#but if that was actually a game then i think that's mitigating

[svtskneecaps]

i should be sleeping but i do want to reiterate how much i love that our collective fan community and also the streamers are constantly like, so new members when? new language when? a teaser drops and we're all like germans???? german time????? asiatic language time??????? new faces??? new friends?? new communities????

i've said this before but it just constantly makes me feel all warm n fuzzy to see it. i'm really happy we're all so excited and united in this.

[ghostzzy]

i'm so glad i don't feel the urge to have to political post on the blog anymore.

[prokopetz]

Something that pops up in my notes from time to time is folks thinking I'm being excessively kind in my criticisms of Dungeons & Dragons, and I'm going to spin this off into a separate thread to address that without putting anyone on the spot.

First, if your own critique of Dungeons & Dragons is rooted in the idea that it's the Worst Game Ever, that speaks more to the limits of your experience than it does to anything else. Dungeons & Dragons in any of its iterations is far from the worst the tabletop roleplaying hobby has to offer – like, you have no fucking idea!

Second, I tend to be even-handed in my discussion of D&D's rules because, fundamentally, the rules are not the problem – or, at least, not the principal cause of the problem.

In many ways, the indie RPG sphere has never escaped the spectre of Ron Edwards, sternly pronouncing that the mechanical process of playing traditional RPGs causes actual, physical brain damage, and that this brain damage is responsible for the bad behaviour we often observe at the table. We don't say it that way anymore, but on some level a lot of us indie RPG designers still kind of believe it.

This is understandable. As game designers, we're naturally inclined to think of problems at the table as game design problems. When we see a problematic culture of play, our impulse is to frame it as something which emerges from the text of the game, and which can therefore be mitigated by repairing the text of the game.

Confronted with the obvious toxicity of certain facets of D&D's culture of play, we go combing through its text, looking for something – some formalism, some structure, some piece of rules technology – which we can point to and say: "this is it; this is where the brain-worms live."

The trouble is, this is not in fact where the brain-worms live. Certainly, the text of a game, particularly a very popular one, can have some influence on the game's surrounding culture of play, but that text is in turn a reflection of the culture of play in which it was written. The Player's Handbook isn't an SCP object, spewing infectious infohazards everywhere when you crack open the cover – hell, I'd go so far as to say that many of the problems of D&D's culture of play operate in spite of the game's text, not because of it!

Basically, what I'm saying is that I don't see any contradiction between being the sort of pretentious knob who writes one-page indie RPGs about gay catgirls talking about their feelings (which I am), and speaking favourably about this or that piece of rules tech from whatever flavour of Dungeons & Dragons is in favour this week (which I do), because I recognise that you can't game-design your way out of a problem you didn't game-design your way into.

The fact that one of the biggest problems facing the tabletop roleplaying hobby is something that can't be repaired by fucking around with dice-rolling procedures is a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of indie game designers, and I won't say I wasn't resistant to it myself, but it's something that's both useful and necessary to accept.

(None of this means that the text of Dungeons & Dragons in any of its incarnations is beyond criticism on other grounds, of course, and I've never been shy about highlighting those criticisms where they're warranted. The only way you're gonna arrive at the conclusion that I'm some sort of D&D apologist is if you're starting from the presumption that The Real Problem Is The Rules.)

[kaasiand]

I've been thinking a lot about Splatoon sponges today and how their large rectanguloidal shape actually kind of sucks because of how much it hinders the fluid movement that's supposed to make these games feel so good.

Also, this last bit is specifically to fix this really bad pet peeve I have with sponges. When they're just barely not fully inked, they're ever so slightly misaligned with the main map geometry, which ruins the flow of movement. Making certain sponges able to always remain at their full size on one or multiple axes (set thoughtfully for each individual sponge placed on the map by the designers) serves to solve or mitigate this

[cryptotheism]

Listen I'm hammered right now but I did competition martial arts for several years. If Zuck and Musk actually fought, it would be fucking fascinating.

Zuck has been training for several years, but Musk is literally two weight classes heavier. That's enough of a difference that most orgs would consider it legally dangerous for them to fight. However, Musk is also older, which could mitigate his weight advantage.

In a vacuum, I'd give that matchup a tenuous 50/50, but I think Zuck wins the psychological game. There's nothing behind his eyes. He reminds me of the 5'4'' coked up ringers that every Jiu-Jitsu dojo would bring to MMA tourneys. You can't take your eyes off those guys or they win points by slipping along your kicks. Musk might be stronger but Zuck has the strategy.

Final call. Hammered 4/1 for Zuck.

[sirfrogsworth]

Hard & Soft: An Explanation of Light

I was watching a video from one of my favorite tech YouTubers, Mr. Whose the Boss. He was showing off some of his favorite tech and pulled out this tiny LED light.

And then he placed a diffuser on the front and said this...

"You can equip a softbox on the front which *massively* softens the light on your face."

Sorry, Arun.

No it doesn't.

I sometimes wish I could get a job as a YouTube lighting advisor. So many creators have to set up and use professional lighting but very few actually have an understanding of how their lighting works. And with just a little knowledge they could up their lighting game big time.

If nothing else, I could stop the plague of ring lights.

Ring lights are my nemesis.

*shakes fist at ring lights*

Arun repeated a classic myth. Diffusing a light does *not* make it softer. And despite the name, a softbox is fully capable of producing hard light. Especially if it is only the size of your granddad's wallet.

I'm afraid softboxes are a bit misnamed—much like how the tremolo system on a guitar is technically a vibrato mechanism. Tremolo is a fluctuation of volume, not pitch. Personally, I just stick to calling it a whammy bar because that is more fun anyway. And, like, what does "whammy" even mean in the context of a guitar? I'd rather call something by a nonsensical name than an inaccurate one, ya know?

What the hell was I saying?

SOFTBOXES!

They should probably be called "light homogenizers." Which is a mouthful, but more accurate.

Or, hear me out... WHAMMY BOXES.

Froggie Note: I am trying a color coding technique to help make the most important information stand out. Red means PAY ATTENTION and blue means "do your best to remember this." Let me know if this is helpful or annoying or if a different color combo is preferred.

Hard Light vs. Soft Light

Hard light is a less flattering light source that creates high contrast, sharp shadows, and accentuates texture.

Soft light is a more flattering light source that creates soft shadows and reduces texture like pores, blemishes, and wrinkles.

You can *only* get hard or soft light by changing the apparent size of a light source from the subject's point of view.

If you remember only three things about light, they should be...

Bright light = sharp photos, less noise Hard light = small light source Soft light = large light source

Now, it's important to remember that hard light is not *bad* and soft light is not *good*. In photography, the oft-used parlance "flattering" just refers to the rendering of facial features and blemishes. So you might use a more flattering lens to make sure faces do not distort or a more flattering light modifier to reduce wrinkles.

