#also I would very much like to continue with this Arc

[essektheylyss]

idk I kind of feel like I'm an idiot bc I actually enjoyed cr 3 from the jump to the end but like the blogs who follow bc I feel they are definitely more articulate and insightful than me are like "the whole thing was meaningless and pointless! matt fumbled everything!" so maybe I'm wrong to have liked it all? I'm not really sure where I'm going with this sorry

I think one thing to keep in mind is that many (and in fact, I would argue, most!) people who are critiquing the story and construction have also generally enjoyed the campaign as a whole! Certainly I don't know anyone who stuck it out through the end who did not overall enjoy watching it, for various reasons; I know there are people who hate watch, which I think is an absurd and honestly really stupid waste of time, but from my experience they are normally making snide and vicious tweet-length posts rather than long considerations of what isn't working for them.

There are also a lot of levels of critique—I've greatly enjoyed a lot of moments in isolation that I simultaneously felt weakened, contradicted, or even actively undermined the structure of the story as a whole, but those moments were still really fun and interesting beats. The Arch Heart's cameo comes to mind, as does, in hindsight, some of the construction of the post-Solstice split, but there are plenty of others of higher or lower impact on the story. In the finale the Raise Dead falls into this place very strongly, so I'm going to talk about it at length for a moment, since it was an absolutely stellar moment for me personally and as such I do think it serves as very illustrative of an example where I simultaneously fucking love a moment while finding it worth significant critique. I think it also touches on the critiques you're referring to, which I would summarize overall as the idea that many of the outcomes feel influenced negatively by pulled punches on the part of the DM rather than a flaw of one player or another. (Also, I want to talk about it cuz I love it. :3) This got very long but I think that to your point, it is worth examining in this amount of depth.

First, the good: it is an absolutely phenomenal culminating point of an arc that was only really concluded in summary; I have, as noted earlier this week, written at length about how Essek is never situated as a protagonist, which is functionally fine and even good. He ends up tied very strongly to Caleb's arc, and moves in the narrative in such a way after 2x97 that allows Caleb to reach a concluding note, and strengthens that narrative. So we only really hear about the outcome of Essek's choices, his inevitable leave from the Dynasty, in the summarization of the campaign 2 epilogue. This is not inherently a problem, because he is not a protagonist. But this moment does functionally create a material representation of that denouement, and in particular the tension between the outcomes of his poor choices and the better—potentially even good!—person he is trying to be as a result of the Nein's influence, which does strengthen his arc in its own right.

This moment also, hilariously, bears out my argument from this post. That the resurrection should only work with this intervention, particularly while the Nein are involved, does follow through on the Nein's general positioning within Exandria. Essek's leave happening without a fight (and, frankly, with only one attempted Counterspell) both makes for a very well-paced moment and also maintains the overall sense of story that the Nein impart when they are on screen; I'm thinking again of how their Ruidus episodes feel, much like their campaign and their post-campaign one-shots, like an intrigue action thriller series, and this fits well in that framing.

So overall, it is a fantastic moment... for the Nein. The Nein are not the protagonists of this story. They exist in the world, and are such active agents that they do continue to develop and exert motion on the narrative into this campaign, and frankly, I think this would have been fine if the party given ownership of this story and campaign did not abdicate their responsibility for it with unfortunate frequency. They do not exert a strong control over their story, which is at odds with the fact that the Nein do, and are present and also involved by the nature of their ending. It completely overshadows Ashton's heroic moment, in that the culminating action beat of this sequence is Essek getting away, which kind of takes the wind out of the sails of the Hells' involvement in the gods' outcome. It doesn't negate it, certainly, but it does refocus the story from them to, for some reason, Essek. So in this sense, it occurs at the expense of the Hells.

I find that while the handwaving of using dunamantic intervention to push Raise Dead beyond its limits (if indeed the reason it didn't originally work was because Ashton's brain was essentially gone) fits fine and even well within the framework of the Nein's story, and an NPC being able to do so without a roll is fine, since NPCs are vehicles the DM uses to guide the story, this is a significant divergence from the overall mechanics of the world at large; even the Nein had to do a full ritual for the resurrection of their tiefling. Matt put those mechanics in place specifically to create narrative meaning behind resurrections, which can feel very unmotivated and like a get out of jail free card in D&D, and while it's been noted that this would've really strained the runtime beyond its existing length, prioritizing it at the cost of, for instance, more truncated end notes for the Nein and Vox would've bolstered the Hells' presence in an ending to their own story that even many of their fans felt was ultimately lacking.

