direct sequel because Dontnod stuck to their artistic vision. Meanwhile, all of Deck Nine's games have leaned on the first game's following to generate interest (BtS being a direct prequel, TC bringing back Steph, and Wavelengths expanding on Steph's connection to Chloe, Rachel, and Arcadia Bay). In other words, all of the subsequent LiS games by D9 have played it very, very safe. It's worked like a damn charm because there are still elements I love about each game, but the basic principle is nostalgia-baiting fans. It's just that now, Double Exposure isn't hiding that nostalgia bait at all anymore and prioritizing profits over telling a unique story. It's sad to see that LiS has strayed so far from its risky, daring, original, and unique artistic beginnings.

Before I end, I'll say that I can't be too cynical about it all, nor do I want to be. Because I can't deny how much joy this whole series has brought me, too. LiS was what got me into narrative adventure games and pushed the boundaries of what a video game could be. If nothing else, I am truly thrilled that Hannah Telle got the chance to play Max again. D9's always been great at maintaining relationships with their actors, and the casts of their games always have consistently great chemistry. Getting recognized by Erika Mori on my own blog is still unbelievable and speaks to the amazing community that LiS has built. As you can see, I'm still posting and reblogging stuff about Double Exposure. And while I don't see myself buying or playing this game for myself, I know it'll keep all of us talking for awhile, and I still live for a good discussion.

Thank you for asking! And thank you for reading.

[ohnoitstbskyen]

Oh no. Sir I believe I'm going to need you to explain that Dragon Age 2 opinion, that is a BLAZING hot take

I really don't think it is. Although of course all of this is personal opinion, not some sort of divine proclamation on high about which video games people are allowed to prefer, so take please it in the spirit it is offered.

Origins is a worldbuilding walking tour as much about explaining its own in-universe lore and fantasy history as it is about either its characters or the actual story that is happening in the game. It's a cool world! With some great lore! But also it is built entirely around Generic Fantasy Plot Structure #1 and never particularly seems interested in innovating, or surprising the player. On top of which, a lot of its setting and lore is pretty weakly sketched and doesn't really get developed into something either visually or narratively compelling until it gets built out in later games.

And while Inquisition has some genuinely fantastic characters, everything else about the game suffers very badly from the plague of BioWare Magic™, i.e. the production was an absolute mess up until the last minute when five hundred extremely overworked and underpaid creative geniuses somehow managed to wring a functional experience out of the trainwreck. It was made with fucking Frostbite of all things, jesus christ, it's holding together with spit and duct tape.

Now, Dragon Age 2 shares a bunch of the problems of Origins and Inquisition. It too bears the hallmarks of "our executives couldn't plan a healthy game production cycle if their lives depended on it" with a lot of unfinished content, half-assed sidequests and a truly frustrating over-reliance on a combat system that isn't half as engaging to use as it needed to be.

But Dragon Age 2 also has something neither of its siblings could ever even hope to match: an actual compelling protagonist.

Like, listen, I know people adore their headcanons about their Wardens and Inquisitors, and it has made for some truly amazing fanworks, but Hawke is literally the only actual character out of all of them. Hawke has conflicts, problems, needs and drives that actually inform and push the story forward, they have a family and a history and a reason to give a sh** about the central conflict of the narrative.

In Origins and Inquisition both, your character becomes the main character of the story entirely because of fate and random chance. You are the Chosen One and you are the only one who can Save The World because you're the last of the super special elite fantasy Hero Squad, or because you got some green magic stuck in your hand by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because the character is a complete blank slate onto which the player is expected to project themselves, random chance and circumstance are the only tools the plot can use to position them as main characters. There is no character to drive them to it.

In Dragon Age 2, Hawke becomes the champion because they're trying to build a new life for their family in Kirkwall, and end up embroiled in the chaos and politics that befall the city as a natural consequence of living in it and dealing with the conditions of it. Hawke and their family's needs and wants drive their actions, and push them to engage in endeavors that influence the course of history. They have agency (in the conceit of the narrative, at least) over how their life turns out, they make choices that have consequences, rather than being dictated into the position of Main Character by a literal looming apocalypse that permits no other course of action.

And I'm not about to sit here and claim that Dragon Age 2's story is perfect or that every character is a masterpiece or that every plotline is amazing. No, there's plenty of scuff and jank and things that have aged poorly and unresolved plot threads and all the rest of it.

And I am definitely not forgetting the godsdamned DLC where BioWare threw it all overboard by inventing a Special Bloodline Plot where oops it turns out Hawke actually IS a special chosen one specially chosen by a special fate to have a special role in Saving The World because they're special because of fate and destiny and blah blah, I still think that was phenomenally stupid (especially when Corypheus wasn't even Hawke's goddamn main villain to deal with what was any of this supposed to add to their character ffs BioWare)

But even with all its problems, the simple fact that Hawke is a character you can give a shit about independent of your own projection as a player - the fact that Hawke isn't just an empty bland blank slate with no personality, no traits, no wants or needs or drives - that has made Dragon Age 2 infinitely more memorable to me than either Origins and Inquisition. I think about it to this day. I think about Hawke to this day. I care about what happens to the character in a way that I just simply could never bring myself to do with either my Wardens or my Inquisitors.

[sokkastyles]

Thinking again about how Katara is portrayed in "Ember Island Players" and how a lot of her objections to the play have to do with how it portrays her as an overly emotional damsel who needs Aang to save her from her wretched existence, and the disrespect of her entire culture and people that is used to portray her as someone who needs a man to rescue her.

Which on one level you can interpret as Fire Nation propaganda, but it's also a meta commentary on the series itself, because Katara does rely on Aang as a savior figure and there are certain scenes that are specifically designed to damsel her so that Aang can be a hero.

It's interesting that the show chose to portray Katara watching herself in that position and specifically show that she doesn't like it, in the same episode that they have the real Aang act like them getting together is a foregone conclusion.

In contrast, although the play changes Katara's relationship to Zuko into something romantic and lurid, they do get one thing right about it.

And that's that Katara is the one making the choices.

Of course they also ramp up the sexuality in a way that is gross, especially considering the context of this being a FN play meant to disparage the other nations, but on a meta level it's also meant to make us, the audience, feel disgusted by a woman who makes overt sexual overtures.

I've seen people (who are anti zutara) say that the play is showing Katara as the colonized woman who falls for the colonizer, but that's not what's happening here. Zuko is not portrayed as dominant by the play, and it wouldn't make sense for the FN to portray him that way, either, since one of the purposes of the play is to portray him as a weak and ridiculous traitor who is ultimately defeated. So the joke, both in-story and the one Bryke want to make at a meta level, seems to be about Katara being more dominant than Zuko. In the play, Katara says that she felt attracted to Zuko from the moment he captured her, yet Zuko is shown shrinking from her overtures. And I just have to find it interesting that this is the joke the show wants to make in an episode where the major conflict is Aang making a pushy overture towards Katara and her rejecting it.

Zutarians frequently talk about how zutara focuses on Katara's agency. I have to agree, and I don't know what the conversations about this were at the time, but I do find it suspect that the show seems to recognize this, but decided to make fun of it at the same time. The episode posits the threat that Katara might choose someone other than Aang as a major conflict in the story, shows us a Katara who feels trapped by her role as Aang's damsel, and then makes fun of her for it and expects us to root for her and Aang to get together.

Meanwhile, we also see the real Katara and Zuko get closer in a way that feels real and organic, we see them exchange banter, we see Katara confident and able to best Zuko verbally but also able to comfort him over his fears about the play, which again focuses on her as the main actor in the relationship. Although Zuko and Katara do have that one scene of them moving away from each other in reaction to being portrayed as a couple by the play, overall their relationship remains unplagued by the insecurity that the play brings out in Katara and Aang, which seems to indicate that the problems in their relationship go beyond the play's parodies and that there is actually some truth there, that Katara really does feel like she has less choice in her relationship with Aang and that Aang seems to fear her choices.

It's really not hard to see why zutara becomes appealing in that context.

[a-town-called-hometown]

yippee! apologies if my takes are horrendously bad

my personal take on the matter is that i definitely think the dark worlds can work as a metaphor for escapism without undermining the darkners' personhood. it can be more than one thing, yknow? the darkners are important, their lives matter. and the lightners do go to the dark world as an escape from the problems they face in their own life. but that's not the darkners' whole PURPOSE, yknow? i mean. according to the laws of the universe of deltarune yes darkners' "purpose" is to serve the lightners but like it's not their whole purpose in the STORY.

it's sort of like how, in UNDERTALE, LOVE represents how distant you've become, how easy it is for you to hurt people. but it also literally gives you the power to destroy the world.

i think the biggest reason i believe escapism is at least a part of deltarune's narrative is queen.

queen's whole speech in both of her fights is about how she intends to provide escapism for the lightners (so that they will worship her but also so that they will he happy). she wants to turn the whole world into a dark world, so that everyone can live in bliss and not have to worry about the woes of the light world. she mentions "Staring, Tapping, To Receive Joy. Staring, Tapping, To Avoid Pain." which is like pretty much the definition of escapism

she wants to help Noelle with the problems she faces in the light world ("Noelle. Who Will Be There To Help Her? Her Strange And Sad Searches" and "My One Idea To Help Noelle, Failed") by just... shoving it away for a blissful fantasy world ("Wake? No, She Has Already Awakened Too Much. Let Her Close Her Eyes And Sleep Away, Into A Darker, Darker Dream.")

