#and that this fundamental goodness makes the show more interesting & compelling

[aethersea]

I went and hunted down this article to read, even though the link is dead now, so here it is for anyone else who'd like it. you'll have to scroll a while, or just ctrl+f scott's name

Which is why it’s all the more important to note that Scott? Not your average white teenager. Not a white teenager at all. While the circumstances of Scott’s life are actually probably the result of the writers trying to create a scenario where it’s plausible for a sixteen year old boy to spend most of his nights running around the woods fighting monsters, the facts remain the same. 

Scott’s parents are divorced, and at the start of the show at least, his father is completely out of the picture. It is implied several times that his father was an alcoholic, and borderline abusive. Scott’s mother, on the other hand, is a genuinely amazing and wonderful woman, but she’s busy providing for her teenage son (and the occasional love-starved foster kid that her son literally brings home to live with them because that is an honest to goodness plot point). Melissa (played by Melissa Ponzio) is a fantastic mother, but she’s not around a lot, because she’s always working. She’s a nurse, and while it’s a profession that pays pretty well, it’s clear that it doesn’t pay well enough.

And, I mean, I just can’t get over how interesting Scott’s background is from this perspective. Because his father, who we later discover is an FBI agent, is a codedly upper-middle class white man, but Scott chooses to live with his working class Hispanic mother. Nursing, though an important (very) and difficult job, is generally considered a lower-class profession. It’s something working class people do. Higher income people with the same interests become doctors. 

It’s hard to think of a more positive representation of a Hispanic teen in pop culture. It’s hard to think of a more positive representation of any teenager in pop culture. Scott’s one of a kind. Because while he is a rather static character (he is good and he stays good), Scott isn’t by any means boring, nor is he a bad character. Like I mentioned earlier, he’s a lot like Captain America. Just because he’s good doesn’t mean everyone else is, and a great deal of really interesting conflict can come from Scott and his idealism butting up against the world.

from “The Inescapable Goodness of Scott McCall” on Kiss My Wonder Woman

[mr-president]

I think one of my favorite Funtermina things is how it uses characters as narrative foils, specifically in how those characters interact with each other and everyone else.

Karin and Daan’s is the most discussed as it’s probably the most apparent within the text: their volatile opposing viewpoints on life via their upbringings (despite being extremely similar otherwise). When Karin and Daan interact, it’s like a person arguing with themself. They clash like ammonia and bleach, unable to reconcile how similar they are (haha cleaning chemical analogy) yet toxic in their association.

Marina and Levi represent the different realities of Prehevil, what with Marina’s privileged upbringing versus Levi’s absolute shitshow of an existence. And yet, they get along incredibly well and form a cadence with one another because through each other, they can reconcile their upbringings in Prehevil. Levi is the Prehevil Marina tried to escape—Marina is the Prehevil Levi hoped to return to.

Marcoh and Olivia are interesting because—and I will argue this to the death—their relationship is wholly as siblings. And they’re also deeply connected by their relationships with their sisters, specifically how those sisters formulated and defined how they see themselves. Marcoh has done nothing but live to protect his sister, while Olivia has forever lived in her sister’s shadow. Their identities revolve completely around their sisters, and this also colors their relationship with each other as siblings.

I wish it was explored more, but I think there’s a level of disenfranchisement when Marcoh fervently tries to protect Olivia the same way he protected his younger sister (edit: rb for amendment). He clearly sees her in that role, and Olivia’s already got guilt written into her about her disability making her a “charity case.” I say this also because of their different opinions on guns, power, and death: Marcoh has no bloodlust and seems exhausted when he has to hurt others, while Olivia becomes almost jubilant when she receives a gun. And those reactions to enacting violence are directly informed by their relationships with their sisters: a begrudging responsibility vs empowerment.

My favorite is probably Abella and O’saa as foils. As characters they’re probably my favorites, and their foil makes it even better.

Abella easily connects with everyone around her, ensuring that they’re all getting along (or not killing each other) and she tries desperately to help everyone, even at her own detriment. She cares, so much, even too much.

O’saa on the other hand, is the exact opposite. He actively chooses to connect with everyone as little as possible, to the point where you can kill someone in front of him and he won’t give a shit. This is, obviously, to his detriment in terms of his goal towards enlightenment. He cares too little, even if at all.

They perfectly represent the dichotomy between altruism vs selfishness, the mundane vs the macro, democracy vs individualism. Fundamentally, both Abella and O’saa get shit done, and what makes them so compelling as foils is how similar the results of their different processes are.

Both of them are the only two that are capable of saving everyone. Abella does so by interacting with many of the other contestants, while O’saa does this by ignoring everyone and just occam’s razoring that shit. They both get shit done and to the greatest net success, but in both cases, because they operate on extremes, it’s to the detriment of themselves. The game shows this literally because, well, they sacrifice themselves to Logic for the greater good, but the game also implies this detriment via their moonscorches.

Chaugnaur represents how others have reduced Abella to a sexual object for their pleasure or a mindless brute for labor. It is a physical manifestation of how interacting and connecting with others can be to one’s detriment because Abella often cannot control how people see and define her. Mastermind, on the other hand, is O’saa’s brain swelling and overtaking everything else on his head to the point where he is blind (save for the eye) and mute, only able to speak in mumbles. Mastermind is how O’saa values logic, knowledge, comprehension over anything else, becoming blind to other viewpoints save for his own. Additionally, it’s unable to communicate or connect with anyone else, only able to ruminate get never share its thoughts.

Abella is one of the first to Moonscorch; O’saa is one of the last. I love them as foils because even though they’re the most different in terms of anything, they don’t hinder one another at much all. They’re just kinda chill. And this makes sense because their dichotomies aren’t volatile like Karin and Daan’s, nor complementary like the others. Rather, they operate in balance—you cannot be too altruistic without some selfishness. To help everyone and to achieve enlightenment, you must consider both the mundane and the greater picture. Society operates on a shared democracy and on empowering individuals.

Still, the fact that even operating on the extremes has the greatest positive effect (in terms of utilitarianism) really says smth abt whether these values even matter. But I’d argue that they do matter, cause it’s that question of whether it’s worth it to suffer or even sacrifice for the greater good.

As a whole, each foil represents a central theme/motif of Fear & Hunger: internal vs external locus of control (Karin and Daan), environment dictating identity (Marina and Levi), relationships and their impact (Marcoh and Olivia), and the thematic shitshow that is Abella and O’saa.

Tldr; the game is about some girls and their boy best friends.

[faelapis]

hotd: team green or black? (or?)

rhaenys thoughts?

rhaenyra x mysaria…???

house of the dragon asks! VERY LONG ANSWERS AHEAD:

1: team green or black?

there's two answers to this - the intellectual answer, and the team sports answer.

the intellectual answer is that this isn't really "the point." both sides have (and will) lose a great deal. there are no winners in war, only survivors. a petty conflict between the rich will result in the death of many.

on a broader, thematic note, my impression is that a big point of the entire "song of ice and fire" is that the unjust hierarchy of monarchy and feudalism hurts people. especially the lower classes. they are affected when lords flex military might, when they put their own survival above the realm, when they act petty, selfish or cowardly, which they frequently do. the rare "peaceful" ruler does not justify the system. the lower classes also suffer the most in war. but the system hurts everyone - even the royals themselves. they are literally killing each other for power.

THAT. BEING. SAID.

i actually disagree with the take that you can't have some fun with the team sports aspect. this is a fictional television show. Fun is allowed. it's drama! murder! crying and screaming!!!

so while HotD has overall thematic messages, the show encourages you to enjoy the back-and-forth between the characters. i don't begrudge people for their stan wars on twitter. we all know this is a fictional show - and its okay to be ruled by your emotions when watching fiction.

so. with that said? team black, 100%. i think they have more compelling characters and reasoning for their cause. fundamentally, their cause is to put a woman on the throne in a society ruled by traditional patriarchy.

look, i love alicent for her complexity. she is a well-written character who makes sense with her society... but she is not a girl's girl. she is trapped both by external forces of patriarchy and its effect on her own mind. she is stuck fighting for men and fulfilling wifely duties - never fighting for herself.

she seems pretty miserable, at the end of the day.

yes, rhaenyra is also complex. she's often a bad person - but sometimes, i like seeing a strong woman on a dragon do some crimes :) especially one who has had to fight for respect as often as rhaenyra. that's compelling tv, even if Monarchy Bad.

the greens have A Point somewhere, about stability > rhaenyra, but they are also clouded by self-interest. they didn't even TRY supporting a woman. (also, remember, this is emotion/vibes-based.)

the "aagon's dream" misunderstand was initially frustrating, which also makes me side against the greens a bit more. i like when characters are compelled by real, sincere differences in opinion. i dislike when it's just a misunderstanding that can be easily quelled.

and alicent DID have real motivations, previously! she was right that rhaenyra would have reason to kill her children to claim legitimacy - even if that's more of a Matter of War now than a real intention of hers early on.

oh well. one good thing about the misunderstanding is that it didn't actually convince anyone other than alicent. otto hightower and the council were already planning a coup. it seems mostly that it was a good tool to further their cause, not something that actually convinced the masses on a deep, personal level. you can also make the case that alicent "heard what she wanted to hear".

but it doesn't really matter because nobody was going to suddenly switch sides. the material reality is more important: the council wanted aagon. otto wanted to secure his interests. alicent wanted to secure her children's safety. the war is already happening, so alicent's misunderstanding being cleared up doesn't change anything.

and it causes alicent to realize she doesn't really have much power. society around her will keep turning, and her influence is very limited. the rabble may hate or worship her, and she has little control over it. she may be important in the council, or dismissed from it. which is leading her on a compelling arc that i'm interested to see where goes!