Giving the resurrection full weight would've also given Ashton's sacrifice and the Hells' involvement more narrative weight; the reason the other parties are involved at all is because the Hells were truly running on fumes by that point, but any lack of involvement this created could've been alleviated by having them directly involved through pre-established ritual elements that are not contingent on them having any mechanical offerings. So this moment sits within the context of critique that I agree with: that it felt like a pulled punch that ultimately also served to decenter the Hells within their own narrative, when it could've been used with more deliberate narrative force.

At the same time, I fucking love it, and watched it four times in a row yesterday, because it is so good—and it is, as I described, narratively and thematically coherent in one sense! And I think that is one issue of the campaign: many, many great moments are excellent and coherent in a certain framework but are weaker to varying degrees when considered as one piece of a larger whole. There are so many frameworks at play in this narrative, and not enough direct intervention to manage those as frameworks rather than as a single story, but at the same time, I think those frameworks are far more apparent if you're really looking for them, and that's much more difficult, if not impossible, when you're in the midst of them and telling the story.

I also don't think this means one cannot critique this; in fact, I would say this is more an issue of being a serialized narrative than an improvised one, which is often how critique of it has been pushed back against within the fandom. I was thinking about this as I'm currently in a course on, quite literally, how to critique comics, and we discussed this week how Marjane Satrapi said in an interview after making the film adaptation of Persepolis, which was first a serialized comic, that she ended up preferring the film, and I speculated that was because with a film, one has the ability to make a more cohesive narrative purely by virtue of the fact that with a serialized form, you cannot go back and make retroactive edits when new developments come to light. This is something that long-running comics must constantly navigate (as do many long TV shows), and in extreme circumstances such as decades-old comic franchises, ends up resulting in infinite timelines and hand-waving, which becomes so ridiculous that at this point it's a meme. In that scenario, though, it is not presented as a non-contradictory story, let alone a cohesive one.

Many of the critiques of campaign 3 are operating within the idea that this is presented as one overarching narrative. (And honestly, comics and other narratives that don't utilize that presentation are also still critiqued on that merit by people who greatly enjoy the texts they're critiquing anyway.) Within that context, I feel that the framing of the Raise Dead, as well as much of what would be my critique of the other pieces I referenced (the Arch Heart's cameo and some of the party-split sections) if I was to do the same kind of rundown of those, actively undermine this presentation by introducing and forefronting too many conflicting frameworks that are not interwoven well enough to create a single, cohesive overarching narrative.

This is a very long-winded way to illustrate my point, which is that I would really encourage reading critique not as a lack of enjoyment of the campaign, let alone a suggestion that no one should've enjoyed it (and if you did, then you're not smart enough to know better), but as a way to engage with the text(s) as presented within one framework or another. I think this is sometimes obscured in online fandom spaces, where we're not engaging in critique in as formal of a sense as one would in, say, an academic setting, where the norms generally dictate the framework one is using is explicitly stated if not fully delineated within the critique, but it is, more often than not, still implicitly present within the critique.

And as a final note, I would also really urge everyone reading others' opinions on something they enjoy to resist the urge to elide their own opinions from the conversation, even if you don't feel as articulate or as well-versed in critique. Critique is a trained skill, so it is certainly something one can pick up if they are inclined, and at the same time, someone doing it does not mean they are inherently right—and in fact, with all argumentative writing, it is up to the reader to consider the argument and decide whether or not they agree with it. (You can decide that you disagree with me about the Raise Dead! Just because I wrote a thousand words on it does not inherently make my interpretation truth; it's just an interpretation. You get to say whether or not you think my interpretation makes sense based on the evidence presented.) Even here I'm using the framework of some critique that others have made, but I don't delineate in full myself. In doing do I'm not presuming that you agree, but I am presuming that you've read it and know what I'm referring to. Strictly speaking it's also not even saying that I take that critique as true; it's saying that I feel the conclusions drawn are applicable as a basis for my argument. If you wanted, you could even say that you feel that my argument is irrelevant to you because you don't feel those critiques are true! But you ultimately do have to be the one to decide any of that, which does involve a balance between a confidence in the formation of your own opinions on the text and an openness to entertaining others'.

[yeshallbeasgods]

#Also thinking about how Kairi was written out when she really didn't need to be#If all this was done to set up Riku with a new char we haven't met yet I will wear a clown suit for the rest of my life#But I really don't think that's the case after Riku's arc in DDD culminated in him realizing Sora is his most cherished person#He's already in love y'all now we just need to wait and see

A+ tags but also.