...i forgot the rest of what i wanted to say!

well first off, thank you for your ask! I'm going to get extremely in depth in my answer, so bear with me here. sorry it took several weeks to write this. the escapism reading of deltarune is pretty deeply entrenched in fandom, and to refute it, I felt it required a full-length essay to completely explain my viewpoint.

yes, "the lightners desire escapism" does not automatically translate to that being the darkners' actual narrative purpose. escapism can be a theme without dehumanizing those who are used in order to escape - in fact, I've read a number of stories that use someone's desire to escape to HIGHLIGHT how they're hurting others in pursuit of that. I believe that toby fox is definitely capable of telling a story about kids having a valid desire to escape, and about them grappling with having inadvertently created a world of real, living people as a result.

(I'll reiterate again that this is not the story arc that generally shows up in fanon. the common consensus is that the game will end in an omori-esque "growing out of" the dark worlds. it's why I have a huge dislike of the fanon escapism reading, given that the darkners are shown as people whose lack of agency parallels kris' own. it would feel cheap if the resolution to that plot was that the darkners were actually never meant to be agents in their own fates. but this is a digression.)

the reason why i DON'T believe that this is a story that toby fox is telling is because of the way the world, themes, and characters are written. put simply, it just doesn't come across as congruent with the story being told.

deltarune's main themes are agency, fate, identity, and control. this is a conflict that shows up in nearly every major character, is baked into the worldbuilding, and is the central struggle involving us, the player. the protagonist of deltarune is literally possessed by us against their will. the darkners are objects that have no choice but to serve and be discarded. over and over again, there is emphasis on roles that characters play - and crucially, roles that are imposed on them.

what would escapism mean, in this thematic context? in real life, escapism can represent any number of things, but in a story, a major narrative theme generally has to dovetail with other major narrative themes in the work. I would argue that escapism in deltarune would likely mean going to a place where characters are able to choose for themselves what roles they embody, or even to discard the notion of roles altogether. a fantasy of control is the only way to escape a reality where you have no agency. and honestly, it's hard to imagine that something could count as an escapist fantasy if you don't even get to choose whether or not you participate in it.

let's talk about kris.

I see a lot of discussions around kris that say that kris goes into the dark worlds to escape. the dark worlds are posited as kris' fantasy of heroism. it's a world where they can seem heroic and cool, a world where they can have friends. this theory makes a decent amount of sense on the surface level, but only until you consider that kris is being controlled in order to go into the dark worlds. and it is not a control that they appear to welcome.

if those worlds represent kris' fantasy, then why don't they get to choose what happens in those fantasies? why are they being controlled by an external force, one that they actively push back against? if it's really an escape, then why does everything about this world reflect their lack of agency? if they really think this world is just a pure fantasy, then why do they care if spamton falls when his strings are cut?

because they're being deliberately obscured to the player, it is hard to say how kris actually feels about many subjects... but I do seriously doubt that they view the dark worlds as an escape. they don't act in a way that is consistent with that. they resist their lack of agency, and what little we do see of their reactions to darkner characters doesn't suggest that they view those characters as part of a disposable fantasy, either. they seem to have complicated feelings on ralsei. and of course, one of their biggest emotional reactions in the game is to the spamton fight. I would argue that that suggests they have empathy for spamton, which is a hard emotional reaction to have if you believe he's just part of a fantasy. not impossible, mind you, but it seems unlikely that kris believes that all this is simply fantasy.

also, considering that snowgrave both actively discredits the idea that the dark worlds are mere fantasy and is actively traumatic for kris... I seriously doubt they'd open another dark world in chapter 3 on a snowgrave run if their motive was purely to escape. on that route, they've seen the damage we can cause in a dark world. they know that berdly has sustained lasting damage due to our actions, assuming he's not outright dead. why would they want to try and "escape" to a place like that again now that they know what can happen?

the only answer is that they have a motive that isn't escapist.

now, as for ralsei... what part does he have to play in all this?

ralsei does play a lot to the fun, fantastical elements of the dark worlds. he delivers the prophecy that kickstarts the adventure. he flatters both kris and susie endlessly when they act appropriately heroic. he welcomes them into the castle and even makes nice rooms for them. he initially seems tailor-made to enable a fantastical experience where no real issues can ever complicate anything, and where the pain of reality can successfully be hidden from. but there's a lot of complications to the idea that he might represent an escapist fantasy.

the first, and what honestly seems the most important to me, is that he doesn't encourage kris and susie to remain in the dark worlds. he is welcoming and kind, but once the adventure is over, he prompts them to return to the light world. he wants them to deal with their more "real" problems like homework. that doesn't feel like he is trying to facilitate escapism in them. a real fantasy would encourage you to stay in it, wouldn't it?

and while ralsei is definitely invested in making sure the lightners are happy, there are always cracks that show. he isn't able to make kris ignore what happened in the spamton fight. he isn't able to convince susie to be peaceful and kind. and in his very essence, he represents a number of uncomfortable ideas. very importantly, he represents a number of uncomfortable ideas to kris.

this probably ain't your first fandom rodeo, so I'm not going to explain all the different ways that ralsei interacts with kris' personal issues. there's plenty of posts on it out there. what i will point out is, once again, it feels odd that a character who seems tailor made to bring up kris' most uncomfortable associations with their lack of agency and their outsider status in their own family would be part of a fantasy of escapism to them. you'd think that they'd prefer something that didn't have an inbuilt hierarchy, a prophecy that denied them autonomy, or especially a person that reminded them how little they fit into hometown.

that doesn't mean kris doesn't care about him at all - it seems very likely that they do. what I mean to say here is that he just seems ill-suited to an escapism reading, both behaviorally and on a conceptual level. it doesn't seem like that's at all part of his servitude towards the lightners.

of course, there is another non-lightner entity that ralsei seems diegetically engineered to serve. but I'll discuss that later.

now as for susie...

yes, susie definitely views the dark worlds as more fun than the light world. and why wouldn't she? the light world sucks for her, and she doesn't seem very aware of the fact that the dark world can also suck. you could definitely make the argument that she views the dark worlds as a fantastical escape from reality... were it not for the fact that she treats her darkner friends with just as much importance as she does kris and noelle.

can someone treat components of an escapist fantasy as real and important? of course. but given deltarune's themes of agency and control, as well as the fact that darkners exist in servitude to the lightners, I feel like you'd have to make escapism tie into forcing others into a lack of agency if you wanted the theme to feel coherent with the rest of the work. this would require susie to be limiting the agency of the darkners around her. and obviously, she doesn't do that. her presence around them might be inherently limiting, just by simple virtue of being a lightner, but she isn't aware of it, and clearly is uncomfortable with the idea of limiting anyone's agency. she encourages ralsei to make choices. and she supports lancer in basically anything he wants to do. her treatment of lancer is integral to chapter 1's narrative, and it seems like that treatment of ralsei is integral to the ongoing narrative as well!

her preference for the dark world feels very rooted in her engagement with it as its own reality. rather than trying to avoid her real-life problems by engaging in a pretense, she seems to simply want to spend time with her friends in a place that isn't cruel to her. she isn't ignoring any of the dark world's problems in service of that, either. she notices when things don't line up. if she thought of it as a fantasy, wouldn't she be inclined to ignore issues that impede the fantasy?

and critically - like kris, she does not intentionally choose her imposed role in the prophecy at first. she steps into the role of bad guy to resist it, but that role is limiting too, and she eventually acquiesces to being a hero. it's never something she's completely on board with, though. she actively pushes back the limitations that the role places on her. I find this important to reiterate when we are discussing the notion of the characters viewing the dark worlds as fantasy.

noelle has a complicated relationship to the dark worlds. susie tells her that it's a dream to make her accept the strange reality she finds herself in, which works well on her. she continues to think of it as a strange dream throughout the chapter. (though, like the others, it is not a 'dream' she entered of her own volition!)

it is also a markedly unpleasant 'dream' at times. she has her agency restricted, is kidnapped, has to evade a controlling monarch, and is even tied up in a weird evangelion cross thing on the hand of a giant robot. it's not purely fun. noelle does like scary things, and while it might be healthy for her to have an experience where she stands up to a controlling adult figure... again, the circumstances make it difficult for me to assume that this is a fantasy she would choose for herself. not impossible, mind you, but it's not the first reading of the situation that comes to mind.

and while she does say she wishes she could dream like this every day in the normal route, that does happen specifically because she was talking to the girl she likes. it makes sense she'd find that pleasant. I don't think that necessarily equates to her finding the dark worlds escapist.

and importantly, this isn't the sentiment that she expresses in every route.

again, there's a lot of analysis on snowgrave, so I won't bother regurgitating it much here. but it's nightmarish for both kris and noelle, and very likely fatal for berdly. noelle needs to believe that the event is a dream, for her own psychological safety, but one of the most important parts of snowgrave...