2: rhaenys thoughts?

very few! uhh... she seemed nice? i like her death scene?

the show seems to use her symbolically as a shorthand for "what a good woman ruler could be like" for the kingdom. but i don't know if it would've played out that way. it is hard to tell, because if she WAS queen, the society she lives in could have turned against her. or maybe she could have found a way to earn their trust. maybe viserys would've been chill enough to support her claim (probably?). but we don't know. she's The Queen Who Never Was (tm).

3: rhaenyra x mysaria?

ok so, i do actually have a hot take on this, cuz i've seen some call it "rushed." it may ruffle some feathers. here we go:

i dont think every gay kiss has to feel like an "earned" 50k slowburn fic. it's well-established that instant or near-instant attraction is a thing. i dont think it will be "endgame," but i dont think it needs to be.

i think sometimes - often in this show - you see a man and a woman meet and fuck the same night. people tend to just accept that. not every case of attraction has to be based on a Deep Bond of Many Years. sometimes, a man and woman on this show have no real bond, yet as soon as they Walk Close to Each Other, it's accepted "they will fuck that night."

i would also suggest that not everything is literal. it's addressed in canon that rhaenyras' attraction to daemon came hand-in-hand with what he represented to her. which was, in a word, freedom. she wanted to BE him more than anything.

if we take a non-literal approach, what might mysaria represent?

right now, i think its rhaenyras desperation for someone to listen to her. her council belittles her for being a woman. it protects her like a "daughter" rather than a ruler. mysaria both listens to her, and plots with her on equal level. in a way, she represents (and yes this is a somewhat cliche thing in gay pairings, but not for no reason!) a sense of equality and mutual understanding in a patriarchal world.

they are not "literally" equal in terms of rank - but again, it does not have to be completely literal. mysaria feels Treated like an equal by rhaenyra. she's trusted (and given agency), and earns rhaenyras trust (+expands her own agency) in turn.

mysaria additionally seems to represent a different idea of rebellion against patriarchy - an involuntary one. because she cannot perform its most core obligation of (presumed cisgender) womanhood: she cannot bear children. she must find other forms of "worth" in the world. she has no choice.

rhaenyra herself desires to take up sword, rule in a "masculine" way. so being the only other woman there + both of them standing outside patriarchys desired paths for them + being able to help/depend on each other... seems, to me, to serve the Themes of rhaenyras repression vs liberation well.

not to mention, it's interesting in light of rhaenyra being kinda gnc-coded in... other ways!

anyway. like i said, i Highly Doubt these two will be any kind of "endgame." but that's okay. sometimes, you dont need an eternity together - you just need a moment.

i think there's a certain breed of fan who sees many things only through shipping. so if there's not a long, "satisfying" arc of these two developing feelings for each other, it's a "badly written ship." especially for gay couples. and i don't think this is even conscious homophobia, i think its (partially from queer viewers!!) because they WANT to root for those ships. they WANT a gay ship to feel perfectly "right" in a heteronormative world.

well i'm sorry to say, this show is not a romance. it is not about ships or the idealized, perfectly developed couple. sometimes, people find an attraction to one another in ways that are not ideal. shit happens. people get lonely. people find relief in the only other person there who seems to understand them. sometimes it's quick. sometimes it's the opposite of a 50k coffeeshop slowburn AU.

but that does not mean it's bad. it's just reality.

[novlr]

Do you have any tips on how to improve on character beats, verbal cues and overall dialog descriptions? I struggle a LOT with those! Much appreciated!

One of the most overlooked ways to write interesting characters is through dialogue!

1. Start with the basics

Before you can write convincing dialogue, you need to thoroughly know your characters – their personality, backstories, motivations, and quirks.

Start with in-depth character development. Delve into their past, their relationships, the significant events that shaped them, and the dreams or fears that drive their actions. Your understanding of who your character fundamentally is will naturally guide their conversation style, topics they would discuss, and how they would react in dialogue, bringing authenticity to their interactions.

2. Know your character beats

Character beats form the backbone of a character’s development, marking transformative events, consequential actions, and insightful choices. Once you’ve developed your character’s personality, plot the key milestones that challenge and change them.

These milestones reveal how they react to their environment and to other characters, demonstrating their growth and change. Character beats are not merely plot developments; they encapsulate the internal evolution of your characters, paving the way for an authentic and compelling character voice.

3. Use verbal cues

Verbal cues serve as subtle indicators of a character’s underlying emotions and intentions, enhancing readers’ understanding of the character’s internal world. Voice modulation—from a soft whisper to a booming shout—can depict varying moods.

Unique speech patterns, like a nervous stutter or specialized jargon, differentiate characters and reveal aspects of their personality or background. Even the silence between words can be telling, with pauses and lapses in conversation often speaking volumes about a character’s emotional state.

Examples of verbal cues

Volume modulation: A character speaking softly when feeling vulnerable or shouting in anger.

Speed of speech: Fast-paced speech could indicate excitement or nervousness, while slow speech may show calmness or thoughtfulness.

Use of pauses: Strategic silence or pauses can suggest hesitation, contemplation, or underlying tension.

Stuttering: A character might stutter due to a speech disorder, nervousness, or anxiety.

Laughter: This can vary from sarcastic chuckles to uncontrollable laughter, indicating a range of emotions.

Specialized jargon: The use of profession-specific terms can give clues about a character’s background, knowledge, or occupation, just as colloquialism and local jargon can give examples of a character’s location, social status, background, and upbringing.

Choice of words: A character’s diction can reveal their education level, their cultural background, and their personality. Intentional choice can also indicate aspiration, an attempt to change, or an intentional misdirection.

Repetition: Repeating certain words or phrases could indicate a character’s preoccupation or fixation, or simply be a character quirk, like a catchphrase.

Tone: A sarcastic, cheery, or monotone voice can cue readers about a character’s current emotions.

4. Dialogue descriptions

The way you describe dialogue can significantly impact the reader’s perception of a character. Using descriptive adjectives in dialogue, like “he grumbled” versus “he exclaimed,” can drastically change the tone. Also, pay attention to sensory details – the sound, tone, pitch, and pace of a character’s voice can enhance reader understanding. Physical reactions and body language, like facial expressions, gestures, and posture, during the conversation further enrich the description, making the dialogue more engaging and revealing. Good dialogue varies description with dialogue tags, so mix and match the simple with the descriptive, and you’ll find a good rhythm.

See also: A Beginner’s Guide to Dialogue Tags and Vary Your Language With Synonyms To Use Instead Of “Said”

[lunar-years]

okay. at risk of being too harsh on Ted...

I genuinely do not think he's a very good coach. And I do not mean that just in the obvious "well he doesn't even know anything about the sport he's head coach for" way, even though like, yeah, duh that really is a crucial point. I mean it in like, he's genuinely not as good at managing and delegating and working alongside his fellow coaches! The way he acts and the ways he manages the team so rarely feels...collaborative? I've been thinking about it a lot after reading posts from other blogs about how he constantly brushes off/ignores Beard's advice and also sends Jamie mixed messages and stuff and it's like. YEAH. It's all very "Ted makes the final decision" about everything and that's deeply goofy because Ted literally knows the least about the game out of all of them!!

We see him ignoring Beard's advice to bench Roy, and ignoring that Beard is actually trying to help the team win, as it is their job to do, until Beard finally snaps at him in s1. When he decides to reject Jamie he doesn't pause to consider it or discuss it with anyone, and even afterwards when he does have the coaches "take a vote" it feels...very performative? Like no matter what they said, it was always going to be Ted's decision in the end, and if they disagreed with what he'd already decided he wanted to do, he was just going to do it anyway.

Then he gets in Jamie's head about being a team player and passing the ball a to the point where it's actually hindering Jamie's role on the team and the strength of his performance. And even though Roy recognizes that, rather than going to Ted about it and making different suggestions, he comes up with the whole signal thing which in hindsight sort of feels...very much like Roy trying to package his complaint in a way that will be digestible to Ted's approval? Like, "oh we'll give him the signal so he doesn't feel bad about playing the way we need him to play. but ONLY when we give him the sign don't worry we'll still control it!" Instead of just being like Ted, look, I don't think your strategy for Jamie works at all and here's what we need to do instead.