But there are situations where soft light can be very boring and hard light can be much more dynamic and interesting. But if you have someone who is insecure about their skin or has a lot of blemishes, you can mitigate that by making the light softer. But if you have someone with great skin and a lot of angular facial features, you might use a hard light to show that off.

Which of these do you prefer?

The one on the left was taken with a 7 foot diameter light source and is *very* soft. But the other had a 1 foot diameter and I think it is more dynamic and interesting.

You can also mix hard and soft light. And with something like a parabolic reflector or a beauty dish, you can even modify a light source to be hard and soft at the same time.

This technological terror of a light modifier is sort of like having 24 individual small lights around the edges but the entire surface of the reflector also acts as a single large light source.

And when it isn't atomizing Alderaan, it is taking photos like this...

This creates a falloff of light around the edges of her face, nose, and arms while also reducing the intensity of the shadows. Lenses with longer focal lengths prevent distortion of facial features but also flatten our faces. So a modifier like this can bring back dimensionality.

Neat!

Now I just need $8,000 to buy the Death Star light.

There are a ton of possibilities when it comes to modifying light sources, but most people typically want the main light on the subject to be in the realm of soft and use hard light sources as edge lights.

Also, everything is a spectrum and light is no different. There is a giant space in between hard and soft to play with. In fact, the hardest light possible would be cast on a subject floating in space.

And the softest light possible would be on a planet that has 100% cloud coverage that still allows sunlight to scatter through.

So, I have determined the surface of Venus to be the most flattering light in the universe.

Look at how dark and sharp that astronaut shadow is! And I'm sure Venusian photography would be quite popular if you wouldn't burst into flames.

On planet Earth, noon on a clear day would be the hardest light and a very overcast day would be the softest light.

How can the sun be both hard and soft light?

Well, the sun is quite large, but it is very small in the sky and very far away. It is the only thing humans can observe that is close to a "point" light source—the smallest light source possible that shines light equally in all directions.

But on an overcast day, sunlight scatters through all of the clouds and becomes a HUGE homogenous light source. The clouds become a singular giant light above us. And as you can see, the light is so soft the woman does not have a hint of shadow on her face. And shadows can draw attention to pores, wrinkles, blemishes, and other textures.

But wouldn't the smallest light source be a laser or something?

When photographers refer to a small light source we mean from the perspective of the subject being lit. This is referred to as apparent or angular size.

But you also have to account for the size of the area the light source can illuminate.

This is the area a laser can light up.

And this is the area the sun is able to cats cast light upon.

It doesn't matter if a laser is close or far away, it focuses light onto a very small area. But the sun lights up half the planet. So look at imagine the apparent size of the sun in the sky and compare its size to half of the Earth. In that relative circumstance, the sun is a super tiny light source.

And the sun becomes an even tinier light source on the moon because there is no atmosphere or clouds to scatter and enlarge it.

You can change the apparent size of a light source in two ways...

The physical dimensions of the light and the distance from the subject.

A light with small dimensions can be a large light source if it is close enough and if the subject is small enough. So a flashlight could be a large light source for an ant if that flashlight is directly next to said ant. But a flashlight could never be a large light source to a human.

However, we can enlarge small light sources with modifiers.

A modifier can be a softbox. It can be a piece of paper. A large poster board. A wall or a ceiling. Anything that changes the nature of a light source can be a modifier. But not all modifiers increase the size of a light source.

So, you can take that flashlight, shine it on a wall, and reflect the light to make a giant light source capable of producing softer light.

But what you cannot do is put diffusion material directly in front of a flashlight and make the light it produces softer.

When Arun put that diffuser on the front of that tiny light, he was not making the light any bigger. He was only making the light more diffused.

What does diffusion *actually* do?

Diffusion scatters light. It makes light bounce in all directions and keeps it from being focused. And while this is an important aspect to making a light source larger, it does not change the apparent size of a light source on its own.

Diffused light is homogenous.

A homogenous light source has the same intensity across its entire surface area. And that homogenization is the key to creating a better soft light source. It can *assist* in making a light source larger, but only if you know how to wield that diffusion properly.

When you shine a flashlight toward a wall, you increase the apparent size of the light source.

Fantastic! You now have a softer light. Mission accomplished.

But if you do not diffuse it, you will create a hotspot.

That bright hotspot will reflect more light than all of the other light reflecting off the wall. That reflected light has different intensities across its surface area and you end up creating TWO distinct light sources—one hard and one soft.

This can sometimes be desired if you want to create graduated light that falls off like I showed earlier. But if it is not controlled well with a specialized modifier a hotspot can cause more problems than benefits.

This can reveal unwanted texture, double shadows, cause harsh glare, and it may not achieve the desired amount of soft, flattering light you were hoping for.

However, if you diffuse the light from the flashlight before it hits the wall, the light will scatter and reflect off the wall more evenly. You will create a more *homogenous* light source that acts as a single entity of light.

Diffusion does reduce the overall intensity of the light, but that is usually a worthy trade off for the increased homogeny.

These pesky hotspots are actually a big problem with those cheap softboxes you can buy off Amazon.

Many of them do not have enough diffusion to create a single homogenous light source. So they end up with a hotspot that gives you that double light source effect.

I was able to fix this with my friend Katrina's softbox by adding a layer of tracing paper in front.

You can see the chip clip holding the tracing paper in place on the right side.

Photography is just problem solving all the way down.

A higher quality softbox will have a second layer of diffusion already built in to prevent this, so make sure the softbox has this feature before buying.

Or invest in a roll of tracing paper and some chip clips.

Softboxes are an ingenious light modifier when built properly. They take a small light, diffuse it, enlarge it, and then focus it toward your subject. It's essentially a paradox of scattered & focused light. And since all of the scattering only happens *inside* the softbox, it gives you great control over how that light hits your subject. And you can focus it even more by putting a grid on the front.

This keeps light from "spilling" off to the sides though it can reduce intensity a bit and create unusual looking catchlights in the eyes.

Whereas a cheap shoot-through umbrella kinda "shoots" scattered light all over the place and causes a ton of extra reflections off the walls and ceilings. That may end up giving you unwanted second, third, and fourth light sources contributing to your exposure.

You can see light hitting the left and right walls and the ceiling—those pesky photons are going everywhere! And while it is giving a soft, flattering result due to that umbrella being so freaking big, you have almost no control over the light and how it affects your background.

So, yes, a softbox can make a small light source bigger, but that doesn't always mean you will get "soft" light.

This softbox takes a 10 inch LED panel and creates a 12 inch light source. This is mostly a scam product.