...is that its events, and the world it took place in, are very, very real.

noelle wants to have the strength to face her problems, both in the regular route and in the snowgrave route. rather than escaping from them, she views the "dream" as a chance to practice dealing with her day-to-day issues. it's just that in the regular route she finds that strength authentically, and in the snowgrave route, that desire is manipulated and pushed until she is forced to kill berdly. she doesn't interpret snowgrave as an escape gone wrong. she views it as a dream that became a nightmare. and those are two extremely different things.

but i haven't even gotten to the biggest thing that undermines the concept that the dark worlds are a metaphor for escapism! which is: this fucking guy is dead wrong about everything.

so full disclaimer - I really love berdly. I think he's slept on a lot in the fandom because he's annoying and weird. which is fair, I suppose, but I think ignoring him hinders a lot of people's understanding of deltarune's overall narrative. because berdly often illustrates a lot of concepts in the game, but his narrative framing as a joke (usually...) prevents the player from taking it completely seriously. he has things to say and ideas to show off, it's just that he's often very loud and kind of dumb in his expression of them. which is kind of the point!

ralsei brings up the idea that the darkners are meant to serve the lightners very seriously in chapter one. by extension, and by way of the literal mechanics involved in a dark world's creation, we can infer that this logic is probably something that also applies to the dark worlds themselves. they are allegedly worlds and characters that only are supposed to fulfill a dream of the lightners. but due to narrative framing and deltarune's themes, we know that that's not the full truth. however dark worlds and darkners are created, they deserve to have their own agency. they can't just exist to fulfill a higher being's wishes.

you know who else undermines that view of the dark worlds? berdly! berdly does!!!!

because berdly is the only lightner in the game so far who does take the dark worlds to be an escapist adventure! he wants to turn cyber world into smartopia. he views this as a chance to be a cool hero. he believes he's going to get the girl, he's going to shape this world to his own liking, and maybe also he's going to get queen to acknowledge him or something so he stops being a forgettable little bluebird. and not only does none of this happen, his steadfast belief that it will happen is continually a joke within the narrative!!

berdly's wishes for uncomplicated escapist fantasy are flat-out denied by the dark worlds themselves. as a lightner, those worlds should be serving him. he should have the power to do whatever he wants within the bounds of an escapist fantasy. these npcs should be singing his praises!

but he doesn't have the power. and this world doesn't sing his praise. because it just isn't an escapist fantasy. he isn't right to view it that way. his wishes for heroism are always going to be thwarted.

so now that I've gotten all that out of the way, let's swing back over to the subject of your original ask. queen.

because, like berdly, queen's entire character arc is about how she's completely wrong about what the lightners actually want.

queen would in fact like nothing more to place the lightners into an escapist fantasy. she believes that that's the best way to serve them and make them happy forever. as a darkner, queen has very much internalized the idea that a lack of control is what actually makes people happy. since darkners have no choice in their destinies and are supposed to be happy in it, and since she personally finds her role as a darkner fulfilling, she believes that that's true of all people everywhere. if you want to make people happy, you just have to remove that pesky personal agency!

so she spends the story trying to force the lightners and particularly noelle into situations where she controls them in order to make them ostensibly happier. she does genuinely believe that this is the right thing to do, but as she finds out eventually, she's just wrong. noelle doesn't want that. queen believes that escapism is why the lightners use the internet... but that's totally wrong too.

while there are other searches mixed in, noelle is trying to use the internet to find her sister. instead of trying to hide from whatever happened, noelle wants to figure it out. queen's thesis about noelle and the lightners is proven wrong even before she personally encounters noelle in the dark world. it's just that queen doesn't realize it due to her limited perspective.

the concept of escapism being brought up with both queen and berdly is not there to say that the dark world is escapist. rather, it's there to say that it isn't. despite the dark worlds being a fantastical place, they are extremely real. to view them as a means of escape is foolhardy at best. you cannot act as though you are above consequences within them.

themes and ideas exist within the story for a sake of an audience. so let's get into the final character I need to discuss here. hopefully this will tie my thesis of deltarune together neatly.

that character is of course us. the player.

when creating a piece of fiction, an astute author will often identify and anticipate an audience's reactions to certain things in their work, and write things in such a way that they elicit the desired reactions. in essence, a writer is directing the "character" of the audience. how we feel and how we are anticipated to react to things is an integral part of nearly every fiction.

that effect is far more overt when dealing with metanarrative fiction that diegetically involves the audience. since the fiction is saying a lot of things about the general 'you,' the audience in aggregate, your reactions to certain things in the story have to be finely cued and anticipated by the author, so that the author can thus commentate on the reactions that you have to the story. the "character" you are assumed to inhabit is posited by the author to have certain traits.

to explain what I mean in plainer terms, I'll use the player of undertale's no mercy route as an example. because undertale is commenting on the way rpgs generally work. the player's behaviors in no mercy are attributed by characters in the story to be the result of us acting like a typical gamer. we kill the characters in the game because we want exp. and more than that, it's because we want to see everything the game has to offer. the role we inhabit in this role-playing game is that of a completionist. you could say that that's assumed to be our "character" in no mercy.

deltarune also posits that certain things are true of its audience. by being written to evoke certain cultural ideas, rpg tropes, and references to undertale, it guarantees that its audience will probably have certain traits, and spends a large amount of its conceptual focus commenting on those traits. one of those traits is nostalgia, which is probably an idea that I'll expound upon in a further essay because it's quite integral to my reading of deltarune. but the main one I mean to discuss here, and why I went off on this tangent about how audiences are dealt with in metafiction, is that we are posited as someone who believes in the logic of certain narratives.

deltarune's writing evokes a lot of portal fantasy narratives. alice in wonderland, narnia, pretty much every story where it's revealed at the end to be all a dream... the story of deltarune superficially resembles a lot of those. this, I think, is responsible for the popularity of the escapism theory. because those stories are often at their end about a child learning to put away fantasy and grow up, people tend to believe that deltarune must be about the same thing. but I truly don't think that deltarune is trying to do anything with that aspect of portal fantasy narratives, at least not directly. its main characters aren't involved in that exact type of coming-of-age arc.

instead, deltarune is very concerned with what happens to characters in fantasy, and specifically fantasy rpgs. if your world is deemed to not matter because it's a dream, what does that mean for you, who has no choice but to live in it? if you are an npc whose role has been predetermined for you via script, then can you ever decide for yourself what you want? what if you want to matter? what if you want to be your own person?

as the major controlling force of deltarune, we are initially cued to believe that deltarune is like a dream. it superficially fulfills so much of what we want from undertale fanon. hometown seems like it's a perfect idyllic town, at least until you start noticing the obvious cracks. and remember what I said about ralsei earlier? he is so reminiscent of asriel, and extremely eager to help us. it's not a stretch to say that making us specifically view deltarune as dreamlike and idyllic is probably part of his purpose in the game.

I would not say that we are posited as escapist. but the idea of escapism as brought up with queen and berdly is meant to strike at the heart of a much deeper idea that deltarune is trying to deconstruct. because if we view deltarune as a dream, escapist or otherwise, then we are inclined to write the internal realities of the characters inside off. the dark world can disappear without it mattering. we can control kris without it mattering. if it's all a dream, what does it matter? why should we care to let its characters go free? aren't we supposed to be in control?

if deltarune is an rpg... what is the significance of us interacting with it?

[anneapocalypse]

Demands of the Qun, or How the Inquisitor's Choice Answers the Iron Bull's Most Important Question

I was having a chat about the Iron Bull and his personal quest with some friends and one person said in response to something I said that I should make it a Post, so here it is! And a usual disclaimer: this is not about which in-game decision is "correct"--it's an RPG, there's no wrong way to play the game. I just want to talk about the meaning of this decision for Bull's character and for his future.

Dragon Age: Inquisition’s “Demands of the Qun” is, for me, one of those quests where the RPG format of “player character makes major decision for companion character” really works. I do not see this as an example of game mechanics taking away agency from an NPC. I think Bull has agency in this situation.

The Chargers are not Inquisition soldiers. They are mercenaries, and Bull is their commander. If the Inquisitor makes a call he doesn't like, he is free to say "Screw you" and take his people and leave, because they are not soldiers, they're independent contractors, so leaving isn't desertion, it's just quitting. If he were already certain he wanted to leave the Qun, he could simply call the retreat himself, take the Chargers and leave. Similarly if he were certain of his loyalties and willing to sacrifice the Chargers for that purpose, he could do that, regardless of what the Inquisitor says.

He lets the Inquisitor make this choice.

The Iron Bull has had one foot out the door of the Qun for a long time now. But he's gone back and gone back, submitted himself for re-education and done his best to keep serving the Qun, because he believes he needs the Qun. To him, becoming Tal-Vashoth means losing himself, his identity, his purpose, his very sanity, and as the Fade tells us in "Here Lies the Abyss," this is quite literally his greatest fear. Bull could never bring himself to leave the Qun with nowhere to go instead, nothing to give his life purpose and meaning—and no one to entrust himself to should he doubt his own sanity.

But in his work in the south, the Iron Bull has found community and identity and purpose outside the Qun. The very name he has given himself speaks to that, as does his close relationship to the Chargers.

Right from the beginning, there is tension in "Demands of the Qun." Bull remarks that he's gotten used to the Qunari being "over there" during his life in the south. I think Bull has a very potent anxiety when he meets Gatt again on the Storm Coast, and introduces him to the Inquisitor and their party. To me, it very much has the vibes of introducing two friend groups, where you're not only pretty sure they won't get along, but you're also very aware that they know very different sides of you—and neither of them are going to like seeing the other side. Bull's discomfort is visible both when Gatt speaks freely about Bull's work in the Ben-Hassrath, and when the Inquisitor's other companions make disparaging remarks about the Qun. His two worlds have collided, calling into conflict two sides of his sense of self that he has thus far managed to avoid confronting.

And this is likely part of the point. The Qun does not truly respect alliances with any outside the Qun. I wouldn't say for sure that the Qunari set up this whole situation just to test Bull—it's possible they knew exactly how many Venatori would show up, but they couldn't have known precisely how the Inquisition would respond. That, and their desire to root out the Venatori is no doubt sincere. But I do think they are watching Bull's actions very closely throughout this proposed alliance, gauging his loyalty. Gatt tells him outright that many already believe he has betrayed the Qun.

Bull's internal conflict quickly becomes an external one when the Venatori reinforcements show up, and Bull is faced with the decision of whether to withdraw the Chargers or defend the dreadnought at the cost of their lives.

The thing is, Bull is not neutral on this. He tells the Inquisitor what he wants. He wants to save the Chargers. If the Inquisitor says that the Chargers still have time to retreat, Bull agrees. When Gatt tells him they need to hold position, he says in a low, intense tone, "They're my men."

