#evolve as a person…

[floridakilo]

on paper i know the age difference looks ~problematic~ on his end but i think maybe im the selfish one bc the idea of being with someone my own age or younger or even slightly older (less than 10 years) is anxiety inducing bc then id have to worry about whether we can “grow together” … like i already have to think about what i’m doing in order to mature into a successful adult so the thought of having those same anxieties for your partner by proxy is insaneeee… i kind of already went through this tbh bc my ex was 26 when i was 19 (cringe asf gap) and then at 21 when i was starting to surpass him educationally / at work etc it brewed so much resentment in me and i eventually broke up with him… but imagine if i had stayed with him longer to let him “grow” meanwhile he’s still in the same spot nowadays as 2021… i think i would constantly be worried about that with someone in their 20’s or even like early 30’s tbh

[bruciemilf]

“Bruce is emotionally incompetent and can’t step outside his own morality” yeah it’s a character flaw.

“Dick is extremely stubborn and thinks he’s right all the time” yeah it’s a character flaw.

“Jason has hypocritical tendencies” yeah it’s a character flaw.

“ Tim is entitled and doesn’t think about people when seeking results, and often acts uncaring” yeah it’s a character flaw.

“Damian is rude and bratty” yeah, it’s a character flaw.

Also, some people may not even regard everything listed above as flaws.

Having negative traits allows incredible flexibility within your characters, what makes them intriguing, what makes them easy to relate to. If you want to write people, then write people. But they can’t be good and clean all the time.

[kumzorg]

put your paws in the air wave them like you just dont care

(oc description below)

her name is Sohfa (was written like Sofa before but revised for better pronounciation), and her whole deal was that i wanted to make a trans woman oc, but i had no clue what trans women are like besides being hot and provocative (year 2020, i was young and confused about a lot of things regarding gender), and she didnt have any personality other than looking tired all the time, until i grew up and realised this is the stupidest fucking character design, i came to realisation about lotta things, such as heteronormativity and body positivity, so after coming to terms with my own problems, i developed her further to be a representations of the things that i love and respect, such as feeling comfortable in your own body and dealing with adversities while still having hope for the future

also something something she was initially for a furry visual novel concept (not as a romantic option, shes lesbian and the mc was gonna be a gay man) , but i like to mostly draw my ocs hanging around and doing stuff instead of writing out plot, so that idea is scrapped for now (...but for how long?... >:3)

just as i grow and develop as a person, so do the silly goobers that i make up in my mind

(also shes a frigging nerd, likes to watch old avgn and plays old pc games like a neeeeeerd)

[ohitslen]

Living together.

The snail video if you are interested :)

[mercutio-the-velaryon]

You would think Mel Medarda died in the season one finale the way the only discourse about her that gets popular in the wider fandom is about not only her actions in season 1 but a very specific scene in a very specific context like did y'all see her in season two or do you only care when she's a device for Jayce and Viktor's character arcs?

[unproduciblesmackdown]

Lackadaisy Enrichment

[nemo-namikaze]

Combat truly has evolved.

[histhoughtslately]

Shine without holding back and watch your world bloom right before your eyes.

#betterthanuimagined

[greatgatsbyhateblog]

the h in hog stands for homosexual. i am so normal abt this for actually

[zigzap]

op x pkmn - monkey d luffy ☀️

[carefulzombie]

And we've both done it all a hundred times before

It's funny how I still forgot

S6E44 the war games: part 10 // two slow dancers, mitski // the war games 2024 colorization

[wavesoutbeingtossed]

anyone else obsessed with the recurring theme in TTPD about how in each instance with the three notable muses referenced, they each made a show in their own way of stepping up to Be Someone for her, only to completely cut and run (whether physically or emotionally or both).

The first love who laid on the charm offensive, "I'm not an organ donor but I'd give you my heart if you needed it," sweeping her up in this great big first serious adult love, inspiring all of the dreams that go with it, making her feel like This Is It and the actions undertaken as a result. But then bailing at the first sign of inconvenience, leaving her distrusting of her own feelings and instincts.

The longtime partner with whom she built a foundation against all odds, the one with whom (or perhaps rather for whom) she meticulously placed those stars on the ceiling. The one who at one point painted dreamscapes on the wall and sparked her darkest nights, the one who chose her mess and said there was nothing that could stop them, the one she believed in so completely she crafted a whole life around, but then accused her of abandoning the ship when he had long since metaphorically and physically left the house on the Heath.