The marketing says it makes the light softer.

And while that is *technically* true, I'm afraid people are going to be disappointed if they think this thing is going to dramatically soften their light. A small increase in surface area like that would only be dramatically different if you were lighting a little toy car or the hypothetical ant friend I mentioned earlier. Something the size of a person is not going to see a difference in softness. Not to mention you are going to decrease the power of your light by adding diffusion and have no softening benefits.

Photography gear companies love taking advantage of new photographers because the desire to buy more gear to improve the quality of photos is quite strong. This is jokingly referred to as G.A.S. or "Gear Acquisition Syndrome." And while there is absolutely gear you can buy to improve your photos (lights, lenses, tripods), knowledge trumps any piece of gear at any time.

So, no, this scam softbox will not make the light appreciably softer. The only way to make this light softer is to find a softbox that enlarges it more than 2 friggin' inches, bounce it off something larger, or bring it closer to the subject. Move your light as close as possible and you will enlarge its apparent size.

Or, conversely, you can move your light farther away to make it hard.

Meaning you can technically make a softbox a hardbox.

Seriously, can we just do the whammy box thing?

So, what have we learned?

Soft light is more flattering to skin and reduces texture and harsh shadows.

Hard light increases contrast, sharpens shadows, and highlights texture.

Neither is good or bad. Soft light can be boring. Hard light can be interesting. A mixture of the two often produces the best result.

The only way to make light softer is to enlarge the light source.

You can enlarge a light source by...

Increasing the physical dimensions with a modifier.

Moving the light closer.

Reflecting the light off a larger surface.

Diffusion alone does not make a light softer.

Diffusion makes a light source more homogenous by mitigating hotspots.

Softboxes create homogenous light that you can direct and focus.

A softbox can still produce hard light if it is really small or really far away.

We should call it a whammy box.

How can you use this knowledge?

Well, the first thing you can do is...

DON'T BUY A RING LIGHT.

YES, I AM RANTING ABOUT RING LIGHTS AGAIN!

That giant hole in the middle of your light is a great spot for extra light.

And as we just learned, a larger light source is softer. So unless you specifically need a ring light and know how to use it (facial close-ups, camera goes in the hole), you are better off getting the biggest light you can fit in your space.

Look at how much bigger this light is than if it were a ring light.

It's like all of these influencers are throwing perfectly good light into the garbage.

Sorry, let's try this again.

Once you avoid ring lights, how can you use this knowledge?

I know a lot of you reading this are not influencers or YouTubers or photographers. And you may be thinking all of this knowledge I just shoved in your dome is useless.

But here's the thing...

We all take photos.

And I think we all want our photos to look their best.

If you start thinking more about light when you take photos, I promise you will be able to improve their quality.

If you are taking a selfie, think about where you can go that has a larger light source. Perhaps you have a large window. Or you have a big overhead light or floor lamp that shines up into the ceiling.

I actually had this idea to create a mega light that could blend in with a house's decor, but secretly be a photography light for taking pictures of people and pets indoors at night.

Secret Photography Light Ingredients Cheap Floorlamp Dual Light Socket Adapter 9000 Lumen LED Bulbs

(Seriously, if you put that together, stick it in a corner, and turn it on when your kids or pets are playing, you will never have another blurry photo from inside your house unless they are going full zoomies.)

If you are outside on a sunny day, don't stand in direct sunlight.

Remember, THE SUN IS ACTUALLY SMALL, angularly speaking. Find a shady spot under a tree. Or put the sun behind you and face a big white wall so the reflected light smacks you in the face.

Walls are light sources!

The ground is a light source!

Remember that moon photo?

You were looking at the sharp shadow earlier because I drew your attention to the sun being a small light source.

But the surface of the moon... HUGE LIGHT SOURCE.

How do you think the front of that space suit is lit when the sun is behind him? Either Stanley Kubrick has a big reflector offscreen or the ground is a soft second light source.

If you can't make it to the moon, just wait to take that selfie on a cloudy day. I think overcast light is a little boring, but your skin will look buttery smooth without using those stupid Facetune apps.

You can also wait for good light. Sometimes sunset has some nice, soft directional light because it has more atmosphere to scatter, diffuse, and enlarge it.

If you are indoors, don't use direct flash on your phone. Never ever use direct flash if you can avoid it. But perhaps you are with friends and they all have phones too. Use one or more phones to bounce the flashlight off a nearby wall. Or open up a paper napkin and hold it just out of frame and shine light through it and diffuse it.

A piece of paper can even work!

Flashlight 3 feet away shining directly onto my face...

Flashlight shining through a piece of paper a few inches in front of it...

Flashlight shining through a piece of paper 2 feet away that is just out of frame...

I started with a small light source.

I then made the light source a little bigger with the paper, but the diffusion was too close and it created the dreaded hotspot of doom.

And then I made the light source as big as I could by moving the paper as close to my face as possible without being in the shot. This also gave the light more room to scatter and diffuse making it homogenous.

Froggie Tip: I was using a pretty powerful flashlight, so with a phone you might get better results *bouncing* the light off the paper rather than shining the light through the paper.

So, before you take a photo, just think about how you can make your light source bigger, brighter, and more homogenous and you might be surprised how much better you look.

ANYONE CAN DO THIS!

[nekropsii]

Aww. On one hand, I'm glad my words touched you. On the other, it makes me so deeply sad knowing even the smallest glance towards granting one basic human dignity is enough to drive one to tears. I wouldn't even call my words the bare minimum - I don't think that countering the common idea that a group isn't inherently abusive should be the bare minimum. The bare minimum should be casual respect, the same that's afforded to any other person. The bare minimum should be me not even needing to say any of this in the first place.

NPD is so heavily demonized, especially right now. There's wave after wave of people claiming "Narcissistic Abuse" is a valid term and viciously attacking anyone who breathes in the direction of contradiction, every single search adjacent to NPD results in almost nothing but article after article on, specifically, how to hurt people with NPD, or protect yourself against them... There's conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory posted online quite literally painting them as actual real demons, like, Demons, from The Bible, or linking them to the Jewish Reptilian conspiracy theory, and it's just completely and utterly gut-wrenching. Even in spaces that proclaim themselves as safe, or progressive, or bigotry-free, these unjustified, bigoted snap judgments occur. It's the worst.

NPD is not something that I have. I don't have any Cluster B Disorder, actually. But I'm sympathetic because they're all fucking human beings the world has decided is socially acceptable to turn into a Sinister Other, a Walking Otherworldly Threat, like this is a fucking fiction novel or a video game. I'm sick of it.