And then, when Gatt tells him in no uncertain terms that calling the retreat will make him Tal-Vashoth, the Iron Bull looks to the Inquisitor.

Again, he is not neutral. He knows what he wants. He is standing there basically begging the Inquisitor with his eyes to save his boys.

So why doesn't he just make the call himself?

Because just as this whole situation is in part a test of Bull's loyalty, this is also a test of the Inquisitor.

What Bull needs to leave the Qun is not simply for someone else to make the choice for him, but to believe that there is a future for him outside the Qun. That he will still be himself, that he will have purpose, and meaning, and that someone else is worth trusting. Bull cannot bring himself to leave the Qun if it means he will be left utterly alone with nothing but his own mind and his deepest fears. And if that's what leaving the Qun means… then in his mind, it would be better to stay.

The Inquisitor's choice will answer that question.

To sacrifice the Chargers leaves Bull with nothing outside of the Qun. He has just watched his closest friends die, and he cannot trust the Inquisitor. With Krem and Rocky and Skinner and Stitches and Dalish and Grim, the new sense of self that the Iron Bull has found in the south also dies.

Of course he turns back to the Qun. He has nothing else left.

But if it's the Inquisitor who makes the call to save the Chargers… Bull can leave. He has friends who care about him. He has purpose. He has someone whose command he can trust. He has hope. None of this makes the choice easy for him. It is quite clearly very painful and difficult, and I don't think there's any way it could be otherwise. But he has a way forward nonetheless. The choice makes leaving possible.

The Inquisitor doesn't force the Iron Bull to become Tal-Vashoth. Instead, Bull implicitly asks a question, and the Inquisitor by their choice gives him an answer.

[theresattrpgforthat]

Hello!

I've always wanted to do a stealth game/campaign, but all my attempts to hack it into DnD have failed. Do you have any suggestions for a stealthy system? Not something as abstract as Knives in the Dark (tbh, I just have never been able to get into it) but something that hits the Assassin's Creed feeling of watching the target, making a plan, and then sneaking through the base taking out guards and hiding their bodies and such. Preferably on a grid map or similar, s we're terrible at theatre of the mind.

Thanks!

THEME: Stealthy Games.

Hello there, so I did some digging and I found plenty of stealth games, although none of them seem to really require a map in order to play. That being said, I don’t think that should stop you from providing maps to your players, even if they’re abstract! Some of these games might ask you to sketch out a rough map of the town or building that you’re in, which may help you provide your players with some visual references as they sneak around, trying not to get caught. When it comes to stealth, I think of three things: horror, heists, and spies.

Delta Green, by Arc Dream Publishing.

Born of the U.S. government’s 1928 raid on the degenerate coastal town of Innsmouth, Massachusetts, the covert agency known as Delta Green opposes the forces of darkness with honor but without glory. Delta Green agents fight to save humanity from unnatural horrors—often at a shattering personal cost.

Delta Green comes highly recommended as a great way to play an X-Files type rpg, mixed in with the Cthulhu mythos. It uses a d100 system and is based in the modern day, casting your characters as former members of government agencies, recruited into a super-secret bureau that investigates supernatural things - and keeps those things hidden from the common public. The stealth of this game is mostly about covering up the eldritch and unnatural, even if it means framing someone else or condemning a beloved building.

Your characters in this game have some familiar pieces to them, such as six stats with the same titles as you’ll see in games like D&D. However, you’ll also have pieces like Bonds, which represent relationships that keep your character grounded, and a Sanity system that I’m personally not crazy about (I do not recommend this game for a group that doesn’t like trite mechanization of mental health disorders), but that gives you a way to incur penalties that aren’t just physical damage.

This looks to be the closest to a traditional rpg on this list, and with all the elements to keep track of, I can see how a physical map would be helpful. However, keep in mind that there isn’t a pace or speed stat attached to these characters, so things like line of sight or distance probably won’t be super granular - if you are shooting things you may have broad range bands to determine how difficult something is, but the final decision will be a GM decision, not something necessarily determined in the rulebook. Because the setting is a modern one, I think finding visual references for locations in this game would be very very easy.

If you want a taste of the game before you put your money down, you can check out the Free Starter Rulebook!

Minutes to Midnight, by Oliver S.

Minutes to Midnight is a game powered by Blades in the Dark about a crew of spies, trying to disrupt the balance of power in a modern cold war. They will have to stand strong in the face of their vicious opposition and handle a fragile web of untrustworthy informants, devious intrigues and deadly lies.

We play to find out if our agents can thrive in the cutthroat world of espionage. While the public may never know about their impact, their actions shape the political landscape and outcome of conflict. Will the players prevent the outbreak of a global disaster and use their influence to create a better future? Will they attempt to send the opposing bloc into a turmoil and establish a lasting hegemony? Or will their actions lead the world down a path of war and nuclear destruction?

The Forged in the Dark system uses a cycle in between missions and downtime, sinking your characters into the heart of the action as they pursue clandestine missions in locations built by the group in a session 0. Since the game takes place in the real world, using maps of real cities might be a great way to keep they players visually engaged, and using a city that the group has been to or is familiar with might also make it easier for the group to visualize the kinds of buildings and streets where their spies may be sneaking, scheming, and sleuthing.

Madstones, by xiombarg.

Those who know magic exists at all are the rich and teams of breakers like yourself that go into the jartowns for the Archons. Jartowns are created by burning folk alive in a wicker man, in a ritual known only to the oldest jet-setting Archons.

A jartown is an isolated area of spacetime that was cut out of our reality. Most jartowns consist of a small amount of space (enough for a suburb or town) and a loop of several years. Jartowns become more magickal and horrific with each loop, creating madstones. 

Madstones are small things, from actual stones to human organs, infused with concentrated, distilled magic. They're secretly coveted by the wealthy.

In this tiny 24XX-based tabletop RPG, players are breakers, desperate folk from the occult underground who find a way into the jartowns, hothouses for magick, to perform errands for the ultrarich Archons.

Play as a variety of roles, from sawbones to sinner to spook, and choose to hail from one of four origins, including jartown native.

24XX games are another toolbox that you can pick up and play around with to help you get started with creating your own experiences. Your character consists of a few skills and gear packaged together in a character class. In Madstones, these classes are various specialists, trained to deal with different elements that might pop up when you go delving into eldritch pockets of reality. There is both a stealth and a combat specialist in this game, but there’s also classes for things like a getaway driver, a hacker, and an occult specialist.

24XX games also exist because of their OSR predecessors, meaning that combat is risky, and often deadly - and therefore finding other ways to solve the problem is implicitly encouraged. However, the openness of the system means that your players don’t necessarily need to resort to stealth - they might prepare an elaborate ritual, create a unique piece of technology, or just decide to run away as fast as they can. In regards to maps, I think you could probably use a typical dungeon framework: leading the characters through various rooms or sections of the pocket dimension, and throwing horrors and weird environments their way.

Night’s Black Agents, by Pelgrane Press.

The Cold War is over. Bush’s War is winding down. You were a shadowy soldier in those fights, trained to move through the secret world: deniable and deadly.

Then you got out, or you got shut out, or you got burned out. You didn’t come in from the cold. Instead, you found your own entrances into Europe’s clandestine networks of power and crime. You did a few ops, and you asked even fewer questions. Who gave you that job in Prague? Who paid for your silence in that Swiss account? You told yourself it didn’t matter. It turned out to matter a lot. Because it turned out you were working for vampires.

Vampires exist. What can they do? Who do they own? Where is safe? You don’t know those answers yet. So you’d better start asking questions. You have to trace the bloodsuckers’ operations, penetrate their networks, follow their trail, and target their weak points. Because if you don’t hunt them, they will hunt you. And they will kill you.

A combination of modern spy fiction and vampire intrigue, Night’s Black Agents uses the GUMSHOE system, which is an investigative roleplaying system that provides your characters with resources they can spend to get into secret locations, compete against vampiric agents, and pick up information to help you put together the details of a conspiracy. In Night’s Black Agents, finding clues isn’t left up to chance - you will always get information as long as you tell the GM that you’re using a relevant skill. The obstacles in this game are more likely going to involve getting in and out of sticky situations - and if your opponents are vampires, well, stealth is likely going to be a more appealing than trying to slit their throats.

GUMSHOE games don’t need grid maps either, but a rough map of the city or country is probably very helpful, and it might be fun to draw the floor plans of various buildings that your players investigate in order to help them determine what areas may be the most interesting places to search for clues.

The Breathing, by Fistful of Crits.

You reside in The Archive, an unending and depthless structure spiralling deep into the dark and misty depths, devoid of life and presided over by a being known only to you as The Archivist.

The Archive is made up of windowless rooms and halls that vary greatly in their height, size and danger. All these spaces house numerous shelves containing the collected knowledge of the world outside of The Archive; a place you have been told you must earn your access to. The price of your freedom comes from the discovery of new or forgotten knowledge that can be found in the deepest parts of the structure. 

You, and a few others, are known as The Breathing, in a place full of creatures who were once like you but ultimately failed in their bid for freedom; now known as The Breathless. 

The Breathing is just an example of a broader style of game, using a system called Breathless. Breathless games use a series of polyhedral dice that deteriorate as you use them, with different dice attached to different skills. Throughout the game you pause to “take a breath”, and re-set your skills, bringing your dice back to their threshold. However, pausing to take a breath also gives the GM a chance to introduce a new trouble or complication, creating a cycle of mission, rest, mission, rest, etc.