It almost feels like none of the assistant coaches really feel comfortable questioning Ted's judgement...because he doesn't foster a space for them that welcomes that kind of feedback from them. Even with the Zava thing, he doesn't listen to Jamie, and Roy and Beard don't question it, BUT Roy offers to individually coach Jamie. Because Roy knows what's happening with Zava is bullshit, and he'd rather pull Jamie aside and deal with the problem himself in the way that he can, rather than talk to the head coach about how it's bullshit. And the ONE time Beard and Roy go off and try something against Ted's wishes (showing the Nate video), it massively backfires and they scramble over themselves to apologize while Ted feels even more vindicated in never valuing their input. It's like a never ending cycle of bad management. and the WORST part is that Ted will TELL them he wants to know their thoughts and hear their strategies, but then he doesn't follow it or he just goes off and does his own thing, so it results in like...a level of unintentional condescension, I think.

At the end of the day, I do not think Ted has bad intentions or is going into this stuff intending to walk over the other coaches, but it happens because his purpose and goal for the team is fundamentally misaligned with what the other coaches value. Ted wants to make the team better by changing the culture at Richmond (at least until he checks out and loses interest in even that) and Beard & Roy (& Nate) want to focus on helping them win matches. I also DO think there's something in all of this that could have been a very compelling major factor in Nate's downward s2 spiral. I've always said that to me the most lackluster part of Nate's arc was not his redemption but his downfall--which had a basis that was severely under-explored onscreen. When he leaked Ted's panic attacks, it felt so severe and sudden a leap because there wasn't enough to back up Nate's headspace throughout the season, even thought the basis is THERE. The foundation for Nate feeling ignored as a coach and having his input constantly undervalued is THERE. They just don't ever let the characters properly explore it, or god forbid allow Ted to reckon with how he's ostracized all of his coaches to some extent.

[batsplat]

speaking of smallville now that was certainly a show. how many seasons did you manage and when is it best to stop? I am currently at s2 and already I would kill every other character for lex, wyd it’s only gonna get worse 😭

lmaooo okay so I got to. six. which actually kinda kills me because I swear I poured my heart and my soul into that stupid show, it drove me insane it left me a lesser person and I BARELY GOT HALFWAY

my basic analysis of the default journey with that show that I'm going to pretend is universal is like. it hooks you with something compelling in s1 and you still have enough naive faith to give it benefit of doubt that the writers actually know what they're doing, because you just wanted to have a bit of fun but, hey, these characters are actually more interesting than you expected!! then in s2 you're starting to get doubts but you're already kinda too deep. then s3 breaks your sanity and makes you scream and at this point you just see how far this shit goes. then s4 is.... mid..... but is also in a way the last remotely palpable season? and then at some point in s5 you're just like. wow I don't even enjoy the hate watching any more. and s6 is. yeah. eventually there was one storyline that is so insanely uncomfortable that it's just. enough. enough!

[mild spoilers to follow]

if s2 drives you insane on lex grounds then!! boy!! s3!! the thing about s3 from lex's pov is that. okay it's extremely angsty and does increasingly radicalise you... I have to say I started this show in a very innocent jokey 'oh ho ho I heard they have some good superman/lex luthor queerbait in that noughties show!!' and was ready to be a lex fan like. as a bit. and y'know my readiness to adopt morally dubious characters is pretty high anyway. but the first few seasons made me go?? okay but he genuinely isn't even the villain?? like I'm not even saying this for the bit, he LITERALLY is not the bad guy in this story?? guys??? and then by the end of season 3 I had been completely radicalised to the 'Actually Lex Luthor Should Turn Evil And Kill All Of You People And I Will Cheer Him On' stance. but what really, really, really kills me is that after all that, they still manage to bungle his transition to evil. like, they ignore all the very obvious reasons for why lex would turn evil after all that, and just come up with completely new ones? that have fuck all to do with this character you've been writing up to that point?

and the worst bit. the WORST bit. is that after all that, he literally does not even have fun being evil. like, you know that season one episode where he's being mind controlled and does his gay little swagger. this scene, yeah:

first of all, again, they ended up erasing lex's canonical motivation for turning evil, which is being so queer-coded he might as well be wearing a sign with slurs around his neck while he's stuck in a small town in fucking kansas. like "you think I don't see the way your parents look at me? the way half the town looks at me?" okay, great, love how this entire arc is eventually concluded by having the show say the entire town including clark's small-minded parents were 100% right to be suspicious of him, that there was something fundamentally defect with him basically from birth and he was always going to turn out to be evil. I feel like you definitely thought through the implications of what you wrote here!

but never mind all that, my actual point is that lex is having fun here!! this is one of several episodes where they're 'foreshadowing' lex turning evil by 'having a paranormal reason to make lex evil for a few minutes' (some subtle writing, this), and he's generally having a lot of fun with it!! he's leaning into the camp of it all!! he's freed from all his nasty and completely unnecessary inhibitions like 'not killing everyone in smallville' which. good. and he's just having a great time. and then he becomes a villain and he's literally just miserable all the time!! it sucks!! like omg if you're going to butcher his writing and ruin the character then at LEAST let him have some fucking fun?? at least let him experience joy at his own depravity or whatever? like he doesn't even get to do any fun villain monologues at clark, he's literally just sad clark isn't his friend any more while clark is giving him the homophobic dog slur. and then also about twice a season something paranormal happens to clark and he physically assaults lex to the point where he like, almost kills him, and then after that everyone pretends it didn't happen and clark never apologises and continues to burst into his room demanding answers. like omg?? lex, they hate you anyway, can you please just attempt to shoot clark?? also, obviously the turn to villainy should have been in large part motivated by lex finding out clark's secret and going?? the fuck is wrong with you for not just SAYING this?? (plus finding out everything clark did to lex in season three to keep his secret like it's genuinely so fucked up #lmao) but. I hate to break bad news to you about where we're at with the whole 'does lex know clark's secret yet' situation at the point where I gave up. genuinely what is the point of all this building and perfectly interesting character work if you're NEVER gonna deliver

but quite possibly an even worse sin of the later seasons that genuinely broke my brain was the treatment of lex's father. like, not to give the game away too much here, but the show's philosophical stance on rotten apples ends up being.... well. it's interesting which characters this show feels is worthy of redemption!! also interesting when they retcon several seasons of writing for the show that already very much set up why a character would actually perfectly legitimately go insane and instead settle for 'well his father sure did know there was always something wrong with him'!! watching some season 3 and season 5 episodes back to back would leave your face scarred from the amount of whiplash in the writing. the whole thing's kinda incompetent and dumb but is also like?? actively a little bit evil when you really think about the implications of what they're writing here

anyway. it's a brave stance on superman to go 'okay but what is being a superhero really about if not a whole whole lot of gaslighting'. and I do love the clark stalking room!! but the problem is, they could've played the clark/lex dynamic in a kinda tragic 'wow clark really has been so blinded by his parents that he's gonna end up destroying his relationship to lex because he just can't be honest with him and lex really needed one person in his corner who actually trusted him but clark wasn't the right person to provide that' way. they could've played it in a sort of fun 'yeah this is kinda fucked up and weird and toxic how they simply cannot stop doing dubious shit to each other' way where you just kinda roll with how terrible the whole thing is. but they don't go for either of those!! they're so stuck with treating clark's parents as the moral centre of the universe, with their "marriage is SACRED, clark" schtick and all that (yeah, there's an episode where clark gets lectured about the importance of the bond of marriage, this is a thing that happens) that they're blatantly unaware of what story they're telling but ALSO just refuse to lean into the batshit insane elements and just have!! fun!! and it's one of those things where you really do feel like an idiot for even thinking about this stupid fucking show so!! much!! but I swear, I swear they had a dynamic that hit like crazy in season one... also some of the fic out there for them is CRAZY like it kinda does make it all worth it but still!! still!! this shit infuriates me!!

anyway, here are some bonkers plot bits I remember happening in this show for you to enjoy if you continue in this endeavour:

the lex luthor slut shaming episode

clark kent slut shaming lex luthor, which is conceptually funny anyway but becomes funnier if you just read it as clark being unable to figure out he is actually just subliminally attracted to his friend. like, okay, clark being disappointed at lex for sleeping with thirteen different women, I see you

like. multiple lesbian lana moments. she's constantly getting herself in lesbian situations. and I get this is some kinda weird fanservice-y shit from the showrunners but, sue me, I thought lesbian vampire lana was cute

which is a thing that happens

they get spike from btvs to tell clark vampires aren't real, which is the one funny thing they wrote in about a season

the native american stuff is always deeply uncomfortable but it becomes even weirder when they invent some native american prophecy *deep sigh* to explain how lex was always evil

clark steals a car from lex several episodes after committing like, one of the most obscene acts of betrayal it is possible to commit against a friend (lex is unaware of this and possibly never finds out? I think the writers maybe forgot about this.) and lex is just like. it's fine <3 I know friends sometimes have to do crazy shit for other friends!! you're my friend, right?? and clark goes... yeah. sure