There's a few people in my immediate circles who have NPD. They're all good people. They're nice, they're funny, they have perspectives on things that I deeply value, they're smart, and I treasure their proximity so much. They've never done anything wrong, and certainly haven't done anything wrong purely on the basis of being some Evil, Conniving Super Villain. They're literally just hanging out, and I'm glad to know them. My life is better and more enriched having known these people. They have never wronged me, and I don't think they ever will. And even if they do, it would not be because they have NPD, it would be because they're a living being. As people, we all have the capability to harm others. Animals have the capability to harm other animals, too. Plants can harm you. This is not a trait unique to the Disordered.

Us people without NPD need to do better, to listen to our friends and siblings with NPD, to help boost them up so that we can help end this wretched fucking curse - or, at the very least, quell it. We need to help them speak louder, and amplify their cause with our vocal support. Ableism will never go away, but the least we can do is try to move towards making it not as socially acceptable to be bigoted. None of us need a Sinister Other to combat. This is not war, this is not the medieval times. We do not need this. We do not need to beat a persecution complex into ourselves to excuse persecuting others. We do not need to live in constant fear of the idea of the line cook who just wants to go home and play Dark Souls, or the office worker passing the time by thinking about their 3 cats, or the high schooler at home reading their favorite shoujo manga, or the guitarist driving home tapping their fingers on the steering wheel to the beat of the radio. These are not your enemies. They are people going about their lives. They've literally never hurt you. Stop projecting your fear of abuse onto strangers - onto minorities.

My message to people without NPD is to fucking check yourself if you believe in Narcissistic Abuse, or automatically assume that people with NPD are up to something. Especially right now, that is a very, very vile, dehumanizing form of absolutely rampant ableism that we needed to take extreme steps to mitigate fucking months ago. Years, even. The best time to shoot this bigotry and burn it's corpse was the moment it started rising. The second best time is Now. Interrogate yourself. Realize that people with NPD are literally just human beings. Stop being awful to your fellow person. The way people think and speak about people with NPD is just absolutely disgusting, and everyone needs to apologize to them right now.

My message to people with NPD is simple: You deserve one billion dollars for having to put up with all of this shit. It's actually deranged. Trust me, there are others out there that think this is horseshit. You are not alone.

[the-littlest-goblin]

Something that's stuck with me from the Arch Heart's appearance, which highlights a major underpinning of my frustration with C3, is the "Big Doors don't work" comment.

In what way exactly is the Big Door not working?

The purpose of the Divine Gate was to mitigate the gods exerting undo influence on mortal affairs, and according to everything we've seen in all 3 campaigns up to this point, this was a demonstrable success: the Calamity ended, and despite multiple potentially world-ending catastrophes cropping up since then, it has been up to mortals to deal with these threats. They've often done so with divine aid, but I fail to see how that's overreaching on the gods' part when accepting said aid is still dependent on mortal choice.*

Part of the Arch Heart's reasoning for wanting to "let go" is, as I understand it, because mortals continue to rebel against and resent the gods even from behind the Divine Gate. Which, yes they do, but like... the customer is not always right. Not every complaint needs to be catered to, especially the ones based on faulty postulates.

I get that this is not how the Arch Heart is thinking about it; my issue is not with the roleplay of individual characters, but with the narrative whole and the sheer amount of time it has spent, both in the text and extra-textual framing, sincerely entertaining the base axioms of an argument that is so poorly constructed Ludinus wouldn't make it past round one of a middle school debate club. None of the anti-god arguments have given any tangible evidence for the claim that the gods are an oppressive force or that Exandria would be better off without them that is not either:

A. Aeor, which was pre-Divine Gate and in fact the catalyst for the gods to pull back on interfering with mortal affairs, and therefore not all that pertinent to the current status quo;

or B. an event or action that, while it may be done in the name of the gods (e.g. Hearthdell) or directly encouraged by a god (e.g. Opal and the Crown) is nonetheless still contingent on mortals making choices, and therefore not a convincing argument that the gods are infringing on free will,** nor that removing them would prevent these types of situations.

An ongoing motif of C3 has been showing perspectives which challenge the prevailing narrative about the gods as established within Exandria's lore to this point. As a story enjoyer, I normally would eat up this sort of reversal—I love a metatextual play with in-universe narratives. But to do so convincingly requires more substance than a handful of characters going 'Trust me bro.' I'm going to need to see some peer-reviewed studies on Exandrian metaphysics before I take Ludinus "17 ulterior motives stacked in a wizard robe" Da'leth's word over what I've seen with my own brain over thousands of hours worth of game play.

If the message of the narrative is telling me to question the diegetic information it presents, then I am going to do just that. So far every argument that the gods do more harm than good for Exandria has been rampant citationless behavior. I find it baffling and borderline infuriating that we're approaching the denouement of this campaign and I still have yet to see evidence that the core conflict of the story, the central debate which has plagued every in-game and fandom discussion for a year now, is based on an actual problem. Like, at all.

*If you think Vax did not exercise his own agency and free will in every step of becoming Champion of the Matron, you are simply wrong.

**For real, we know there are magical means of straight-up mind control in Exandria. Like, you don't have to approve of it, but the gods engaging in standard issue verbal manipulation does not constitute a violation of free will, and it certainly doesn't make the argument that they are so immeasurably more powerful than mortals that they should not be allowed to exist.

[tododeku-or-bust]

You know the one thing that's been nagging me since shit started going down? Kamala knew how bad Project 2025 would be. So did Biden. So why didn't either even attempt to put guardrails in place if they actually cared? And sure- maybe I just haven't heard anything about either of them with how crazy the news cycle is right now. But I haven't heard anything about them speaking out against this or mobilizing people against it either. It's just so intereting seeing peope smugly defend Kamala when she's not doing anything about this.

I've sat on this ask for weeks, waiting for the moment that I would be able to succinctly deliver an answer... And I find I cannot. There are people far more educated on the topic (and have the receipts) than I ( @vague-humanoid @time-being and I'm blanking on my guys url, but he had this super long thread on Joe Biden specifically that could answer your question).

Common people are doing what they can and protesting! However, if I had to make it as simple as I can, I would put it down to arrogance and neoliberalism.

Arrogance; they didn't plan bc they didn't think they'd have to, bc they thought the strategy they had was gonna work. Because they seem to think that the only thing they have to do is "not be Republicans", which is an argument that, as evidenced by this recent loss, has always been futile. ESPECIALLY when you start to let your ideology and policy making move further and further right to appease a moderate center... That is only "center" by comparison. You cannot middle ground with fascists, and Establishment Democrats clearly have not gotten it through their heads that no amount of "we go high" will save anyone in a knife fight for human rights. There is no "get in office and rest on your laurels"; we don't have time to not be Republicans, we have to actively move left to mitigate the damage they're doing! For them, they think "as long as we're in, it's fine". It's not. But they refuse to learn how to play the game, have been for a long time, and have been getting circles run around them by white supremacists who they can't reason with.