As a game system, Breathless is pretty light and is fairly easy to hack. But the lightness of the rules also allows for creativity and add-ons, which could include rules for movement or placement. Since the game rewards finding ways to solve problems without having to resort to direct conflict, I can see games like this encouraging characters to think carefully about when to use their resources and when to just… sneak around the problem. If you want to include maps and a grid, you could provide a blueprint of a room inside The Archive and watch the players try to navigate it using their limited resources, with designated “rest areas” that they would have to get to in order to take a Breath.

This certainly isn’t a solution in a box, but it might provide some interesting tools to help you build the experience you’re looking for.

Night Reign, by Sinister Beard Games.

Night Reign is a roleplaying game of stealth, guile, violence and devilry for a GM and one or more players, set in a quasi-Edwardian metropolis perched on an inhospitable peninsula beset by toxic black rain and ruled by a corrupt cabal of Noble Houses.

You take the role of members of The Red Right Hand, a conspiracy loyal to the recently deposed royal family, using your talents in assassination, infiltration and dark sorcery to strike out at your oppressors.

A game all about the things you do in the shadows, Night Reign uses cards to resolve conflict, rather than dice. It also uses a token system to help you overcome obstacles without having to resort to violence - loud, messy, dangerous violence. The Ruled by Night system (which has an SRD that you can download for free) is about balancing the suspicion you’ve already raised against an increasing cost to being stealthy. You spend Shadow tokens in order to be able to attempt to do something, and try to get a hand as close as possible to 21, or at least higher than whatever the GM draws. Your characters will also have powers that can be very effective, but are likely to draw a lot of attention, so using them is risky.

Because of how this game runs, things like movement and speed are not likely to be tracked. However, I don’t think mapping out a location so that the players can understand where things are or what kind of space they’re in is going to hurt the experience. The SRD describes something called City Conditions, which appear to be elements of the fiction that might result from the characters’ choices, or provide obstacles to the players. If you have a map of the city in front of you, you could draw symbols on the map to indicate what’s happening as the story progresses, and even cross out places that have been destroyed.

Heist, by Hark Forsooth Games.

HEIST: Get the Crew Together is a cooperative RPG where you and a group of suave, savvy and slick fellow crooks plan and execute capers, grabbing the fanciest loot from the world's wealthy elite.

Heist is great for fans of shows like Leverage or movies like Ocean’s 11: you’re going to steal something shiny from someone who certainly doesn’t deserve it, and you’re going to do it with style. While combat is an option, your characters will also have to deal with suspicious marks, security systems, laser grids and bank vaults. The characters are composed of special talents and personal flaws, and the GM has the task of designing something the game calls Murphy’s Gun - a major twist that will reveal itself midway through the heist.

It can be tricky to determine what to prep for a game like this, but one thing that you can for sure prep is the location. Design the building, draw the floor plan, and come up with obstacles for the different areas - there’s not really movement tracking in this game but having the layout will certainly help your players come up with ideas about how to get in, get out, and get rich.

Another thing to consider…

Mothership doesn’t have any stealth skills, but what it does have is the incentive to be sneaky. If an alien horror is moving through the ship, you’re more likely to try and stay out of it’s way - and having no stealth skills means that the players have to describe what they’re doing to stay hidden; climb into vents, squeeze yourself into cupboards, and try to wriggle into the space suit. However, this doesn’t mean that you’re not rolling - you might roll to clamber over something or to fit yourself into something, or you might roll to scope out a location to find an exit or suitable hiding place. It’s also excellent in terms of maps - plenty of adventures will provide at least a blueprint of the space station or ship that you’re exploring, which you can use to spook your players with fresh horrors.

[mahomadjicks]

Been seeing some posts about the Q and A the clash writing team did and man…

((WARNING: light rant below; mostly me rambling about worldbuilding aaaa))

I’m not fond of what the writing team wants to do, especially since it seems like they’re hyper-focusing on the kudos/street managers. It’s this section in particular that’s got me thinking and worried.

MAN does this phrase here have a lot of food for thought. Not just because of the horror fanfic i’m making, but now things clearly seem to be taking a large turn into the ‘Manager-focused plot’ I feared Clash would write themselves into.

Idk. The way i’m thinking about it, it’s a bit self destructive writing wise for suits to be in inherent ‘tiers’. (Grunt cogs have less personality/free will than managers, ete.)

If one of the goals is to show how COGs Inc exploits and mistreats their workers, isn’t it shooting yourself in the foot saying ‘COGs inc is a horrible company to ALL its workers’, but then turning to say ‘oh yeah, all those cogs aren’t as sentient compared to THESE ones’—

Like, in the case of ‘grunt’ cogs, wouldn’t these cogs be the ‘ground zero’ of the atrocities the company commits? Literally built for one purpose in life, in a cycle of being destroyed and rebuilt constantly without any say or agency. Being held under the thumb of a dubious company that in all technicality owns you, so you can’t really leave unless you’re fired?

If the grunt cogs were just as self preserving and sentient as the managers, then the message would be hammered in better. THEY’d be the ones constantly put under all the pressure for virtually nothing. Instead, the writing team has introduced the dilemma of ‘who is aware/deserving of company rights’.

If these (grunt) suits are inherently ‘lesser’ than their manager counterparts, then it changes the gravity of the situation from ‘discriminatory company practices’ to ‘changing a piece of machinery.’ No real loss, and its business as usual. The very problem i’d imagine the writing team wants to warn and help players to recognize in the story.

While not treated much better, it’s been shown/implied that manager cogs (specifically kudos/street and Litigation) get a lot more benefits and free time than anyone else besides bosses.

Removing personality/preservation from ‘grunt’ suits changes this element in the story from ‘They have higher positions, thus better work benefits,’ to ‘They get those benefits because they KNOW that they have them in the first place.’

In general, lot of the managers seem to have the luxury of being built without a specific company in mind, having childhoods, and ultimately CHOOSING to work at COGs Inc. Many seem to forget the whole reason the kudos/street managers were hired in the first place was in response to Atticus Wing’s death.

They weren’t randomly ‘dropped in’, and now the story needs to be changed to accommodate them. There already was an explicit reason, and it doesn’t seem to conflict with any manager lore after the fact. Why bend over backwards to force them into the story rewrites more?

I understand the managers are super popular, and have been a game changer in terms of story and gameplay, but I honestly feel they’re also blinding people in terms of prior lore and potential lore avenues. There’s no need to break the story/lore further to make the ‘special’ cogs even more ‘special’.

At the end of the day, I get the writing team wants to add more flavor, and I commend them for doing all this for free! Writing isn’t easy, and this isn’t me hating on them at all. I’m just not fond of this manager-centric mindset gripping people. I’m certainly looking forward to all the future content they wish to add, specifically rewrites in toon NPCS.

Anyway just had this in the back of my mind for a minute, feel free to throw in your two cents if ya like.

[soon-palestine]

https://t.co/J3fEqiIOIk

Since June 2019, Sudan has been caught in a whirlwind of revolution, descending into a profound economic and political crisis. The initial optimism that followed President Omar H. al-Bashir's ousting has led to chaos, influenced by powerful international actors with their respective political agendas. The geopolitical quagmire is further complicated by the involvement of neighbouring countries.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's (PhD) recent visit to Port Sudan, where he met with Abdel Fattah al-Burhan (Gen.), the head of the Sudanese army and the Saudi- and Egyptian-backed Sovereign Council of Sudan, evidenced Ethiopia’s vested interests. The visit should be particularly important given Abiy’s prior engagement with Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) leader, whom he hosted in Addis Abeba in December 2023 to advocate for peace in Sudan.

Ethiopia's economic ties with Sudan are substantial. The slowdown in the 211.5 million dollar investment circuit between Khartoum and Addis Abeba has adversely affected both countries. Small businesses along the Sudan-Ethiopia border have borne the brunt of the ongoing conflict. Prime Minister Abiy’s visit can be seen as an effort to stabilise these economic ties and promote peace for mutual benefit. However, if influenced by Western countries or Saudi Arabia, Abiy’s administration may face political backlash from its ally, the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The role of international players was evident early on. The UAE was among several countries, including the United States (US), Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, that expressed solidarity with the Sudanese people. Saudi Arabia and the UAE notably provided three billion dollars in economic aid to Al-Burhan’s leadership, signalling their approval of the political shift in Khartoum. However, the situation in Sudan soon deteriorated into an ongoing civil war, leading to accusations of ethnic cleansing and further international scrutiny.

Sudan's civil war, however, extends beyond regional dynamics. Recent reports have uncovered the involvement of external actors in perpetuating the conflict.

In May this year, American Senator Ben Cardin, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, raised concerns about a UN Panel of Experts' report from the previous year, which provided evidence of the UAE supplying weapons to the RSF, a group notorious for its brutal tactics. US Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, echoed these concerns, calling for “external actors" to stop "fueling and prolonging this conflict and enabling these atrocities by funnelling weapons into Sudan.”

Abu Dhabi has been working vigorously to clear its name in response to these accusations. Through diplomatic channels and humanitarian aid, the UAE has sought to counter allegations of its involvement in the Sudanese civil war. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been funnelled to humanitarian organisations operating in Sudan through various UN agencies, a move seen by many as an attempt by Abu Dhabi to portray itself as a force for good amidst the chaos.

Despite these efforts, a recent UN report has further implicated the UAE. The report exposed that the RSF, supported by Abu Dhabi, committed international crimes by receiving and laundering gold illegally exported from Sudan. The UAE has vehemently denied any involvement in Sudan’s political turmoil or illegal gold trade practices, calling the allegations a political mockery of its humanitarian generosity.

While these revelations add layers of complexity, the international community’s response remains lacklustre. The US and the UN have the political and diplomatic clout to influence the situation, but the resolution of Sudan’s crisis ultimately lies in the hands of its people. The international community can only play a supportive role in the Sudanese-led efforts to resolve the political disorder, providing the necessary space and resources for Sudan to shape its destiny.