Quick correction, but intensely devoted homoerotic friendships have been played up in Japanese media, particularly anime and games, for decades now. We didn't call it queerbaiting back then but it was very much around. The early 2000s did have a lot of that stuff, as did the 90s. That said, Sora continuously choosing Riku over Kairi in subtext as well as explicit text does still stand out as notable. Even back when KH1 first came out, the narrative convention would be for Riku to sacrifice himself and disappear from the story, leaving Kairi and Sora to go home together and honor his memory. Sora immediately ditching Kairi to go find Riku was eyebrow-raising.

So like, queerbaiting was absolutely a thing in anime and games at the time (just look at Ouran High School Host Club, which absolutely a pastiche of this and similar tropes), but Kingdom Hearts was still not messing around even at the beginning.

Sunken Ships and SoRiku

Hi internet void. I went feral and maybe you'll read the result.

KH has made a lot of choices around SoRiku from a narrative perspective that, in isolation, wouldn't amount to much. A heart-to-heart here, a questionable line there, and so on. The usual things that one would do to court a queer shipping audience in an otherwise het or unromantic work. And SoRiku circles have painstakingly documented every instance to show something that looks more like a consistent and intentional effort rather than a few dollops here and there to keep shippers engaged. There's... a lot. But one stupid, insignificant thing really shook me up and made me a believer in SoRiku Endgame, Actually.

Silly as it is, it's Nomura's reaction to people shipping RikuNami that gets me the most.

Generally speaking a writer doesn't want to interact with fandom shipping unless it's to urgently course correct. As in it would be catastrophic to the narrative if the fandom had the wrong idea. Otherwise it's best to just take note of how people are interpreting things and adjust the next installment accordingly, or live and let live. Keep distant and don't risk accusations of retconning/bad writing/queerbaiting in bad faith. So the normal reaction from Nomura seeing people get excited over RikuNami would have been to just do nothing. But instead, the scene was patched to downplay the smile, and Nomura went on the record to clarify that it's not a setup for a romantic relationship between Riku and Namine.

That's insane.

Why is it so important that Riku remain romantically uninterested in a girl he'd have a natural connection to, huh? What about accidentally implying RikuNami was so detrimental to the story that it was changed and explicitly addressed like that? Even if it wasn't meant to be, surely letting it play out like AkuRoku did would be enough. Just gently clarify and move on with the story (which pretty much sunk the ship on it's own anyway). You don't wade into fandom shipping and launch nuclear warheads like Nomura did against RikuNami unless you want to leave no room for doubt.

Torpedoing RikuNami also doesn't help them keep up appearances in terms of straightness at this point. Leaving it intact would only help the case of Riku and Sora being bffs with the strongest bond 5ever- a huge boon for the writing team if they wanted to avoid things looking too gay. Nomura et. al. are absolutely aware of the impressions and jokes about how gay KH is. And KH definitely would not be the first series to play in to queer ship teasing for the lols until it's time to pair everyone up at the end.

But they did the one thing you're not supposed to do if you're just aiming to queerbait: undermining the plausible straight ship. You don't eliminate the only straight option for your character like that for the sake of "he so gay" jokes! Having a straight option available is vital to make the bait; they don't have to be compelling or important to the story, they just have to exist. Yet at this point, Riku's only option is Sora. They went out of their way to ensure we wouldn't think anything else makes sense for him.

Holy. Shit.

[utilitycaster]

Would you be willing to share more about this campaign playing into the weaknesses of Matt, Marisha, Laura, and Liam. I guess specifically, what are the main weaknesses youre seeing and how do you think the campaign exacerbated them?

If you’ve answered this already sorry!!!

In short:

Matt is extremely good at following his players' instincts and making the world feel like it is continuing to spin even when the characters aren't focusing on it. He is actually pretty bad at guessing what the players will do until quite late in the game (sorry man you should have realized the Augen Trust plot was dead from like, at the latest, episode 12, and it's WILD that you didn't anticipate Keyleth being on speed dial would be like, a factor) and at longform railroading (especially when that requires him to bypass the long digressions a character-focused arc), and he is VERY bad at saying no or bringing down the axe. It's always good to be a kind person, and it's frequently good to be a nice person in real life, but niceness in storytelling sucks ass. So he tried to run a very heavily plotted campaign without putting a heavy enough hand on the scale, failed to handle a very aimless party, and pulled pretty much every single punch.