Neoliberalism is a harder one for me to explain in less words. Essentially, in order to maintain the (white, western) hegemony of the United States, Democrats have often had to cede power and strategy (that would otherwise suggest integrity to the leftist beliefs they supposedly hold) in order to stay in positions of power within the current system. You saw how it happened with Palestine this last election; suddenly we're shaking hands on killing folks in the "middle east", but we were all "anti Dubya" when he was doing the same thing. They were literally putting some of their own most progressive party members on the chopping block. Plus, selling specific groups out for temporary gain is not an uncommon Democrat strategy (see: Bill Clinton, prisons, policing, and welfare, and the Black community).

So yeah, I would definitely say arrogance and a desire to maintain their own power in a crumbling system over actual effective policy. Which ended up losing them power. Makes no sense, does it?

[kaidatheghostdragon]

Halfas and Fear Gas

Ive seen a lot of "fear gas makes danny high." Its hilarious and i love it. Other variations i recall seeing are: fear is not as potent, complete immunity, 'food supplement' fear gas, and the boring 'effects him like normal.'

BUT.

I haven't really seen anyone treat effect effect on the brain and core as separate processes. In other words, humans get affected one way, ghosts get affected another way, and halfas get blasted by both.

We already know how normal humans are affected, so we dont really need to go over that. Ghosts, however, are free reign. (Unless there's a canon incident where a ghost like boston brand or gentleman ghost are exposed to a fear gas attack? Any DC canon nerds out there that know of something like that?)

The options I've seen or thought up so far:

Complete immunity - ectoplasm just doesn't react to physical matter in a way that impacts the ghost. Fear gas, as in the chemical itself, has no effect whatsoever.

Effects ghosts like humans. Straight forward, it's a bit weird if you think about it, but eh.

Fear gas, as in the chemical itself, is like ghost weed, or perhaps something stronger. Might be hallucinogenic, but in a bad trip sort of way rather than a worst fear sort of way

Fear gas, as in the chemical itself, is accidentally a super effective health suppliment for ghosts

If emotions are food to ghosts, fear gassed humans can span the range between 'delectable snack sprinkled with extra sugar' to 'weird chemical food that isnt healthy but will still sustain you' to 'supercharged health snack completely saturated by nutrients'

Fear gas, either the chemical itself or the people affected by it, has a distinct smell. It could be good, bad, or neutral, possibly related to how it affects the ghost. (Or deceptive, for humor and/or angst.)

Fear gas is outright toxic to ghosts. Perhaps the chemical itself is similar to, but just left of, ectoplasm. Like many artificial chemicals that can substitute various nutrients / usurp metabolic pathways in humans, it could have any number of mild to debilitating, short to long term effects on ghosts.

(If anyone has another idea, feel free to add)

Now we get to halfas, who have both a human brain and a ghost core. Dany has a human body and brain that are affected normally by the fear gas: hallucinations, panic attack, adrenaline response, etc etc. Someone better at biology can describe the actual biochemical processes going on.

But the ghost core? Added on top of All That? Can be excessively angsty, somewhat mitigating, or outright hilarious.

Going through the list of options:

Complete immunity.

This sounds boring, but its actually my favorite. Why? Because danny is getting conflicting signals. His brain is compromised and in full panic, but his core is telling him that he's completely safe. As a hybrid, Danny could be capable of having critical thought with both organs. If he's clever enough to recognize the seperation between the two, he can exploit it as a sort of anchor (I'm imagining it somewhat like how a multitasker can do different things with different senses, like listening to an audio book while solving a jigsaw puzzle - the book is auditory, the puzzle is visual and tactile, neither interfere with the other.)

Danny, in this scenario, is definitely in an altered state of consciousness, seeing things that aren't there and right on the cusp of panicking or defending himself. But if he can recognize that his core is unaffected, he can focus on the sensory input that his core is processing, and the whole situation might be somewhat equivalent to becoming lucid in the middle of a nightmare - its terrifying, but just the recognition that it isn't real takes the edge off. To him, it's now like being stuck in a VR horror game and being unable to take the headset off, flinching at all the jumpscares but recognizing that his body isn't actually being attacked or injured.

Affects ghost like humans

Danny could either be affected exactly the same as anyone else or effectively double-dosed as both brain and core fight entirely different hallucinations. Maybe if danny is lucky, he'll just black out from the sensory overload.

Ghost weed

This could make what was initially designed to be a really bad trip into something catastrophic... or mellow it out. Idk. I've never done recreational drugs. Both the brain and core are cut off from reality. The brain is terrified, and the core is tripping out. If his core naturally reacts to his emotional state, it's gonna amplify the effects, which is Really Bad. If the core is compromised to a point where it can't really process anything, then Danny is still trapped in a nightmare state, just more loopy and otherwise no worse than any human.

Health supplement and/or literal food

This one is confusing. Brain is terrified, core is satiated? Energized? A boost to his powers is gonna make him much more difficult to contain and treat. When he comes out of it, there's real potential for angst from danny worrying that the conflicting emotions of absolute terror and hunger satiation are a sign that he's turning evil. Especially if his core was instinctually feeding off of the fear of nearby civilians who were also gassed during the trip. That undercurrent of predatory satisfaction is gonna leave him awake at night for a few weeks.

On the plus side, feeding his ghost core might help it clear out the toxin faster, so the trip is much shorter. Maybe he even pulls out of it before he accidentally causes any damage with his powers.

Smelly

Pretty straightforward. If it smells bad, Danny is automatically gonna hold his breath, limiting his exposure. If it smells good, he might take a good few wiffs before realizing what's up and holding his breath, or just keeps dosing himself more and more as that effects, good or bad to the core and definitely bad to the brain, settle in.

Toxic

Has the potential to be much more long-term and insidious. You can run the full gamut here. Does he need to be restrained and taken to the far frozen for days or even weeks of treatment? Does the ectoplasm incorporate the drug, and Danny has to suffer weeks or months of microdosing until it's used up, turning him into a paranoid schizophrenic during that time? Is it blood blossoms 2.0? Does it have no mental effects but screws with his powers? Does it influence his emotional self-control? Does he grow the ghost equivalent of a tumor that encapsulates the toxin and has to be surgically removed? Does he need supplemental ecto to remain healthy, temporarily, or permanently? Does it affect his ectosignature or peak power level? Injure his core? Lower his healing factor?

All of this is on top of the initial fear gas trip, which he may have never even fully pulled out of. The angst possibilities are endless.

Then, there are liminals who have the potential to be affected like halfas or in an entirely different way. Does your headcanon give them proto-cores or baby ghost cores, or are they just severely ectoconaminated? How would that change their symptoms?