Although belatedly, the Addis Abeba-based African Union (AU) has also begun addressing the dire humanitarian situation in Sudan. The Chairperson of the AU High-Level Panel on Sudan, Mohamed Ibn Chambas (PhD), has begun to speak out about the severe impacts of the ongoing civil war. However, stronger official condemnations from the AU were expected, holding all groups and countries involved in the war accountable.

Ironically, Sudan’s revolution is no longer a story of a failed uprising but an ongoing civil war marked by international intrigue and regional power struggles.

[radiofreederry]

The galaxy by the end of 9 ABY in me and @gabajoofs' timeline. After the Battle of Endor, the Galactic Empire splintered into several factions led by various charismatic warlords, which fought amongst themselves as the central Imperial government continued to war against the newly-proclaimed New Republic. This "Warlord Period" ended in 7 ABY with both the defeat of Warlord Zsinj and the Liberation of Coruscant. The majority of Imperials remaining have defected to Ardus Kaine's Pentastar Alignment, and the Empire is effectively dead as a polity, with only some dead-enders in the Deep Core keeping the name alive. As the Republic continues to hunt for Imperial war criminals, the galactic status quo has settled into a cold war between them and the Pentastar Alignment, with neither side willing to fire the first shot despite hostile relations. While the Republic governs much of the galaxy, other players also hold territory and influence as well, including the Mandalorians, the Central Committee of Grand Moffs, the New Confederacy of Independent Systems, organized crime groups, and a dark power rising in the shadowy corners of the galaxy...

The New Republic: After the Battle of Yavin, the Rebellion restructured itself into the New Republic, initially based on Chandrila. Over the next several years, the Republic waged a campaign against the fracturing Empire, securing the Galactic South and the Core before finally liberating Coruscant in 7 ABY. A series of escalating scandals brought down the leadership of Mon Mothma the following year, and she was succeeded in her role by Leia Organa, who pushed through governmental reforms and currently serves as the Republic's Chief of State, with Cal Omas as her Prime Minister. The Republic now sits at a crossroads, with several political factions vying to influence its destiny - including a right-wing political coalition led by Mon Mothma's daughter Leida.

The Neimoidian Socialist Confederation: After the election of socialist Thog Rutak as Trade Monarch, Neimoidian society was thrown into a civil war in which the socialists emerged victorious, and set about reforming Neimoidian society and nationalizing the Trade Federation. The confederation has grown to include much of the former Corporate Sector after its own socialist revolution, and is aligned with the Republic as an independent affiliated observer state.

The Pentastar Alignment: The largest and most successful of the post-Endor Imperial splinter states, the Pentastar Alignment, known in Republic space increasingly as simply the Imperial Remnant, controls most of the galaxy from Ord Mantell northwards. It has been so successful largely by avoiding conflict with the Republic and the Mandalorians, instead targeting smaller Imperial warlords including Warlord Zsinj. Pentastar has absorbed much of the remaining Imperial fleet and many of its greatest remaining military minds, including Grand Admirals Martio Batch and Gilad Pellaeon, the latter of whom acts as supreme commander of the Pentastar fleet. Governed from Bastion, the Pentastar Alignment is led by Ardus Kaine, former Grand Moff of Oversector Outer. Though he has taken the title of Legate in reference to military leaders of Bastion's ancient history, in all but name he is Emperor, and inspires great loyalty in his men.

The Bright Jewel Free Trade Zone: For a year beginning in 8 ABY, The Republic and the Pentastar Alignment fought an undeclared war over control of the important trade hub Ord Mantell. To prevent the conflict's escalation into a wider war, the belligerents covertly agreed to withdraw their forces and establish a free trade zone in the Bright Jewel Sector. Nominally independent, the zone is home to the Great Game, a covert competition between the Pentastar Intelligence Agency and the New Republic Intelligence Service to establish influence over Ord Mantell.

The Hapes Consortium: The small, independent enclave of the matriarchal Hapans has gone unmolested since Endor. Chief of State Organa is planning a diplomatic mission in the hopes of bringing them into the Republic.

The Chiss Ascendancy: In the Unknown Regions, the Chiss control their territory and watch for threats known only to them. They have not established relations with the Republic.

The New Confederacy of Independent Systems: After Endor, rather than joining the New Republic, a group of former Separatist worlds, led by Magisterial Porro Linn of Balan-Quod and mainly from the Tion Cluster, formed a revival of the CIS. They have received little support, and have not normalized relations with the Republic.

Black Sun, the Iron Triad, the Exchange, et al.: In the wake of Endor and the decimation of the Hutts, organized crime has grown in power. Several worlds in the Galactic south and former Hutt Space are now openly run by crime organizations, in particular the Iron Triad, founded by former Imperial officer Ubrik Adelhard, which is based on Klatooine. After the death of Prince Xizor, the leadership of Black Sun remains unclear.

The Central Committee of Grand Moffs: A small group of Grand Moffs working in concert with Supreme Slavelord Trioculus of Kessel - who claims to be the Emperor's son - has monopolized the spice trade with a small fleet of Imperial ships, conquering the Pyke Syndicate and incorporating it into their own operations. They are considered of least concern to the Republic.

The Imperial Royalist Confederation: After Ysanne Isard launched a coup in late 4 ABY, Sate Pestage and Mas Amedda fled Coruscant for the fortified Deep Core, where they set up their own government on the Emperor's throneworld of Byss. There Amedda rules as Imperial Regent, surrounded by sycophants, and the Republic is content to let him stew.

Mando’ade Aliite be Te Anila Grat’ua Mand’alor (United Clans of Mandalore): After Endor, Death Watch veteran Vasili of clan Bev’miir, who had spent several years uniting the disparate Mandalorian clans, launched an assault on the Empire's holdings in Mandalorian space. After securing Mandalore, Bev'miir, now known as Mandalore the Uniter, waged war to expand Mandalorian space to historical heights, helping to crush the Warlord Zsinj and destroy the power base of the Hutts. Since securing the borders of Mandalorian space, Bev'miir has been content to rule his worlds in relative peace, reforming Mandalorian society and restoring the supremacy of the clans. He recently signed a treaty alongside Chief of State Organa in which the Republic recognized him as the legitimate representative of the Mandalorian people and his government's sovereignty over the worlds it controls.

The True Mandalorians: Supporters of Bo-Katan Kryze's claim to lead the Mandalorians, including her own Nite Owls and several smaller clans, united as the True Mandalorians and attempted to gain their own foothold to unite the Mandalorians. While the Republic recognized Kryze as the true leader of the Mandalorians and offered support, ultimately Kryze's forces were only able to secure Onderon's moon Dxun, losing the planet Jabiim to Bev'miir's faction. Now, languishing on the jungle moon, they have lost even Republic recognition, and their future is uncertain.

The Hutt Empire: Campaigns by the Mandalorians and Iron Triad, and a revolt of the Evocii on what was once Nal Hutta, have destroyed most of the Hutts' power in the galaxy. Individual crimelords such as Dertykop of Taris or Teemo of Tatooine still exert power, but the Ruling Council retreated to Varl and the Bootana Hutta, there to rule what remained of Hutt Space. The Council was overthrown in 8 ABY by the warlord Muuka, who has proclaimed himself the new Emperor of the Hutts, declaring that the Hutts must return to their ancient ways of warfare and conquest to survive and reconquer their rightful territory.

The Proto-Sith: A number of dark side factions, including the Knights of Ren, the Prophets of the Dark Side, the Lost Tribe, elements of the Reborn and the Inquisition, and the Sorcerers of Tund have gathered in what was once Sith Space and the Centrality. The Rule of Two died with Palpatine and Vader at Endor, and it is time once again for the Sith to cheat death…

There are also several factions which hold little to no territory, but which have a great deal of galactic influence regardless:

Moff Royen's Imperial Remnant: A small fleet of ships which remains independent of the other major Imperial remnants, mainly patrolling the Red Hand Cluster.

The New Jedi Order: After a quest of several years to uncover secrets of the Force and find Force-sensitive recruits, Luke Skywalker, now a Jedi Master, has reformed the Jedi Order, heading the new Jedi Council. He has established a temple on Tython to headquarter his Order, which numbers around 100 Jedi, both survivors of the old Order and new recruits. The Order is independent of the Republic, but a treaty of friendship between them saw the Republic establish a fleet to defend Tython and the Order from threats.

The Children of Ghorman: The Republic Commision for the Prosecution of War Crimes and Crimes against Civilization was established in 6 ABY for the prosecution of Imperial war criminals. Valarr Ulgo, an Alderaanian former ISB officer and member of Republic Intelligence, formed the Children of Ghorman in order to secure these criminals, a group of Rebel veterans who were all impacted personally by Imperial atrocities with the sole objective of capturing those Imperials who were beyond the Republic's reach and bringing them to justice.

The Mining Guild: The fall of the Empire was a boon for the Mining Guild, which regained its independence. Under the leadership of Athor Skarhill, the Guild has moved in a left-wing direction, and affiliated itself with Garm Bel Iblis' People's Union Party.

[boredtechnologist]

Bally Midway's "Spy Hunter" arcade - Attract mode

Analyzing Bally Midway's "Spy Hunter" from a philosophical perspective involves delving into its thematic elements, gameplay mechanics, and narrative, to uncover the deeper existential, ethical, and sociopolitical implications it may present.

1. The Duality of Identity and the Spy Persona: "Spy Hunter" places the player in the role of a secret agent, a character inherently associated with dual identities and deception. This duality raises philosophical questions about the nature of identity and self. The spy, living a life of constant masquerade, embodies the existential inquiry into what constitutes one's true self. Is identity a fixed essence, or is it an ever-changing construct shaped by circumstances and roles?