Marisha tends to have pretty loose character concepts. This isn't bad, but it does mean that they need to be either very driven, or for the narrative to force them to be driven, for them to be interesting. Keyleth has her Aramente and her need to become a leader. Beau's mentorship from Dairon and her close relationships with the rest of the Mighty Nein and her general curiosity led her to get involved with all kinds of messes, even though the actual backstory of her plot was largely handled without her (again, another way to look at this is C1 and C2 played to these people's strengths). But she often has these gaps that feel like she stopped character development midway through. Laudna is obviously the most egregious (the ten years in the desert is honestly hilarious in how bad it is) but think about how Patia was so utterly defined by family position - and did a good job with that! the scene where she addresses her grandfather is a highlight! - but Marisha never once had even the barest outline of her parents designed. Like that's a pretty massive oversight for a character you describe as a Kennedy! Her whole deal is who her family is! And so by making a go with the flow character but also giving that character a horrible traumatic backstory that she was not, ultimately, really over, she made an incoherent mess.

Laura excels with quiet background development and a lot of room to play with character dynamics without necessarily being in the hot seat. She is, by her own admission, afraid of making the wrong decisions in the D&D game. This is not how D&D works. You make choices. If you fail to make choices it will be boring. Vex can choose to join Saundor or not, but neither of these is The Right Choice, it's just a choice you make that has (here is the word that much of the fandom is too stupid to understand) consequences, as all choices do. If she joins with him she gets a boon, but also a drawback. If she doesn't, he attacks her viciously both physically and emotionally. So anyway Imogen was put in a position of having to make a lot of decisions but without a real time pressure either, and Laura's hesitance to do this as a character positioned as The Chosen One meant that the entire story was just a slog of a bunch of idiots with no plan or philosophy other than the basest self-interest. Imogen's introversion and unwillingness to branch out especially early on is also true to the character but really goes against Laura's own strengths with the more outgoing and gregarious Vex and Jester (or even characters willing to say weird or mean shit like Arlo, the Matron, Sweetpea. and Bethany).

Liam is also at times too nice for his own good and won't go against his friends (Caleb in particular was a great example of the character concept canceling out Liam's weakest tendencies; just as Bells Hells in many case played to people's greatest weakness, though in Laura's case it was not her fault, the Nein played to many of their greatest strengths). To be clear: being a hostile asshole at the table is bad, but if you have clearly said for a hundred odd episodes that you won't let people go forward with this plan, then when they go forward with this plan, stand up and fight. If you have said that service to the Raven Queen and an acceptance of death is important, then frankly, your friend wishing their character had a happier ending is a valid thing to feel but you are not obligated to sacrifice your own meaningful ending to give them theirs. I don't know what happened behind the scenes there, but it certainly doesn't inspire faith.

[aprilblossomgirl]

i feel like i'm hurting so much for faifa in this episode. he doesn't deserve to hear that many hurtful words. before i continue, i think i need to say this first: as an asian myself, i will always understand why most (asian) shows choose forgiveness when dealing with bad parents/parenting, no matter how unforgivable they might be seen by the rest of the audience. and that, i believe, is not of any agenda by the showmaker. of course, to not generalize it, few medias didn't go through that route because of a different preference or goal in the storytelling. however, understanding forgiveness doesn't necessarily mean i believe it is always the 'right' way of wrapping up an arc.

thinking about the upcoming faifawine's story starting next week, i feel like some dialogues in this episode, no matter how they really felt off to me, are intentionally right there as a further backstory for faifa. and especially if the directing choice of faifa's expression changes through that scene with the whole family is anything to go by.

when yotha called fai, he said this first: "Tell me honestly. Don’t be scared of hurting anyone." as if yotha knows that fai always keeps his feelings to himself to avoid hurting anyone else.

fai trying to come up with a reasoning, "I was probably just angry with her, but I think everyone was hurt by what happened— Dad, Newton, and Mom." as if to avoid answering yotha's question, "Do you hate her?" with his real answer.