Anyways, just some ideas for people to use. My favorite idea so far, that I'd love to see someone use, is that Danny has learned to use his separate brain and core as insurance against mind control and mind-altering drugs. The freakshow incident was a sort of catalyst that helped him recognize the differences between his brain and core, and he taught himself how to lean into one or the other for various advantages in different situations. (Sort of like how a person can lean on either logic or intuition to make different types of choices.)

There's a lot of interesting potential here. Essentially, Danny could teach himself to be immune to mind-control and greatly resistant to drugs, as he can evaluate his surroundings with both organs and identify differences. Mind control wouldn't work unless it targeted BOTH brain and core, as he could shift to the uncontrolled one to break away. Any drug designed to knock out or roofie a human is countered by the fact that danny's core still remains conscious of his surroundings, and creative use of ghost powers counters the accompanying paralysis.

If ghosts dont sleep, one could argue that Danny's core is in a meditative state when his brain rests, which is why his ghost sense can wake him up from a dead sleep - he's never fully unconscious. Workoholic danny could find a way to get homework or paperwork done, or solve a problem, or design a piece of tech, or even play a videogame, while 'sleeping,' even using ectokinesis to move stuff while his body is sleep-paralyzed. Sleep-deprived danny is still functional because his core isn't affected by his brain's lapses in consciousness from micro-naps. (He is a lot moodier, though. His core is more emotion-focused while his brain is more logic-focused, on top of the normal mood-swings from sleep deprivation.)

This version of danny, after being fear-gassed, immediately recognizes that his brain and core are suddenly experiencing two different realities. He would be able to talk himself down from a panic attack and slowly find his way to safety. He probably wouldn't trust himself to hold back if he got in a scuffle, but he would be coherent enough to vaguely understand his surroundings to avoid danger.

And lastly, something I dont recall seeing in any fics - if the bats encountered fear-gassed Danny, and he's aware enough to refuse an antidote, I dont think the bats would push it. Yeah, forcing more medical trauma on our favorite blorbo is all good and fun, but he clearly has an altered metabolism that was affected differently by the fear gas than normal, so there's a heightened risk that the antidote would also have an altered affect, for the reward of removing the effects of fear-toxin (which is no longer guaranteed), which danny is already showing he's capable of working through.

On top of that, medical professionals are not allowed to force treatment if the patient refuses them and can walk it off. (If they are unconscious or can't get up on their own, they can intervene.) Medical conditions and allergies are a thing too, and its the priority of the patient to inform the medical worker as soon as possible to prevent complications. Jazz may have coached Danny about "in a medical emergency, declare closet-meta status with highly modified metabolism and unknown reactions to most drugs."

I see the conversation going something like:

"If you can hear me, im going to administer an antidote."

"Dont. Give it to someone who actually needs it."

And then the bat treats everyone else before approaching danny again to ask how they can help. They would be trained to take all of this into account:

Human male, visibly uninjured (unless the fic writer has different ideas) experiencing non-standard reaction to fear toxin. Probable indication of meta or enhanced status.

Victim is cognizent, replied to verbal communication, denied treatment. Appears to be managing the effects of the fear toxin. Not currently a danger to themselves or others.

Nonstandard reaction to fear-toxin implies potential non-standard reaction to antidote. Victim may be aware of medical condition that could complicate treatment, and is reasonably stable at the moment. Further questioning needed.

There are other victims in the area that are less cognizent, they become higher priority. Approach victim again when all other victims are cleared out, (in case of uncontrolled meta powers, to avoid further casualties), ask more questions and ascertain situation.

Once questioned further, danny drops the memorized line about altered metabolism and unknown effects, and giving Danny the antidote basically immediately becomes a non-viable option. They will probably argue Danny into being taken to Leslie's clinic, as he'll refuse a hospital (probably quite hysterically, given the fear toxin), which i'd imagine is the bat's normal protocol for closet-metas.

At least, that's how I imagine the situation panning out. Danny noping out before the bats return to him or during mid-interrogation is also extremely likely, which is gonna put the bats in panic mode for the next several hours. (Going to *any* secondary location with the bats is a non-option to Danny, for many potential reasons.) Danny is definitely going on a watch list (as in, possible meta with unknown powers, keep an eye out in case he gets caught up in another rogue scheme, need more information).

[thydungeongal]

out of curiosity, are you aware of any games that mechanised notetaking? just was walking the dog and thinking about making something explicit that's oft implicit

Oh, immediately could think of one! Eureka: Investigative Urban Fantasy by my good friends at @anim-ttrpgs basically necessitates note-taking not just because it is an investigative game but because of one of its mechanics: Eureka!

Eurekas are one of the many systems the game has in place to make sure that the investigation doesn't stall or lead to a dead end simply because the investigators aren't being lucky that day. It is a very trad game where to gain clues investigators investigate scenes and use their skills to draw clues from evidence. Which, being random, means that there's always a chance that an investigator fails all their rolls and doesn't end up gaining any clues!

This is mitigated in part by the use of graded successes (the most common result on an unmodified roll is actually a partial success), but also, whenever a character makes an investigation roll they gain investigation points, with failures yielding more. Once a character's investigation points reach a certain threshold they can be used to gain a Eureka (and the game even encourages you to stand up and shout "Eureka!" when using it) which allows a character to suddenly gain a clue from one of their previously failed investigation rolls as if they had succeeded at it!

So it's a game that basically necessitates writing down ALL of the clues the investigators gather as well as every single failed investigation roll! It's highly ambitious and crunchy, and I love it. You can also get the prerelease version of it for free at the moment by joining their indie RPG book club where I'm also around to help out a bit! :)

I'm sure there are other games as well, but I literally immediately thought of Eureka when I saw this ask. :D

[riongeee]

Jamil, immediately after graduating: Quit your job

Sebek: ???

Jamil: Travel the world with me

Two people with predetermined futures running away together to experience the world :')

But genuinely as a little thing, I think that would be so fun. Like, imagine, Jamil who has been forced to constantly be meeker and to lower himself to appease people and has always had the looming future of being a mere servant. Then we have Sebek, loud but still has that future of having to lower himself to someone.

Like, Jamil would probably hear tidbits about Sebek and the fact that their similar, like we already know that Sebek and he are both bodyguards, and despite Sebek 'liking' his future (Quotations because does he like it or is that just all he's ever known) or is he just resigned? So Jamil takes one look at Sebek and just goes 'this one, this ones mine'.