I vaguely remember lex buying stuff the american football high school team at some point and showing up to the lockers to give a speech and it's just?? this is right after the friendship break up and it's basically lex talking right at clark and he's talking about the importance of fresh starts and it is so fucking funny

the one episode where lana is in paris. they had built up to this for ages as like a whole thing where lana finally frees herself from that miserable town and all the people in it (don't ask how the 'lana knowing clark's secret' situation develops. it doesn't) and then she's there for. one episode

martha kent tells clark how they can't harbour illegal immigrants at one stage?? she eventually changes her mind I think but what even was that all about

the papa kent goes into politics arc. shoot me

lex becomes like. possessed by zod. which somehow manages to make everyone involved more dull

silver kryptonite makes clark paranoid, which ends up being pretty funny because he genuinely talks the exact same way

lex thinks clark can throw him across the room because he's been hypnotised

lex starts capturing various clark super powered friends and delivers these gay villain monologues to them (like genuinely, in one of them he's got shirtless aquaman strapped to a gurney and he's like, leaning over him, teasing him with a glass of water) and they're some of the best bits of the show

clark discovers the clark stalking room, which I will say was very funny

chloe basically saying lex always sends clark these massive gifts as a way of keeping his affections which?? clearly true but I thought we were keeping that the subtext

clark gatecrashes lex's wedding high on red kryptonite

one of lex's old bullies gets killed by like, a statue falling from the top of the building they're standing next to and stabbing the guy and then some of the blood splashes on lex and he's just like ?? bleh. fantastic scene

and THEN there's several scenes with his father where lex is like 'well that sure was a nice shirt :(' and lex's father is berating him for his lack of humanity. or something

there's an episode where lex is split into good lex and evil lex and it's genuinely the only worthwhile thing the show did that season. like the writing is still kinda incoherent but, crucially. it sure is fun

the spirit of lex's mum tells him she thinks he sucks

worst show in existence. I'll never forget it

[vigilskeep]

Out of curiosity, what direction would you have taken Cullen's character in Inquisition? Or would you have included him at all? :3

oh man well

first of all i’m not sure i’m the best person to answer the question because i am profoundly uninterested in cullen. even in dao, his most cohesive appearance by a mile, where he features in my favourite origin, he um... he sure is there! he serves his narrative purpose! i don’t know what else to say

more in the spirit of actually answering your question, i think dragon age inquisition is as fundamentally incapable of making good use of cullen as a game that would make cullen part of its main squad inherently must be. dragon age inquisition is not capable of breaking down what is wrong with the templars, which is why you get... i don’t know why people call it a redemption arc even in quotation marks. he just shows up. he still supports the templars, and would rather you go to them, who shouted you down in the street, than the mages, who by all appearances straight up invite you over. he has not had to face the consequences of his work in the templar order or his treatment of mages; for all intents and purposes, from his perspective, all he did wrong was not notice that his knight-commander was an anomaly who was crazy. he is fundamentally the exact same guy who told me to my face mages were not people, except he’s polite about it now, because this is dragon age inquisition and we all just need to shut up and come together to defeat the Real Problems. it is completely canonically possible for him to have taken part in two circle annulments, one of which he personally instigated. dragon age inquisition does not care!

so to take cullen in a decent direction for his character—if you insisted on bothering to include him in yet another game at all—you would have to be writing him in a different game than the one where the hero has no choice but to lead an organisation with cassandra and cullen at their side, where every challenge to that organisation’s divine purpose is laughed off. (meanwhile one seemingly humble elven apostate, who actually has entirely other concerns, is the only compulsory mage. no rebel aligned mages are even optional companions in the game.)

i am interested in what it would theoretically take to write a compelling ex templar character. my own inquisitor is an ex templar! dragon age is a series designed to challenge your ideas of what backgrounds allies can come from, and designed to throw in your face that, for better or worse, good or evil, everyone on every side is also a person who believes they have their own reasons to do what they do. but if you wanted the ex templar character to be cullen, you have to challenge the foundations of his beliefs as a templar. you have to make him... actually regret being a templar? criticise the templars for anything other than imperfect service to the chantry and impolite wording of their deadly prejudices? you might even want to consider centring his personal quest on, hey, the terrible things he’s done and believed, not on the harm to the poor little stoic self-sacrificing templars

sorry this is coming across a little aggressive. you see why i’m the wrong person for the job. i don’t like cullen and he was an antagonistic force in the previous two games who my characters felt personally threatened by. i don’t see why i have to swallow that he’s one of the good guys now without him facing a single consequence, much like cassandra, who was introduced interrogating my friend. (but hey, this religious army has good intentions!) and i certainly don’t see why you would not only do all that but make him the face of a ludicrously flat, wish fulfillment romance only available for women of the conventionally attractive races (available for circle mages! with a throwaway line about how she’s not like the other girls to address it!) to get straight married and settle down with a dog and a picket fence. (i’m not saying there is no place for wish fulfillment romances whose only stumbling block is cutesy awkwardness. but that’s not what dragon age is for! where’s the teeth! it’s representative of a wider tone change in dai that i deeply dislike and if i get onto it i’m going to make this post so long. and with this man?)

idk i think cullen should have been the rogue templar breaking rules to hunt wardens in awakening and sigrun should’ve got to cut his head off. the end. that’s my ideal. sorry again

[mla0]

i think with me, sometimes the reasons why some people hate a character are why i love them in the first place. i love character arcs and just characters with heavy flaws in general, including characters who genuinely do heinous things while still trying to do their best and having good* intentions. i just find that so compelling and realistic. i think vinny and shaun are both in that category for me, but it certainly doesn't only apply to them; i just think their personalities and plotlines were the most interesting for me.

i liked the plot twist with vinny. loved it, actually. made me like vinny as a character way more than i did when i thought he was just some.... well, everyman. it made me see everymanhybrid so much differently than before, it recontexualized huge moments that happened before that i initially didn't even care about, because we only just learned that those were actually huge character moments and we just didn't know it yet. it added a whole new, flawed layer to the series that i adore. vinny seemed to be such an average, good-guy character who sometimes did stupid shit. then you find out that much of it wasn't accidental at all, but instead a desperate attempt to save himself and whoever else he was capable of saving, at the cost of others, and his own dignity. the lengths he went were extreme and unjustifiable to many, but that's what i liked. it showed that vinny is a human, for better and for worse. what lengths would you go to in order to survive?

i like that shaun can be a huge dick sometimes- she can be intentionally blind to the bigger situation, in denial to protect herself from something terrifying even though it hurt her family, and you can see her struggle with that. doing something like that hurts and feels terrible, but is still something she chose because she was afraid. she sided with a close friend over her family because of the comfort of familiarity, of what "makes sense." it's coping with something that is fundamentally terrifying to come to terms with. it's fucked up in the viewers eyes, but to someone in that situation you can understand why it happened. you can hate it, but still see yourself in it. then you also see moments of kindness, including between the two siblings, and you get a more full picture of her as a whole. she's chalk full of conflicting messages and i adore that. she cut off michael in one of the last few videos, but then refused to give up his location even when facing death. she gets angry, she fucks up, but she's still unwilling to doom those she seemed to hate even when it could've saved her life, even when being lied to about all that happened. getting the mix of her flaws and virtues (along with the same for the other characters) was probably my favorite part of this series.

anyways, you see multiple facets of their characters, some loveable and some hateable, but even when they do horrible things, it only makes me find them more interesting. it's not quite like a villain in how they're "evil" or have bad intentions despite sometimes being complex themselves (HABIT, for example), because they're regular people, but you watch them fuck up over and over again while still understanding where they're coming from, and recognizing that many would fall into the same trap, because nobody is without their vices, their selfishness, and their blind-spots. so many people, including ones who think they'd be better in that situation, wouldn't be if put to the test. they'd fuck up, they'd do awful things either to save themselves or for their perception of the greater good, and i love that. i like to see how people can break down and degrade in such horrible situations, while their humanity and ultimate "goodness" still exists at the same time, creating a conflict between how they're still a good person at heart but willing to do bad things if they feel it's justified. it gives a glimpse into your average person's breaking point and general morality, which is rarely strictly good or justifiable, nor purely evil or irredeemable.

also, it opens the doors for me to write compelling redemption arcs, which i've also always loved. i love seeing bad people get better, and good people get worse. like i said before, what would you be willing to do to keep yourself alive?