2. Surveillance and Paranoia in Modern Society: The game's spy theme also taps into the broader philosophical and ethical discussions around surveillance, privacy, and paranoia in modern society. The player, both the hunter and the hunted, navigates a world of constant surveillance, reflecting real-world concerns about the balance between security and privacy, and the ethical implications of living in a surveillance state.

3. The Morality of Violence and Justice: "Spy Hunter" involves a significant amount of violence as the player combats enemy agents. This aspect of the game brings to the fore philosophical questions about the morality of violence and the concept of justice. Is violence ever justified in the pursuit of a greater good? The game’s setting in the world of espionage, where moral ambiguity is commonplace, encourages players to ponder the ethical complexities of such actions.

4. The Illusion of Control and Determinism: The game's driving and combat mechanics, where players must continually adapt to changing environments and threats, can be seen as a metaphor for the human desire for control in an unpredictable world. This reflects philosophical debates around free will and determinism. How much control do we truly have over our lives and decisions, and how much is dictated by external forces?

5. The Role of Technology in Human Conflict: "Spy Hunter" heavily features advanced vehicles and weaponry, highlighting the role of technology in modern conflict. This aspect raises philosophical questions about the relationship between humans and technology, particularly the ethical implications of relying on technological means in matters of security and warfare. It prompts reflection on the extent to which technology should be integrated into human conflict and the potential consequences of such integration.

6. Escapism and the Fantasy of Power: Lastly, the game offers players an escape into a world of intrigue and power, where they play a dominant role as a spy with advanced capabilities. This escapism can be viewed philosophically as a reflection on the human desire for empowerment and agency, especially in a world where individuals often feel powerless or constrained by societal structures.

In summary, "Spy Hunter," though primarily an entertainment medium, serves as a platform for exploring deeper philosophical themes. It touches on the duality of identity, surveillance and paranoia, the morality of violence, the illusion of control, the role of technology in conflict, and the human desire for escapism and power. These themes resonate with broader philosophical inquiries, demonstrating the capacity of video games to provoke thought and discussion on complex, real-world issues.

[utilitycaster]

Well now im curious, what are your top 10 etiquette violations

I'm not actually sure there are 10 tbh in that these are relatively broad - you could split them up more finely if you wanted but they cover a wide range of behavior. Also this is...a bit stream of consciousness. I do stand by 1 as the absolute Golden Rule of D&D in that it's really just so Me Me Me (more so than main character syndrome) that it's inexcusable, but like...rules 2- 6 are kind of all in the same nebulous position in my mind as are rules 7-10. 2-6 are "really bad, have a talk and be prepared to kick this person out if they don't shape up and honestly I would probably not want to hang out with them irl much if they don't shape up" and 7-10 are "maybe don't invite them to game nights but they could be okay otherwise."

Deliberately going against the general vibe of the table. This is the broadest but also obviously worst trait. If everyone else is here to play a serious playthrough of Curse of Strahd and they're all vampire hunters and whatnot and you're playing a clown in a hawaiian shirt named Jeff you are not funny; you are an asshole. I think that person who made the post of like "I'm playing D&D with my dad's friends and they're all fighters with tragic backstory and I'm a neon firbolg who resurrects our enemies and runs therapy sessions" should be beaten with hammers. Like, be unique, but if everyone else is going for a lighthearted vibe it's not time to bust out your darkest PC and vice versa. (This also goes deeper, like, if your table has decided PC death in-game is okay, you can request a change, but if you've never spoken up about this and then your character dies and you pitch a fit, that's on you.)

"Um actually my rich family solves this" and similar circumventing of obstacles in a way that cuts off all story avenues. It's fine to offer your services to help - sometimes the party will want it! But the worst player I've played with (who still did not violate Item 1) did this and short-circuited like 75% of the plot by being like "well my wealthy merchant family can probably smooth this over" and I wanted to, well, beat them with hammers. Brian Murphy of Naddpod calls this "showing up and trying not to play D&D" and he's right.

Closely related to/overlapping with item 2 but Main Character Syndrome. If you're a wizard and there's a nonurgent trial of strength? that is for the barbarian. If they ask for help, go for it, but don't just do everything. Share the table. Self-explanatory but man do some people not get it. I'm also grouping this with "my character wouldn't help" behaviors. Like to be clear, forgoing your turn as a roleplay thing is fine, but another Naddpod D&D Court regular topic is like "the player for whatever reason would not join combat bc their character wouldn't, and we nearly had a tpk because the encounter assumed our fucking cleric would be there".

Actually violating player agency. Closely relating to 2-3. Conflict is great and good. I think it's fine to lie, cheat, and steal from your party members if your table agrees on that. There are spells or abilities that lead to possession which is also valid if your table has talked through that. But you do not get to otherwise like, force another player character to do your bidding (unless your table has, again, decided this is okay). You cannot persuasion check other PCs into going against their desires unless that's a very specific conversation you've had out of character as a table. Even in game, like, the DC on persuasion checks can be arbitrarily high - even impossible - if someone would simply never do it.

Noncombat/non-violent D&D. There are other TTRPGs that are not heavily based on war games with character classes that aren't like 90% battle abilities and you should check those out. Anyone who plays noncombat/nonviolent D&D and is proud of it is dumb as the bag of hammers I'm beating the people of items 1 and 2 for and I don't respect them. I guess this isn't so much an etiquette violation in that if your entire table wants this you can all be terrible together, but it is kind of a dick move, especially since I both love D&D and find the anti-D&D crowd to largely be the most sour grapes-ass losers of all time, but also believe passionately that there are many things D&D does not achieve well because it is in fact a specific game with specific objectives. You should, if you want to play a game that is all social encounters and skill checks and no fighting, play the many indie games that would love your patronage and suit you admirably, not the most neutered, milquetoast, unsalted margarine version of D&D. I genuinely believe that people playing murderhobos or hardcore metagamers are VASTLY preferable.

Not making a good faith effort to know the rules. You do not have to be good at D&D. You do not have to walk on your knees for a hundred miles through the desert repenting for not knowing every rule of D&D. You only have to let the soft animal of your body have at least read the rules of your character's class, subclass, and race, and show up prepared, instead of being like "tee hee I listened to 5 episodes of TAZ Balance and am going to twirl my hair at the DM and hope they help little old me." The DM is BUSY and has SHIT TO DO. Read the fucking manual. It's okay to be wrong! It's not okay to be clueless on purpose.

Rules for Thee and Not For Me. Mostly a DM thing, and to be clear, the DM does have special rules bc they are the special one and this is obviously not about that. There are also rules that apply to NPCs/stat blocks and not PCs, and those are inherent to the balance of the game and are fine because NPCs have different abilities. But if, for example, you are requiring an athletics check of PCs to climb up on a ledge and don't permit acrobatics, your rogue NPC villain can't do acrobatics either unless they have some specific pre-written ability.

Metagaming pt 1: excessive metagaming: Part 2 will reveal the "excessive" but like. If you know trolls regenerate because you've been playing D&D for years but you are a level 4 INT 8 sorcerer in-game? you do not know trolls regenerate.

Metagaming pt 2: refusal to engage with the fact that this is a game: Sometimes you get the reverse, when people are like "well my character wouldn't realize that this magic item was important to your character" despite the other person RP-ing everything or "would I notice you were knocked out directly in front of me? It's a pitched battle!" Like. don't cheat but come on bro. This is, ultimately, a game. I will once again bring up Naddpod both because D&D Court exists AND they will do rule of funny shit (as Murph once pointed out, if you want to say you go to Ruby Tuesday's as a joke, great, if you try to use it mechanically, no, which is a healthy attitude towards immersion) AND Murph understands the concept of kayfabe.

Really extensive indecision that doesn't involve the whole party. This is mostly me but like. it's not fun, and I am impatient. If you're not an actual play livestream, you should take a break and in fact talk out of game and resume because god this drags. If everyone's on board obviously go for it but if it's one person's choice...babe the spotlight is on you, sing your solo or leave.

Basically: remember you are at a table with other people and you are telling a collaborative story in a system that is combat-heavy. I'm not bothered by (for example) someone stealing another character's item so long as they understand that this may lead to consequences for them! If you can dish it out but you're prepared to take it and your table trusts each other? Great! The problem is when people try to win against the other players, ask for special treatment they do not grant others, waste everyone's time unnecessarily, or skip to the end of the story; that's against the fundamental nature of the game. It's inconsiderate AND it misses the point.

[dailyadventureprompts]

DM Advice: More Than You Can Chew

Time and again I’ll have folks write in with a really solid idea for a big picture campaign concept or third act twist with a request to help bridge the gap between the low levels/start of the campaign and the thing they’re excited for. I love helping these folks, but as someone who looks for structural answers to problems it’s made me think there might be something lacking in how we’re teaching DMs to tell stories.

If I had to break it down into pure fundamentals: The constant guiding theme in any and all adventure or campaign writing is that whatever the party happen to be doing, whether it be hunting monsters, protecting an ally, exploring a ruin, or planning a heist, It’s only a piece of a far larger story. This larger story operates at a greater scale than the party currently has a means of dealing with, initially making them feel like small fish in a big pond and providing a great sense of achievement when they finally do manage to take on the larger threats.

 On a Campaign Basis:

When plotting a story arc you should start with a goal, something difficult but conceptually achievable that the party can throw themselves at with cleverness or daredevil bravery. Rescue the Heir, Save the Village, Avert the Disaster, Steal the Jewel. The task is not impossible, but the solution is not obvious requiring them to explore, be crafty, and get inventive. It’s best if they’re invested in accomplishing this goal in some way, so make the stakes personal and resonant with the characters and their desires.