Like at some point Sebek becomes known as the honorary Scarabia first year because Jamil (I'm picturing this post his overblot) is absolutely overprotective of his first year. Like, Jamil teaches Sebek things that Sebek would've never really spent much thought on otherwise. They cook together, Sebek learns Jamils style of dance and in return Sebek teaches Jamil how to ride on horseback and introduces him to obscure operas as he begins to come out of his shell. Jamil begins to see more to Sebek than the Malleus obsessed,loud knight everyone else sees. It comes to the point that when people see one they ask where the other is (enter angst about Kalim remembering when he was like that with Jamil????)

Also, Diasomnia in all of this, they just assume it's Sebeks admiration for a senior. In the actual game, Sebek also admires Jamil, so for them, it would be a case of Sebek just thinking he found a new person to respect. They only really notice things are different when Sebeks absence makes it known. It makes itself known through the lack of a sonorous voice waking Silver up; through the lack of joyful compliments towards Malleus; through the lack of panicked flails as he tried to mitigate Lillias disasters in the kitchen. They find themselves oddly out of place without their first year, yet now, they have no idea to reach out, they can only watch as Sebek laughs in a way they've never seen before (had they ever seen him laugh so hard he snorts?)

Enter, the conversation. Personally, I think it would be after Malleus' overblot, like not even graduation. Jamil realizes not only does he want to travel the world, but he wants his friend to do so too. In the moments where everything was in limbo, Jamil regrets that Sebek has never been able to think of a future that deviates from his set path and he decides to try change that.

Whether Sebek takes that chance, is an entirely different story :)

[slutforpringles]

“I think for Daniel, I struggle with the results he’s had lately, because he’s an exceptional talent. He really is. To jump in the Red Bull when he did [2014] and go up against Sebastian Vettel, to go up against Max and be as competitive as he was, it was unbelievable. It really was. And then we saw glimpses of it at Renault as well, you know, before it was Alpine. Took some time to find his feet, but then he was extremely quick against the Hulk [Nico Hulkenberg], who we all rate very highly. It just didn’t materialise at McLaren and Alpha Tauri, which is such a shame. And why is that? I don’t know. It’s not his age. He’s not old. Look at Fernando Alonso, what he can do. So the only person that knows is probably Daniel, and I feel for him, because to be on such a high for a lot of your career, and then it fall away for the last few years, it’s tough. But I think, from what I’ve heard, he’s made peace with it, and he’s got his whole life in front of him."

I really, really dislike some of the framing I've seen of Jenson Button's interview on the Sky Sports podcast that he's paying Daniel some lovely compliment about his career. While I think his intentions were probably in the right place, his comments scream of someone who hasn't actually paid attention to the last year/eighteen months of Daniel's career and only reinforce Red Bull's narrative that Daniel was dropped because of his own under-performance this season.

First of all I think comparing Daniel's performance at McLaren and Alpha Tauri/VCarb is just a complete false equivalence - the situations genuinely could not have been more night and day different. The fundamental mismatch between driver and car at McLaren and the futile mission McLaren went on to try to mitigate it - by trying to fundamentally change Daniel's driving - was a unique set of circumstances that was unsustainable for both driver and team.

This just didn't exist at AT/VCarb, which was pretty evident from the fact that Daniel hopped straight into a completely unfamiliar car and outqualified Yuki on his first attempt. Sure there were some races that were more tricky than others due to certain car characteristics introduced by various upgrades, particularly given the propensity for this generation of F1 car to have such a weak front end. But to try and compare the McL and AT/VCarb stints just demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge and understanding by Jenson Button.

Takes like this also reinforce rhetoric from Marko that Daniel just didn't achieve high enough level results, which given the actual machinery he was driving is laughable. Sure it's fair to criticise Daniel's slow start to the season this year, or his inconsistency in qualifying, but Daniel also turned his season around and after a difficult start put his head down and put in the work - Scott Mitchell-Malm summed it up well on the The Race podcast.

"A few races before the summer break my understanding was that Ricciardo and Perez had basically been told up your game before the summer break because that's when we're going to revisit things. It wasn't a promise or a threat either way, but it was a give us your best so that when we sit down we've got absolutely everything we have. One of the drivers pretty much rose to the occasion; has Ricciardo been stunningly good in the midfield? No. Has he been good, effective and doing pretty much what you can with that car? Yeah I think he has, actually. [Ed Straw: Yeah he's been pretty decent.] So I don't really see that he has floundered in that situation whereas Perez has, he hasn't risen to it."

Ultimately Daniel was punished by VCarb's complete inability to upgrade their car this season. Had the VCarb continued to improve over the season in line with Daniel then we wouldn't be in this situation, and people wouldn't be making ridiculous, inaccurate and unfair comments on Daniel's performance like Button has here.

[queenvhagar]

You know, I think one of the reasons why Rhaenyra was so incompetent in handling political matters is because she never had to play the game of thrones properly. The premise of the game is that if you make a mistake, you die, and as long as you win, you have one more day of life. But our pampered princess could make mistakes, create scandals, and disrespect whoever she wanted, whenever and however she wanted, without any problem because her dear father was there to save her, mitigate the damages, or protect her. That's why, when Viserys dies and she has to take control, she fails. She can't control her husband; her few political victories were thanks to her husband, son, or Hand, and when she takes the capital, she doesn't know how to handle the people properly, and they rebel against her. She has a council full of incompetents who care more about their own interests than hers, and she doesn't know how to get rid of them because she's afraid of losing their support. Yet, the fans TB claim that she was going to be a legendary queen when, most likely, her Hand, husband, and advisors would have made the important decisions, as happened with Viserys. What do you think?

The problem with Rhaenyra comes down to a couple things, in my opinion.

First, she's never really meaningfully had to play the game of thrones due to her unique position in society as a Targaryen dragonrider, the king's favorite princess, and heir to the throne. This leads her to be sheltered from real world consequences to her actions. It reminds me a bit of the line from Succession about how their father made them a playground and they think it's the whole world. She lives in an incredibly privileged bubble, and within that bubble, protected by her father, she is emboldened to act how she likes with little thought or care to how others perceive her and how her actions would be interpreted by others. Once she marries Daemon, he becomes another reinforcement to that bubble. He encourages the idea that people should fear them and submit to them. Within their bubble, and due to their unique positions as Targaryen dragonriders with the king's favor, he suggests they make moves in the political game that silence dissidents and inspire fear. However, still these actions in the "game" are somewhat divorced from the actual game of thrones that others are playing, where if you lose you die.