[kagoutiss]

I kind of love how you have all these interesting hcs for Ganondorf like animals loving him, his weird dynamic with Sheik, the approval he seeks from his mothers etc. while at the same time being like “he’s a horrible gremlin and bloodthirsty and no one would want to stay near him”. I feel like it really captures how absurd and chaotic he is. Thank you for your service.

oh…im holding this ask very gently…..this means a lot to me because like!! yeah all these things are sort of true to me and i feel like he’s one of those characters where the more you dissect him, the more discordant things you find, and yet they all somehow intertwine in a way that makes him compelling and whole :-) retroactively putting a warning here that i ended up talking a lot and going pretty off-track but. like,,, one of the main roots of his absurdity to me is that he just has these fundamental problems with connecting with people (outside of clever manipulation, which he is good at), which are very effective at driving people away, even when he genuinely loves them, and i think he does this thing constantly where he wants people to despise him and he wants people to think the worst of him, because he is so much more comfortable with that than just? learning how to actually differentiate between love & hatred? and to not immediately feel threatened by gestures of love as some kind of deception, because he probably can’t quite make out the difference? despite having such a high level of emotional intelligence otherwise? and this primarily ties in with the idea that the biggest most terrifying enemy he has ever known in his entire life has been the neighboring kingdom, which professes to be the epitome of love & light & benevolence while at the same time committing the most egregious hateful bloody acts of cruelty in the darkest recesses of kakariko’s catacombs

and like. i think all of his formative experiences have still led to him being fully capable of things like feeling love, but also consequently not having the faintest idea of what the definition of that actually is, or how it works, or how to relate to someone you care about without just projecting all your own experiences onto them, or communicating your affection in ways other than just. being mean. and him purposely antagonizing people who do love him and are kind to him is a kneejerk reaction that he might not even realize is nonsensical, just a way of avoiding the most fundamentally disconcerting thing he knows, which is the ambiguity of something that claims to be kind or good. and so i think he‘d find a weird comfort in things that either don’t have that ambiguity, or subvert it entirely

like animals! who are far less capable of deception, or monsters, who like him, are deemed inherently evil. or spirits, who shouldn’t technically even be bound by the concepts of good & evil, even less applicable to wayward souls than to living beings. above all other humans though, he is definitely closest to his surrogate mothers, who supposedly are the true highest authorities of the gerudo tribe, and who treat him more like a deity than a son, and might moreso love the idea of what they want him to be, rather than the person he is. and he is in fact mortal, and a human being, and extremely flawed, and prone to recklessness under stress, and makes silly mistakes, and is emotionally unstable, with an attention span that doesn’t actually seem particularly well-suited to politics or government. and i accidentally wrote way too much in one sitting again, but.

but yeah, he’s like. my point is he is so full of things. he is completely absurd and chaotic and yet also i think there are recognizable patterns in what he does, if you think about him way too hard for way too long. he’s an infuriating swiss watch of a person that functions with seemingly inexplicable precision, but is made to say rude things to you instead of showing you the time, and yet you can’t really judge him too harshly after making the difficult effort of trying to understand him, because it becomes more & more evident that. that’s just. the way he is. that that’s the inevitable way that he came together, entirely due to circumstance. he’s a reflection of the completely nonsensical universe that he lives in, an antagonist since the day he was born, defined as such by the world’s Inherently Good Authorities, who are themselves objectively guilty of mass kidnapping, torture, murder, displacement and genocide, and yet are still, by the immutable definitions of these words as they’ve established them, Good. and i NEED to go to bed but yeah i love him for being a horrible insufferable bitch, actually, because it’s meaningful in and of itself, and i love him for not being normal, and having unmanageable fears of inadequacy, and mommy issues, and ADHD and autism, and for bullying teenagers, and being more fond of monsters & parasites than people, and literally using his emotions as a weapon, and referring to himself as king of every evil thing in existence, and almost never bothering to explain his actual motivations to people who he knows have already decided that he is the crux of all the world’s problems, because he’s fully internalized that trying to be understood by anyone at all is completely pointless. wife material

[edalynn]

I've recently seen someone defend the bad writing of Huntl0w with "it's just because the show got cut, it would've been better if it had time!", but I disagree.

Firstly, I'm generally annoyed with people defending every flaw of the show by "but it got cut!!". Yes, some issues are because of the cut. However, the writers weren't forced to write the show the exact way it turned out, they could still make decisions about it, and they should've carefully considered what to include and devote screen time to, since they knew they had less of it.

If Huntl0w was always the plan even before the cut, but they knew they didn't have time to develop it properly, they should've just cut it. Plain and simple. It contributed nothing to the characterization or the plot, cutting it would change nothing aside from surface level blushing (highlighting how pointless its inclusion was). Fans could still ship it, crew members could still ship it in personal art, but it didn't need to be in the show.

And the "but it's bi4pan rep!!" defense for keeping it in doesn't hold up, since there's zero confirmation of Willow's identity in the show, and Hunter's entire. confirmation is a small blink and you'll miss it flag that's on screen for like 3 seconds. If a more casual viewer didn't notice that one detail, they wouldn't know this isn't just a straight ship. For an m/f ship to be good rep the characters need to be SHOWN as queer, not just confirmed via tiny split second flags and the creator confirming it on a livestream. And making them a couple despite them barely talking also reinforces some heteronormative and amatonormative messages.

(And there's the "love heals all" trope problem with WHEN the writers chose to have them hint at becoming a couple/the feelings being mutual, and just generally a problem with the pairing being the conclusion to their arcs when that's not what either of their stories were about)

Secondly, I just don't think their personalities work well together. They don't have romantic chemistry, there's no spark, they don't mesh like Luz and Amity or Eda and Raine. The only way they could be "developed" to fit together is if you retcon their personalities and tailor them into a dynamic after they've already been established, which is not good writing.

Huntl0w is just a fundamentally weak pairing. I don't think it could've been fixed, I think it would've always had a "pair the spares" feeling to it. Neither have even shown interest in romance before, and we've been given no compelling reason why they would be interested in each other specifically. The "half a witch" thing isn't it, 1) them being called the same slur isn't romantic, and 2) their experiences aren't actually that similar, Hunter has much stronger parallels with Amity (they even had the same deepest wish - to figure out their own future). Interestingly, they also barely interacted, but what we did get actually offered a strong foundation for further development of their friendship had the show not been cut.

Okay, this is one of the best, concise explanations as to everything in the show that's wrong with hunt/low. It literally never in a million years could've even been hodge-podged together to make a compelling, intriguing romance.

It contributed nothing to the characterization or the plot, cutting it would change nothing aside from surface level blushing

(And there's the "love heals all" trope problem with WHEN the writers chose to have them hint at becoming a couple/the feelings being mutual, and just generally a problem with the pairing being the conclusion to their arcs when that's not what either of their stories were about)

I feel like these both go hand in hand. Not only would not adding it have not changed a single thing about the story, but even hinting at it actually damaged their entire arcs all together. Willow's whole arc was about being strong enough on her own, while Hunter's was about discovering and becoming himself and who he wanted to be. Making both of their arcs end in them being forced to rely on each other (almost seeming co-dependent-ish) when they've barely been shown to have interacted on screen really negates every single bit of character growth we've seen up to that point.

And the "but it's bi4pan rep!!" defense for keeping it in doesn't hold up, since there's zero confirmation of Willow's identity in the show, and Hunter's entire. confirmation is a small blink and you'll miss it flag

Also, Dana literally said that her saying it outside of the show airing & unless it is actively shown on the show, makes it headcanon only. She is the creator, yes, but she made the point to say that even what she says should be considered headcanon and that everyone should be encouraged to have and share their own. So technically, it's bi4??? rep at best.

Secondly, I just don't think their personalities work well together. They don't have romantic chemistry, there's no spark, they don't mesh like Luz and Amity or Eda and Raine. The only way they could be "developed" to fit together is if you retcon their personalities and tailor them into a dynamic after they've already been established,

100 million percent. They barely even work as friends honestly, especially from the very few times we see them interact on screen. Willow is brash, confident, and holds a grudge. None of those things would be good for Hunter, an abuse victim, in a relationship. Hell, the way she pulls him underground in asias is SO reminiscent of the way Belos does the same thing in HM, it makes me uncomfortable to rewatch. And she was totally ready for the school to turn him back over to Belos despite his begging until she was convinced he actually had been with Gus, and even then it was just so they could save Gus. And on the other hand, Hunter is impulsive and fiercely overprotective of the people he cares about, which goes directly against Willow's drive to prove she can take care of and protect herself. None of those traits scream romantic compatibility lmao. In all honesty, it's more likely to create a toxic relationship, especially coupled with Hunter's trauma and PTSD.