In the background however you’ve got something else cooking, a larger story that the party are only pieces in, a conflict between individuals and forces far larger than they’ve previously dealt with that’s been going on unseen. Start with how the party achieving their initial goal will affect the world: who’s it going to piss off? what tenuous balance does it disrupt? What had to be done to keep that balance in place? Do any of the power players in this arrangement see the party as their opportunity to make a move and so throw their support behind this seemingly innocuous goal? What prices do they extract?

Villains are generally going to be your primary link between the small and large scale stories, but it’s important to set them up correctly; the villains are acting/reacting in relation to the larger story and their actions trod on the lives of the party/the people the party care about. In trying to correct this injustice (if only for selfish reasons) the party gain the villain’s attention/the attention of that villain’s enemies ( though whether they be allies or villains themselves depends on the story) and suddenly find themselves caught up in the events of the larger narrative.

While it’s a good idea to plan the goal based adventure as something the party can objectively “win”, I prefer setting up the background scenario as a delicate sort of jenga tower: things were inevitably going to fall apart but there’s no way to predict how. That’s because your players a) are chaos agents b) have agency, and it’s all about seeing how they choose to act/react in the face of an overwhelming scenario. 

The small scale story is about the lives of the heroes/people, where as the larger scale story is about the outcome of ideas/the world.  You do the small story first because getting your audience to care about themes and lore is best done through getting them to care about characters first, and then using their plights and passions as a lens to see the bigger picture.

Advice on using this technique on specific adventures under the cut:

You give your party an idea what they’re supposed to be doing, likely in line with the central gameplay pillar. Again, challenging but achievable, they can guess at the steps they’ll need to succeed even if they need to do some prepwork

Be sure to mention specific risks or unknowns that go along with this task, inviting them to take countermeasures or go off the safe path for potential gain.

Figure out some plothooks and emotional appeals: sympathy, greed, amusement, power, fear. Figure out the notes your party best responds to and learn to alternate them between adventures. Playing the same note too many times makes your party not want to bite the plothook.

Do some worldbuilding, whether tying it into existing lore or spinning up some new ideas: Why are things happening this way, why now?

Now figure out the twist, the thing that’s going to happen someway along your adventure that’ll shift the party from predictable challenges to unpredictable ones. Hired to protect a merchant’s valuable cargo along dangerous roads (combat)? Turns out its an enslaved sentient creature destined for a terrible fate, which the party could free at great personal cost ( ethical). Delving the ruin so the local wizard will kit you out with gear (exploration)? Woops, you’ve come back to find his petrified body smashed to bits in what just might be a magical assassination ( mystery).

Flipping the challenge on its head in this way is what makes an adventure memorable as it gives your party that “oh shit” moment that kickstarts their brain into alertness. A twist that’s predictable isn’t a twist, which is why so many “shadowy employer betrayal” adventures fall flat. Likewise, giving them a somewhat predictable challenge at first gives them material to improvise solutions to emergent, unpredictable problems.

It’s always a good idea to figure out what failure looks like for this adventure. Killing the party off is likely to be unsatisfying, but making them live with their mistakes is what makes a campaign into an actual story. Set up npcs who’s lives will be ruined, have the party’s enemies grow in strength, make them lose out on potentially valuable treasure. These not only give weight to your player’s choices but they act as their own plothook later down the line when you give the party a chance to undo what they’ve done.

[centrally-unplanned]

Something I do see a lot on discourse around Vicky 3 is a discussion of essentially "strategic decisions", people going "I want the game to always challenge me on what the right decision to make is and have meaningful tradeoffs and choices". And while for sure you need some of that - its inherent to diplomacy & war for example - I don't actually think that is true for the core mechanics. For one, Vicky 1 and Vicky 2 never had those! It did not, I am so sorry. In Vicky 2 if you want to move up the value you chain you "build factory in territory that has matching RGO", "research the pop growth, literacy, and research point techs before pivoting to key industrial techs" and "spam factories and railroads as long as they are profitable". Every country run was the same in pretty much every context from a strategic lens, your choices in this regard were not meaningful and you never needed to stop and think "hm...what do I build here, let me research the market..." or something, you learned a few tricks and applied them over and over. In Vicky 1 it was the same, but simpler, with a weirdly high punishment for imports (import costs were 100% paid by the government for some reason) so you try to avoid those, and also pop splitting as pure manual labor.

The Victoria games are simulation games, where "NPCs" have a ton of agency and therefore a lot is out of the hands of the player. That gameplay model actually conflicts with strategic depth, because if the simulations choices are meaningful then they need to be taking strategic options off the table. And its also a game simulating a 100+ countries and dozens of goods in a market economy, its operations are gonna be opaque as all hell. Because the simulation is expansive, to handle it as a player your actual decisions need to be simple and clear. Otherwise each decision would be a slog of digging through tables to figure out what to do, the game would drag down (and if the game just gives you a summary table of the data for you, well that is like a chess AI showing you your best moves isn't it?)

Instead what you want is the roleplay of meaningful tradeoffs. What is annoying is if every country feels like it industrializes and politics the same way, if you just "Build University - Build Steel Mill - Win" every time you lose the sense that you are roleplaying a leader of that country figuring out its challenges. You want multiple pathways - autocratic agrarian regime, liberal export powerhouse, communism autarky, etc - to all feel viable so you can play different roles. All of them being viable is anti-strategy in a way, right? It means your decisions kind of don't matter, anything can work out. Again you balance this, you have to do each path "right" and can screw up, but at its core its not meant to be hard the way chess is hard.

Vicky 2 for example did this a little bit with its RGO bonuses to factories - each province had its "best" factory, so if your country didn't have a great iron/coal province then maybe going for steel wasn't for you. Its an obvious decision right, not much strategy there, but it separates countries as an identity. But overall Vicky 2 wasn't amazing at this - one of the reasons event-heavy mods were so popular.

I see a lot of complaints online about Vicky 3 having that "sameness" to countries, but I also think those comments are rose-tinted about its predecessor games. I haven't played enough to say yet, so its what I am keeping an eye out for.

[tales-from-the-aether-ttrpg]

Alignment in Tales from the Aether

In this system, Alignment is less about morality and more about ideology and how one interacts with the world. There are three metrics players will use to determine their character’s alignment and they are as follows: (Peace, Justice, Freedom), (Self, Family, Community) and (Benign, Indifferent, Malevolent). 

In most cases, people have two sets of alignment: what they wish for/think they are, and what they truly are deep down. If you want to dig deep, give your character two sets of alignment. That which they strive to be and that which they actually are when push comes to shove. After all, it is only when our beliefs are challenged that we show our true colors. 

Peace: Everyone has the right to live their life without interruption or chaos. If pursuing a gang that is trafficking drugs would cause a war, you might be more likely to look the other way to keep the peace. You rarely wish to rock the boat and will put up with much if it will belay conflict.

Justice: Everyone should be held accountable for their actions and receive proper consequences. You have a very strong personal code and seek to rectify injustice no matter the cost. 

Freedom: Everyone has a right to live their life how they choose without anyone telling you otherwise. Why should other people impose their views of right and wrong on you? Every person is the master of their own mind and deserves respect and agency in their lives. 

~<*>~

Self: Your needs are most important and always come first. You may be willing to help others and be a team player but the moment someone else’s interests conflict yours, you come first. 

Family: The needs of those closest to you are most important and always come first. You are willing to sacrifice others for those closest to you but spare little thought towards those outside of your circle. 

Community: The needs of your community, people, world, etc, are most important. You value life above all and treat the lives of everyone from friends to family to strangers with the same weight.

~<*>~

Benign: You do not intentionally hurt anyone who has not wronged you and will try to keep collateral damage to a minimum. You will very rarely take advantage of others unless absolutely necessary. 

Indifferent: If innocent people are hurt by your actions, oh well, but you won’t intentionally hurt anyone who doesn’t deserve it. You will use those you have to to further your goals. 

Malevolent: You intentionally hurt people who have not wronged you and take advantage of anyone you can to further your goals. 

Some examples under the cut

This is a peak at some design elements of my TTRGP Tales from the Aether. This is not dnd. If you think some of these ideas are interesting, check out my Masterpost linked here and follow for more updates :D

Peace for the Self: As long as no one is getting in your way or interrupting your life, you don’t care what chaos is swirling around you. You would walk past someone getting robbed to keep the peace.

Peace for the Family: As long as those closest to you are able to live their lives outside the chaos, you are happy. You will endure humiliation from a noble so long as your loved ones are not disturbed. 

Peace for the Community: You don’t want there to be conflict within your community. When the leader of a city is enacting discriminatory laws against a select minority within your home city, you would be willing to let it slide to keep from causing unrest. 

Justice for the Self: The justice system is for you to use. Any slight or perceived injustice against you will be righted by any means necessary but a thief who stole a poor family’s life savings is meaningless to you.

Justice for the Family: The only wrongs that matter to you are those that hurt those you care about. You couldn’t care less that the gang extorting them is targeting many other people as well.

Justice for the Community: Every person deserves the same amount of justice. A serial killer littering the city with bodies that has had no impact on you is just as important as the thief that stole your mother’s necklace. Every person deserves justice and accountability.

Freedom for the Self: No one is allowed to tell you what you can and cannot do or be. No laws can bind you and no god can command you. If people are being oppressed around you, that is their problem.

Freedom for the Family: No one is allowed to tell your family what they can and cannot do or be. Their personal freedoms are the most important and you would sacrifice yourself and other people to protect them.

Freedom for the Community: Everyone is deserving of respect and autonomy, even people you have never met. The infringement of one person’s freedom is an infringement of your own.