"If Mom really wanted to abandon us, why would she have taken me with her?" shows that fai was not being optimistic (as yotha implied) but somehow trusted the mom. only to be shattered later, "I thought if I brought Faifa who loves being with his Dad and brothers, at least he would ask me to bring him back to visit everyone often and we’d all see each other sometimes. On the other hand, if I’d brought you, Yotha, we might have been so happy that we wouldn’t have wanted to come back and see anyone here again..." (what nonsense! i cannot understand any logic behind this one.) in a way implying that she might haven't been that happy with fai, which somehow validate what he and yotha had been talking about before: "I don’t know why she took me with her even though you were the one who wanted to go." / "Because she loves you more than me." / "That’s definitely not the reason." oh, i was right. mom doesn't love me. but she's hurting. but...

imagine being faifa, hearing all of those hurtful excuses, but his immediate response was trying to justify why mom did what she did instead of trying to validate the real feeling he himself was having. and i say this with my whole being: that's a pretty accurate representation of how we, asian kids, mostly were nurtured. the scene just stabbed me right in the heart.

faifa might haven't said anything, but his face didn't lie. you could very clearly see how his face instantly dropped once mom told her reason for taking him instead of yotha at that time. and i still cannot forget the face he made a few episodes back when mom gave him something he was allergic to. the level of gaslighting here is too suffocating to witness. the emotional neglect just hits too hard. i cannot even begin to break it further into fai's loneliness.

all these made me wonder how the upcoming third arc will 'deal' with fai's inner wound. i hope the show won't brush it off because i think it would add more depth to the romance part, how he navigates his feelings once someone finally enters his life, as it has been implied that wine was also dealing with heartbreak.

[elvenferretots]

I feel like being in therapy is a lot like watching serialized TV. I get to work through a very small chunk of the story for an hour, and then waiting to suspense for a whole another week to see where it goes.

For once, I would like to binge. Let me get through all this shit in like 12 hours and be done.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Kiss Kiss Fallen Tree!

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[wickmitz]

— THE ELECTRIC-FEVER REMEDY.

[bitchthefuck1]

you know what, I actually will talk about this because it's bothering me. The issue with focussing so heavily on syd and carmy's potential for a romantic relationship isn't that there's something inherently unintellectual about romance or whatever, it's that a lot of people seem incapable of doing that without immediately flattening the story and ignoring or intentionally misreading any and all nuance for the sake of that romance. Every scene suddenly becomes about how it impacts their relationship, every analysis is done through a romantic lens, every frame or line of dialogue becomes about finding some easter egg or hint that "proves" these people should start dating. Their dynamic is absolutely a fundamental part of this show, but if you can only see it as a will-they-won't-they, you miss so much of what the story is actually trying to say with these two.

There are good versions of this story where their relationship is romantic and there are good versions of this story where it isn't, but as soon as you decide them being together is "the point," you lose the ability to actually judge the story for what it is, not what you want it to be.

[quatregats]

Well okay I can't find the post about the theories about who pushed Captain Sawyer (I think @hms-lurking-latinist was involved?? Do you know what post I'm talking about or did I make this up) so I can't remember what people's theories were and give them proper credit but I do think that show!Horatio definitely pushed him. I fully buy this theory. And I can't remember if this was an actual theory but I'd buy that it was Wellard in the books and Horatio was trying to cover for him (I need to reread Lieutenant though). Show!Horatio having pushed him and Archie covering for him fully knowing this fact is a very good dynamic, though.

[smile-files]

i continue to find ii3 baffling. why did they make it (this isn't to hate on the season, i'm genuinely curious)

[dent-de-leon]

TAZ Ethersea my beloved.....

[rosemirmir]

Just saw rider time ryuki with a friend. I did like it, but also I have so much I need to process before I have any thoughts I can actually put into words

Also it was wild to finally see the gay sex scene with context

[obisamya]

What is going on w roy and keeley this season like genuinely

[starpros-sunshine]

no yeah i am familiar with the source material i read all/most of the og sherlock holmes stories a few years ago and i think moriarty the patriot is a very cool and interesting adaptation. and also on a meta level i think it’s very funny that somebody looked at the Big Bad Final Boss Of Sherlock Holmes Stories and went “but what if he was a pretty anime boy who was gay for sherlock” and then just ran with it

It's everything to me it's wonderful. Afaik the og Moriarty also didn't do identity theft and arson as a kid but as far as I'm aware that also never got brought up so who knows really but I it is very funny you're absolutely right about that.

[arolesbianism]

Not to acknowledge homestuck's existence but if there's one thing that I legitimately like abt it that no one gets like I do it's troll romance. Aka I'm apparently the only fucker on planet earth who read the romance part of that. Can anyone hear me.

[magnolia-sunrise]

close ups

you wanna guess the color of my underwear?