And second, and in this I see her paralleled with Cersei... Rhaenyra thinks she's smarter than she is and that she can play the game better than anyone else. It's the classic Targaryen superiority complex coupled with privilege. She sees her unique position of power and uses it to "get away with" a lot of things. She knows she has influence over the king, and she uses it. She knows she has Daemon, and she uses him (as he uses her). But once again, the moves she's making are in this protected bubble. And even though she thinks she's truly getting away with all of the things she is, for good and for the long-term, the reality is really something different. Back to that quote of thinking the playground was the entire world... Rhaenyra thinks she's being clever in passing obvious bastards as trueborn heirs. She thinks she's being clever in leveraging her father's and Daemon's favor to her benefit. But she's not. She's detached from the political reality of the world. And by the time she's set to be handed the grand prize from her dad, there are actual real barriers to getting what she wants, because she finds that others have played the game better than her, and she's absolutely blindsided and shocked that this is the case. Because she never had to really, meaningfully play the game before, and she really doesn't understand how the real game is played and what the stakes are. She truly thought she was playing the real game perfectly for so long, and then she discovered that the actual game she needed to play was different and that others had played it better. Her actions during the Dance are her attempting to grasp the reality of the real game of thrones and failing to play it well, demonstrating her incompetence and resulting in her loss of power.

[howtofightwrite]

I'm planning on writing a Pokemon fanfic where the trainer is hard of hearing. They can speak and give commands but it is also normal for trainers to hear the opposing trainers commands and respond to that not just what they see. Which would put them at a big disadvantage, wouldn't it if they could only process visual information? I know you said stuff before about combat being too fast and people don't 'call out attacks' but that doesn't fit here. But also on the other hand, Pokemon don't alwa

But also on the other hand, Pokemon don't always obey their their trainers (usually a trust issue) but perhaps this actually could be a good thing and help turn that disadvantage around since if they trust each other enough for the Pokemon to respond appropriately by themselves if they feel the trainer is making a bad call or not quick enough to respond to an attack called out by the opposing trainer. What do you think? Any other ideas?

Something to remember: Pokemon is a game. I don't mean in the meta-sense that the anime and ancillary materials are based off of the video game and card game, the way you could, for example, describe the Fallout TV series as based on a game. I mean, literally, that the structure of Pokemon itself is a competitive game.

When you start stripping it apart, and really dig into the structure, combat in pokemon is a game where the trainers are the players, and their pokemon are the pieces they're using on the board. This is an important concept to grasp when you're dissecting the material, because it informs why it functions.

There is a concept in games called an action stack. When you're playing a strategically intensive game, you'll often come across some version of this concept. Basically, you announce your action to your opponent, they then get an opportunity to take a legal response (if one exists), and then the action resolves. In situations like this, calling out your actions is a necessary step in keeping your opponent apprised of changes in the game state. It's also (often) necessary as a step to give them the opportunity to respond (whether that's part of the same action stack, or as a following action.)

Now, much like in Pokemon, in casual games, these kinds of declarations, and even the structure of the action stack itself, can become very ad hoc. You wouldn't do this in a tournament environment, but in casual circumstances you'll see players doing things like say, “I'm playing this,” or just drop the card on the table as part of their appropriate action window. (Though, again, this behavior is extremely rude in a tournament environment.)

As you mentioned, the instructions given by the trainer is, technically, for the Pokemon's benefit, rather than the opponent. Also, pieces on the board not following the player's commands is a concept that does exist in some tabletop games. For example: if you botch a Leadership test in Warhammer, you're not going to get the results you were hoping for.

So in this specific case, being privy to your opponent's actions ahead of time is really more an example of intelligence gathering (even though it's at a very limited level.) And, this is, absolutely, a consideration in competitive games. If you can accurately predict your opponent's next action it can let you take preemptive steps to mitigate their move, or even outright prevent them from doing what they want.

Not being able to collect intelligence conventionally is a little bit of a problem, but it's not necessarily a deal breaker. A lot of the time, intelligence gathering in games (for an experienced player) is testing limited information against extensive system knowledge to make educated guesses about what your opponent will do. If you have awareness of the board, you don't always need to actually have specific knowledge about what your opponent is planning. Meaning, if they're extremely knowledgeable about what's out there, they might not need to hear their opponents' every command. With enough familiarity, each pokemon is recognizable on sight, and they have limited move options determined by their appearance (with the occasional outlier or exception.)

Also, lipreading is a thing. It's a lot harder when you're just sampling general use of the language, but when you're looking at a limited number of individual words (and you know which words could be issued because of the aforementioned system knowledge) it can become quite possible for someone to pick out what a trainer is telling their pokemon, even if they wouldn't be able to hear the words normally (or lipread a stray conversation between strangers.)

Incidentally, if you're thinking that it's unreasonable for someone to have the stat sheets for over 1k pokemon committed to memory, that's in line with what you need to have committed to memory for a number of competitive games, if you're operating at a high level. Chances are, if you're a highly ranked M:TG player, you'll probably have at least 2-3k cards committed to memory even if you can't use them in Modern anymore.

-Starke

[vigilskept]

i just want to say i saw your tags and i do agree with most of them!! i just think we also cannot overlook the role of racism in that, because of how many of those people who walked away with more attachment to assan than davrin talk about that exact sacrifice. it is a recurring problem in the dragon age fandom that many other players do not LOOK for depth in Black characters, then complain about its absence. So I am much less generous about it personally! But thank you for your thoughts, they were interesting to read. (Sending as an ask cause I don't want to reblog and make a whole post about it in case anyone gets aggressive, feel free to answer me privately if you want too at all - no worries about doing so! But I made the post partially because of my major frustration with how racist a lot of people were being about davrin and that choice, so it was something I took into consideration while writing the thing up)

i do know what you mean, fandom has been terrible with reading any depth into characters of colour in this franchise... there's a tendency to assume they have no more complexity than whatever image of themselves they're projecting outward (see: zev, bela, vivienne)

and based a lot of the discourse around wyll in bg3 over the last couple of years, i don't think we've seen much change in fandom when it comes to this. it's still a big issue, and that kind of bias (consciously or not) factors into how a lot of people have been interpreting davrin's character/arc for sure

i just think that the writing also plays into this a little

that first scene where you welcome him into the lighthouse struck me as particularly off because davrin's literally just lost two friends in the wardens before joining us and we don't even get the option to ask him how he's feeling. the whole conversation is about assan, the grey wardens and the griffons

now assan's isolation from his siblings is being deliberately paralleled with davrin's isolation from his clan (and now the wardens), but on it's face this conversation comes off as though rook is more interested in the griffons than in davrin. especially when you compare it with the other early-game lighthouse conversations! just 1 more dialogue where you actually get to check in on davrin could've mitigated that, if only a little

the heart of davrin's quest isn't buried between a dozen layers of metaphor or anything, it's not hard to find the parallels with assan when you put some time/thought into it. but the writing elsewhere in veilguard is so unsubtle, and the opportunities to talk to davrin directly about himself are so much fewer that it becomes much easier to write off his character than the other companions...