The "half a witch" thing isn't it, 1) them being called the same slur isn't romantic, and 2) their experiences aren't actually that similar, Hunter has much stronger parallels with Amity

Yeah... I've never understood the romanticism of being called the same slur lmao... And you're totally right about Amity and Hunter having far more in common than Willow and Hunter. Amity and Hunter parallel each other amazingly and the way their friendship was set up really would've made for a far more interesting arc, especially throwing Luz into the mix as Amity's girlfriend and Hunter's "rival" sister.

They definitely should've been dropped when the show was shortened, if they were ever intended to be canon in the first place. The way it was hinted at and their interactions and arc in the show is just lazy at best and damaging to their characters at worst.

[petricorah]

i wanna start making comics but like. i dont really know how??? are there any tips that you could give me perhaps?

hi!

i've been working on trying to compile a list of resources for people (@aangsfrogs--i didn't forget!) who want to make comics for a long time. It would consist of some of my personal tips and a lot of links to other people's PDFs and youtubes. But that's...a hefty project, so if you had any specific questions for the meantime, my askbox is open!

But, for just beginning, here would be my tips:

Read comics. Read manga and webcomics and cartoons and medical comics. There is so much out there, and reading is such a big way to learn. If you see something you like, take a moment to think about why you like it. Are the expressions or colors appealing? Did it make you feel a certain emotion? Analyze what the artist may have done to get across what they did. (Is it the camera angle? the style they chose to draw in? the paneling? the pacing? the color? etc.) Doing this over time will help you recognize the tools available for telling stories through this medium, and you'll be able to put them in your own work.

Try to think about what you want to make comics about. What moves you? What topics interest you? What ideas or tropes do you love in media or think about often? What do you hate and wish was done better? What characters are you drawn to, or what characters do you want to create? (What about them compels you?) I find it's hard to create an idea out of thin air, but if you start writing down random ideas you have, you'll start thinking about them, and over time, you'll have a bank of things to pull from when you want to create.

Lastly, anatomical skill or knowledge of color does not a comic make! You don't have to know much to begin, and there aren't rules. Just start drawing what is meaningful to you!

This is just cursory and doesn't get into super specifics like paneling or scripts or plotting or colors or thumbnailing or....etc, but I'll try to expand my list of resources and get that out! And, hmu if you have any specific questions on topics!

happy drawing~

Book list under readmore:

Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics and his Making Comics. These books are taught in like, every comic class ever. While not my complete favorite, they do a good job of showing some history and fundamentals, and how easy it is to make comics even if you don't have a lot of drawing experience.

99 Ways to Tell a Story: Exercises in Style by Matt Madden: Really good if you don't know how to start analyzing comics. (Also it's just a fun visual exercise.) It shows the same short story done in 99 different styles with different emphasis on different moods and points of view.

The PreHistory of The Far Side: A 10th Anniversary Exhibit by Gary Larson and The Calvin and Hobbes: Tenth Anniversary Book by Bill Watterson: Two great books with work from my two favorite cartoonists. They both have writings from the author about getting ideas, developing stories, and being a comic artist.

Uncanny Bodies: Superhero Comics and Disability, edited by Scott T. Smith and José Alaniz and Black Comics: Politics of Race and Representation, edited by Sheena C. Howard and Ronald L. Jackson II: These two aren't really about making comics, but they are great collections of analysis about old and new comics alike.

By no means a complete list, but some good ones that I can think of off the top of my head.

There's also the book Webtoon School: Everything you need to know about webtoon creation and story writing. To be honest, I didn't read this completely through because it was a bit more fundamental than I was expecting, but it gives a good cursory look of how to write comics if you're just starting out! It covers some history, how to write stories and arcs, etc.

Also, look to your favorite writers! A lot of webtoon/webcomic artists do tutorials or youtube videos. for instance, velnxi has this great tutorial up I really suggest looking at here.

[penny-the-pissed-poltergeist]

Hey! Figured I'd send in an ask since you had indicated you wanted some. With the company now defunct, it seems like a good time to reflect on RWBY and examine it more closely. As such, I wanted to ask what are your top three most favourite and least favourite parts of the show? It can be a character, a specific scene, a particular detail, anything you want. More importantly, why do you like/dislike those parts respectively?

things I liked

The Yang and Weiss reunion in VOL.5

"Your MOM kidnapped me! YOU KIDNAPPED HER" is still one of the (intentionally) funnest things in the show. The hug is just really cute and beautiful, I love how the home leitmotif is playing and it's main reason both me and many other people like freezerburn. (even if there is a platonic explanation if you're not a coward)

Ruby's character post VOL. 8

You can tell she's a good character because even when the writing is really bad she's still at least KINDA compelling, I genuinely enjoy her arc in VOL.9 despite how bad it makes her team look, before they stumble at the end at least (I don't blame that on it being rushed, ascension is just that fundamentally bad of a plot point)

even in shit like the JL movies she's still one of the characters I like having on my screen the most, I'm really glad she has officially left her era of barely doing anything important in her own show. she's one of my blorbos now because I relate to the whole not liking yourself thing

The vibes and world

the world of RWBY is such a unique setting, not quite fantasy, not quite sci fi, even a tiny bit superhero. No one else in fiction who looks and fights exactly like Ruby Rose or Weiss Schee or Pyrrha Nikos. The world felt so unique especially in the OG trailers

bonus round: Penny

OH MY GOD I LOVER HER SO MUCH AUTISTIC QUEEN HXHXAJHSA (that's it that's the whole entry)

Things I really didn't like

Jaune Arc

You know all that stuff I said about how unique the setting and character's are, yeah like ignore all of that. here's a generic white guy swordsman with a regular sword and shield who's is incompetent and has no powers in first 3 volumes and only exists to make unfunny jokes and get explained at by a character who's 5x more interesting than him, he's only here because they couldn't find a way to naturally drop exposition even though they literally in a school. He might as well have dropped in here from the real world after getting hit by a truck.

Then his (almost) GF dies and he's the only one allowed to morn her except Ruby like once, and then Jaune is given so much important screen time that he feels more like the main character then Ruby ever did and becomes a bully because angst. he finally becomes a character I can enjoy in VOL.7 and most of 8, before he kills Penny and my faith in his character along with it, he immediately gets like 5 other things to get traumatized by in the ever after and gets explained OFF SCREEN so you don't even get conflict from it. god that wasn't even everything, I'll stop now.

The white fang (or Fannus in general)

You can point out literally anything to do with this subplot and it would be offensive in some way. From animal people being race allegory by itself being sketchy at best to even Blake's mom's name being a slur in some contexts. People still try do defend it even though the WRITERS THEMSELVES admitting it was bad.

I think we should just stop trying to make truly divergent species direct race allegories, it's never worked

that one "Maybe you lost some brain cells along with that arm" scene

started with a good Yang scene, ending on a bad one. Oobleck is here (YIPPY) and Port too (god damn it) and they are joking about how funny that one time they put Qrow in a dress was because man in dress funny (ugh). So Yang gets some mediocre advice and gets insulted by the "maybe you lost some brain cells along with that arm" line and finds it funny. yes disabled people are allowed to make jokes about their own disability but there's a big difference between that and able bodied writers having an able bodied character make a joke at a disabled character's expense and saying the disabled person is fine with it. maybe I should be happy that they cut down on Yang's recovery arc if we were gonna get more of this, no matter how stupid that was.

Bonus: Coco

They really based one of their few gay characters on an IRL nazi and then made her predatory and sadistic in the not fun way...

[beemovieerotica]

while we're talking about ofmd and race, i think there's a really interesting discussion to be had about how colorblind and color-conscious casting happens for historical content -- and the basis for why any of this is happening is that actors of color want to be able to engage with history in a way where they're not continually being asked to play slaves/servants/the singular empowered POC who dies tragically

and while money isnt being put toward stories centered on historical people of color with anywhere near the same frequency as white stories (Woman King was a huge breakaway from this where we actually had african-centered history that made it to white audiences) we're still talking about diasporic actors and writers of color whose families are rooted in the west and who grew up on western history. and on one level there's the instant recognition for these western stories by audiences (and recognition = less financial risk for producers) but on another level, POC want to have the same ability to play around with the historical contexts and stories they grew up seeing. and while people have their gripes with things like bridgerton (no media is without problems) it was a rare instance that let actors of color get to play the high society lords & ladies, have more screen time, and fundamentally get paid more for having a good time, and they're not being asked to engage with generational trauma

and i see ofmd on the other end of the spectrum from this where there was a deliberate choice made not to explain the casting & historical realities of slavery in any narrative sense -- it just is the way it is. so you have your options of 1) create an alternate timeline to explain the presence of POC in these roles and the reality of slavery (bridgerton), 2) dont explicitly explain the casting, dont change the reality of slavery, but weave in the commentary on the actors' races in a meta-textual, self-aware way (hamilton), and dont explain at all, just let things be (ofmd)

and the first two are conducive to drama with elements of comedy, but they're two very different genres from each other and extremely different from the conception of ofmd as a 20-minute-per-episode comedy. so you have a 1700s colorblind comedy that does not engage with the history of slavery -- actors and writers are able to play with the setting without switching genres, and the show is hugely successful

so the key question is: does this all meaningfully change the way that people then engage with the history of that time?

im not really concerned with discussions of "should [media] have been made" because it's here. it already exists. someone wanted to make it and audiences liked it enough to keep it around. im also not really concerned with the personal morality of media consumption, because again, the media exists and people are watching it without you. im asking if there is something like a "bridgerton effect" that distinctly alters people's perceptions of history itself because of the way a historical piece is satirized, modernized, played with, and reworked for modern audiences. and even then we can have another discussion on top of that on whether, if the answer is yes, this is the responsibility of the writers and creators, or of existing educational gaps. i think that's compelling and kind of the only thing that matters in these discussioms imo.

[cheesybadgers]

Something I pay a lot more attention to since writing a 167K+ longfic is how stories are structured. And one thing I was really conscious of when writing an ‘angst with a happy ending’ fix-it fic was not giving both main characters everything they wanted/needed a) too soon and b) at the same time as each other because for me, that's just too neat and tidy and not particularly interesting to write or read. Where romantic plots are concerned, it also kind of perpetuates the misguided notion that being in love and being loved in return magically erases all other problems in life.

There were a few times I'm sure some readers of mine were thinking 'Why can't they just have their happy ending now?' and quite simply, it was because both characters were on their own separate journeys as well as the one they were on together. They had their own lessons and realisations to learn, with the support of each other of course, but ultimately, independently of each other before they could properly move on with their lives together.

I suspect (but could be wrong, I admit lol) this might be what's happening in a certain show about to start its new season, but there is a tendency for fandom to either not have the patience for longform storytelling like this or not understand how the structure of it works. They'll see something in front of them in the here and now and assume that's that plot point/character trait/relationship dynamic permanently decided because it's canon and we all know canon is the final word and is an immovable state. Anything else that subsequently counters what has been established already is deemed to be 'out of character' or 'unrealistic' or a 'continuity error' or 'bad writing', rather than y’know, fundamental character and story development.

I'm not even aiming this at one specific fandom, because a certain vampire show was also terrible for this during the airing of season 2. X or Y couldn't possibly be true because Z had already been established as canon and canon is obvs The Law. And I'm sorry, but that's not how it works lol.

One of the hardest but most satisfying parts of writing for me is not deciding what's going to happen; it’s deciding how it's going to happen. Your characters start their arc at point A but you need to get them to point B, C, D and beyond. Plotting a story is like a game of chess, a jigsaw and a juggling act all rolled into one. It's a problem-solving exercise and that's why I love it. But it's not easy and in all honesty, I don't think you fully appreciate this until you do it yourself.

Now I find myself noticing that even when I don’t personally like a particular writing choice and think it was executed weakly, I try to understand the purpose and intention of it in the overarching story. And this is where critique/analysis can be interesting, because the execution is often what makes or breaks a good story even when the premise itself is compelling.

But I think the craft of storytelling often gets overlooked in fandom, which is where the abundance of ???? commentary and arguments seem to come from, because a lot of people aren't looking at the bigger picture or the full character/plot trajectory. They're just clinging tightly onto specific canon details to the exclusion of everything else...or, alternatively, they’re not engaging with canon in the slightest to the extent where you wonder what the point is of calling themselves fans of the piece of media in the first place. I gain very little pleasure in either of these extreme/bad faith approaches, which basically rules out interacting with a large portion of fandom these days lol.

As a certain unreliable narrator once said:

[iridescentoracle]

The Klavier Problems Post

so. i talked about a bunch of things in that post i made earlier about how to fix apollo justice (the game though also the character) including all the little things i would do but the two big changes i think are needed to fundamentally fix this game are 1) making apollo’s inscrutable asshole mentor a separate character from phoenix wright 2) make klavier gavin an actual goddamn person.

and i talked about #1 at length last time, so here’s the post about #2.

so, klavier gavin. i keep trying to come up with metaphors that don’t feel too clunky to actually use in a sentence and not being satisfied but to me he is several pieces of cardboard lovingly painted and assembled to make roughly half the shape of a person, held together by three staples and a prayer. what’s there is great! it’s just. not an entire character.

conceptually he’s fantastic. an actually nice and helpful prosecutor? WILD. absolute galaxy brain development. who knew you could have one of those. an apparently nice and helpful prosecutor who has ties to the game’s main villain and so might be playing the long game, leaving the audience and potentially protagonist suspicious and unsettled the whole time, only to eventually prove himself genuinely a good person when things get desperate? excellent twisty fun, and provides obvious and delightful room for things to get interesting and complex.

and even in practice, there’s parts of that that are genuinely executed well! there’s at least a half-dozen points over the course of 4-2 and 4-3 where he clearly knows what’s really going on and gives apollo the opportunity to figure it out/prove it when he could’ve just gone for an easy win. he actually plays way more fair than literally any other prosecutor so far up to and including edgeworth in the matt engarde case! he’s way more forthcoming with info during investigation segments than anyone else would’ve been, both directly and by providing access to crime scenes apollo was otherwise blocked from, and i swear during the first trial especially he, like, hand-fed apollo the win. that’s FASCINATING and so so different from anything we’ve seen before, i love it.

the problem is… kind of the everything else? or like, that there isn’t anything else. he’s set up to be this massively complex character who actually has by far the most difficult/horrible time over the course of the game, and the writers just… forgot to actually put the complexity in.

he’s got all the pieces of an amazing character—this consummate performer who’s always putting on a show, perpetually performing who he wants to be and how he wants his audience to see him, hiding his true feelings from everyone around him, that’s great, that’s always a good time. someone genuinely good-hearted and honest who truly believes in justice and doing the right thing and playing fair so sincerely and completely that they can’t even see that the people they love are secretly evil? again, that’s great! i love that! that’s so compelling!!

but like. [padme amidala meme voice] okay so he’s a consummate performer who hides all his feelings. he does have actual feelings, though, right? okay so he’s genuinely sincerely good and honest and kind and would pick justice and truth over letting his loved ones get away with murder if forced to make that choice? again, he does have feelings about that, though, right? that’s not an easy choice to make?

and while i do love the introduction of a prosecutor who plays fair and is nice and friendly instead of [literally every other prosecutor in the entire series both before and after this game], it’s really fucking weird how chill he is about interacting with apollo and trucy. like. really fucking weird. why are they all so normal about each other? why is klavier so chill about helping his brother’s ex-employee who proved his brother was a murderer and the daughter of the man his brother framed for said murder? like. even if he’s all Professional™ to the point of managing to hide whatever he must be feeling just about his brother being a convicted murderer, how how HOW is he so normal whenever he’s interacting with apollo and trucy. it’s WEIRD it should be SO WEIRD where is the tension??

even more weirdly, why isn’t apollo weird about interacting with klavier gavin, in turn? even if we want to assume klavier is Just That Good at maintaining his persona, apollo is not a professional musician and doesn’t seem like a very good actor. he should feel extremely weird about this guy and he just… does not seem to. for that matter, trucy should feel weird too! that doesn’t need to be something the game actually digs into, it could be implied in passing that she’s also doing the performance thing and hiding all her actual emotions in favor of showing a carefully crafted persona to the world and that she only shows what she’s actually feeling to phoenix, in private, but NOPE not even vague implications in that direction really, she’s just. actually totally normal around klavier gavin and is a huge fan of the gavinners somehow??

but the weirdness (or rather, baffling lack thereof) doesn’t end with apollo and trucy.

again, not wanting to talk about/show how he feels about his brother for most of the game totally makes sense, he’s a consummate performer with a well-practiced facade etc etc, he isn’t even in 4-1 so by the time we meet him he’s already had time to practice being His Normal Professional Self. he’s got this. in my hypothetical rewrite he’s got this slightly less around apollo and trucy specifically because of their very specific personal connections but if we hear him talking to ema or to other people he’s definitely got this.

but in canon he literally finds out during a trial that one of his bandmates/good friends is also a murderer and a smuggler and was the one responsible for setting his guitar on fire which he was SUPER upset about earlier in the case, and his reaction to daryan’s confession is… playing air guitar and saying “you’re not in the band anymore btw.” there’s a couple minutes in the last case where he’s like “oh shit my brother committed a LOT more crimes than i thought actually” before he goes back to not caring. like, setting aside his expression bc limited number of sprites etc etc, based specifically on the actual dialogue he’s clearly distressed about the possibility of kristoph having been responsible for poisoning vera, apollo openly says “but you clearly think it is possible,” and then klavier is like “eh fuck it, i knew something awful was going on, yeah let’s make my brother testify” and… that’s it. air guitar time. kristoph spends half his time on the stand insulting/manipulating klavier/attempting to undermine klavier’s confidence in himself and it’s clearly working! until suddenly klavier’s like “haha yeah no it’s all good.” in the credits scene he compares the trial in which he found out his brother had attempted to kill at least three different people and he himself was partially complicit in kristoph being convicted, positively, to a rock concert.

like. there’s maintaining a professional facade and then there’s that.

he deserves to be so goddamn compelling. but like. in practice he’s not even a person. why doesn’t he CARE. why doesn’t he care kristoph is a murderer. why doesn’t he care apollo proved it. why doesn’t he care daryan is a murderer. why doesn’t he care kristoph is a murderer again, and also forged evidence and used klavier to ruin someone’s career and presumably would’ve used the forged evidence himself to win under false pretenses in klavier’s first case if he had the chance and and and. why doesn’t he care in the next game that his mentor got murdered. let him be a person with interiority i am begging.

but like. this is what i keep coming back to. i could fix it. i could fix him. not in the “oh i could fix him” generally-dating-related sense. more like the opposite of that actually. i could make him psychologically MUCH worse. but as a character he would actually be good.

it should’ve been such an amazing dramatic reveal/twist in the last case when the scope of kristoph gavin’s crimes begin to be revealed and klavier stays true. all game, he’s too nice and too helpful and apollo and trucy feel more than a little awkward interacting with him even though he’s always perfectly polite to them despite little hints of something darker underneath, moments when his perfect facade falters. he should keep apollo/the player off balance and unsure what to think of him, and we should suspect that he’s just as bad as kristoph but playing the long game even better.

and we get to the final case and realize kristoph gavin has been behind everything and at first klavier acts like he doesn’t believe it, and we brace ourselves for klavier to show his true colors and push the judge to end cross-examination and let kristoph get off scot-free even though we know he’s behind everything and we know klavier knows—

and then he doesn’t.

he hasn’t known all along, he wasn’t in on it, he’d adamantly repressed any suspicions he’d had all those years—so the gradual reveal that kristoph was behind everything is completely devastating, not least because he has to learn and process it all on the stand in front of everyone (not least both apollo and kristoph himself), and so the evidence builds, and finally, klavier has a whole entire breakdown of his own, that’s if anything longer and more dramatic than kristoph’s

and then he collects himself, and he apologizes, and he helps us win the case.

like

that would be

so goddamn compelling

and i genuinely don’t understand why that’s not what the game gave us. we were so close to getting that, why did he just brush it off? why didn’t he care?

so in the secret good version in my head, that’s what happens.

there should be differences in how he’s written outside the courtroom, too, though. like i said before, in canon, apollo-and-klavier and trucy-and-klavier should feel extremely fucking weird about interacting with each other and be varying levels of good at hiding it but none of them should be perfect, and i think it’s a major writing/characterization flaw that none of that is true. in this version, though, the situation is a little different: trucy could still potentially be a little weird around klavier gavin bc he’s kind of part of why her original dad abandoned her (and vice versa), but she doesn’t actually have to be.

because here’s the thing: in this au, klavier hasn’t done anything to phoenix at all except (if he didn’t take the whole seven years off for his band—which, given that he did still get someone disbarred thanks to his brother’s tip and probably still had weird feelings to repress about that, he might have!) potentially face him sometimes in court (where, as in canon, he’s an entirely fair and reasonable opponent who doesn’t resort to anything beyond lighthearted insults and is an extremely graceful loser, and in general is an absolutely delightful change of pace from the paynes or who-have-you), and while he is part of why trucy’s original dad left, that was as much (as far as she knows) the fault of shadi’s defense attorney for forging evidence instead of proving him innocent fair and square, and if her dad had actually cared he could’ve come back for her eventually, so while she probably isn’t sure about klavier right at first regardless, i think it would be plausible for her to not have any sort of a grudge by the time the game actually happens?

conversely, though, if phoenix stays a defense attorney he and edgeworth definitely get married within, like, a year, tops. so while trucy might not be weird about klavier, at least by the time the plot of the game kicks off, he’s kind of nervous around her, just like. not bc of the zak gramarye trial. because one of her dads is his boss.

but then that just makes any conversation trucy-and-apollo have with klavier that much more fun bc as far as trucy’s concerned, here’s that cool prosecutor who’s one of the nicest people she knows from her dads’ jobs! while klavier is slightly terrified but in a normal polite kind of way, and meanwhile trucy and apollo have their canon pseudo-siblings-because-they-don’t-know-they’re-biological-siblings dynamic, and finally klavier and apollo interacting is every bit as fucked up and tense as they should be about each other in canon bc oh my god you’re why my brother was exposed as a murderer and got sent to jail / oh god you’re my evil ex-boss’s younger brother, and how the hell do you talk to someone like that? because that’s what their dynamic should have been in canon and frankly we were robbed

nyquildriver: klavier being polite and helpful but obviously taken off guard frequently by these two would be so entertaining nyquildriver: it gives us the tension that we want while not being like, bizarre about it and resorting to like. flirtation? that feels weirdly like pandering nyquildriver: although klavier disguising his uneasiness with flirtation? that would be an interesting choice iridescentoracle: YES i actually love the idea of klavier flirting reflexively as like. a defense mechanism. when he’s stressed and doesn’t know how to respond he leans harder into the rockstar persona which includes flirting with everyone whether he remotely means it or not. it fits into what we do see of klavier in canon so well but like. turns him into more of a real person?

nyquildriver: honestly the pieces are there! they just didn't arrange them into a complete picture of a person, argh nyquildriver: after their first meeting apollo: what the fuck was that trucy: was he… into you? apollo: I don't think he was, which is why that was weird as hell??? nyquildriver: trucy's favorite running joke now is klavier flirting with apollo like he's a fan nyquildriver: she buys gavinners merch to plant on apollo/his things on the off chance that klavier sees it because the reaction should be hysterical nyquildriver: and that is worth giving up her allowance for however many years

iridescentoracle: god. and the like, deeply comedic irony that of literally everyone in the world who he could have this awkward and specific a relationship with, it just happens to be the one guy who can tell he absolutely does not actually mean the flirting and is perpetually accompanied by his sister who can also tell iridescentoracle: like, if apollo was ANYONE ELSE he might be able to actually pull off using Flirty Rockstar Klavier Gavin as a façade to get through interactions convincingly normally. but unfortunately, nyquildriver: and it would be a great way to keep the player off guard and suspicious of him too!

[catgirlforeskin]

What do you think makes for actual interesting role-playing mechanics for a TTRPG?

The most fundamental thing I’d say is like. Having roleplay be mechanically integrated with the rest of the game.

I love Pathfinder 2, and it improves drastically over DnD in integrating roleplay, largely by allowing you to have mechanically fun characters in and out of combat, while DnD often makes you pick one. You make a lot more decisions during character creation and as you level, and have different types of feats that make it so you’re never choosing between one mode of play to have fun in.

However, it’s still mostly a combat game and doesn’t reallyyy have strong mechanics for roleplay, it’s more just kinda “you can do it if you want.” Like you can express your characters better mechanically with the good available toolset, but I feel that’s different than actual narrative mechanics.

The issue is that most of these big rpgs have a clear division between gameplay and roleplay, gameplay is what the rules are for and when you roll dice, and roleplay is a you doing freeform improv. That’s not inherentlyy bad, but…actually nah it kinda just sucks lol. If a game is designed with roleplay as a core part, it shouldn’t mechanically be an afterthought.

The obvious answer here is Powered by the Apocalypse games do a great job of it, and plenty of people have written very well how great they are.

I’ll instead highlight Lancer here, which is still broadly segregated between gameplay and roleplay, but it does it in a good way. You’re mech pilots where sessions follow a tight mission structure of brief, downtime, action, and then debrief.

In your downtime phase, you have more freeform play where you’re preparing for a mission, and can be anything from performing recon, to recruiting locals to help in a mission, to convincing another pilot to lend you their cool gun for the battle. There are rules but it’s kept loose.

What I like about this is rather than doing the standard “roll Deception to lie to them,” you do one roll for the whole downtime activity, and you use Triggers instead of stat numbers, and these are things like your background or something you’re particularly good at, like “show off” or “get a hold of something.” Triggers can be invoked to get you bonuses or penalties depending on a situation.

The important part is, there’s variable fail-states, and most commonly, you’ll be able to get what you want, but at a cost, like “you can hack into this database, but you’ll need to frame an innocent employee by using their work ID.” Being forced to make hard choices rocks, and having the agency to MAKE those choices is what drives good roleplay.

TL;DR is that having a way to fail forward and make failure interesting drives compelling roleplay and is a great way to integrate narrative agency for players into rpgs. Games shouldn’t be split into gameplay and roleplay, they should be integrated and have no hard line between them. It’s almost always more interesting to, instead of saying “you can’t do this,” say “you can, BUT at this cost”