And then of course the final boss level, the infatuation from hell who saw all this and said "I can be the one that none of the others were" and insinuated himself into her life and her consciousness until it felt real, only to vanish after the ploy did its damage.

(Of course, it's all contrasted by a fourth party with whom the trust and dreams come freely and solidly.)

It's just a fascinating study in how patterns keep repeating themselves, not only in a person's choice of partners but in people's behaviours in general. And how so much of the album is not just about specific situations but also globally about the pitfalls of relationships and dynamics and how we choose to believe. TTPD album that you are.

[temporary-tats]

Well… finally watched Wednesday.

Guess what I’m gonna be fucking insufferable about for the rest of my life?

Surely not the Black Cat x Golden Retriever ship that has burrowed itself into my bones and imbedded itself in my DNA in the past 2 days. Pshhh… nooo….

[medi-bee]

isat pokemon au, my liege?

my rambling in tags

[impmansloot]

on Rook as a protagonist

I'm genuinely surprised that some people say that Rook is the best protagonist to them out of all in Dragon Age games—obviously, to each their own, and if you genuinely think that and love your Rook, then hey, that's great, I definitely do have some positive feelings towards my own Rook too despite not being able to genuinely roleplay their personality and having to change it to fit the restrictions given by the game.

Like, your personality is basically fixed in place, it's not a protagonist you can roleplay but rather a predetermined one with your skin on. You have some variety of lines but they're within, well, the same personality: friendly/empathetic sarcastic, Clown, stoic sarcastic (sure, it's a generalization, maybe an unfair one, but listen it's how I'd describe it), which sometimes don't even work like they're supposed to: e.g. you'll have a friendly/empathetic Rook sounding more stoic than the actual stoic one in the same dialogue tree.

I would say though that DAtV makes it easier to connect to Rook as a character because again, they're basically a pre-made with a distinct personality, so you can grasp that personality pretty quickly and if it works for you, it works. Inquisitor by comparison can come off bland, especially if you don't construct their personality beforehand and due to the lack of proper origins and an initial other character to bounce off of (Varric to Rook). Generally, the roleplaying aspect is not an issue exclusive to DAtV: I'd say the further we go, the worse it gets. DAO honestly handles it best because: 1. HoF is a "silent" protagonist, which allows more tone/voice speculation + what you say, you say phrasing-wise 2. you have origins which help you connect to your character throughout their events and via characters you're related to while still giving you the liberty and space to react to the events with accordance to your character's personality/vibe. 3. generally the amount of dialogue and behavior options: you're a leader, but you're not immediately put into these shoes, and you can go about your party as you want. Like yeah, you have to save the world, you're not given any other choice, but if you don't want to be a good guy, you don't have to. Defile Sacred Ashes and side with the cultists, murder the werewolves, turn dwarves into golems, annihilate the Circle with innocent mages, make a deal with the demon (doom the boy and potentially sacrifice his mother), kill your companions, be stupid.

Now Hawke is a more limited character for obvious reasons, but even they have more variety than Rook: Hawke's relationship with Malcolm will literally be determined by your personality—which is a bit silly tbh, but it's something. Hawke's personality options are distinct enough too, and most of all, you have the option to be a bad person and make bad, outright evil decisions. You can side with slavers in Darktown, you can give Fenris to Danarius (which is a pretty dumb option with a dumber reaction from companions, but it's a choice), you can just be mean in general, have beef with your companions, which will influence their personal quests. Now, is Hawke the best character for roleplaying? I don't think so, but it's still more variety than whatever DAtV gives us.

As Rook, you just can't be an asshole, can't ever argue with companions, disagree on things (which has been said by many others atp), and generally you can't do truly bad, evil decisions. I'm gonna be real, DAI doesn't always give you this choice either. DAI also doesn't allow you to be like, stupid stupid for example cause you have to be a leader of currently one of the most if not the most powerful organization in Thedas, aside from the Chantry itself, but you can say dumb shit here and there, and you can do bad things too: you can be a cruel and ruthless leader, you can be an asshole and execute people for your amusement, like hell, order Cullen to take lyrium (obviously a bad choice, imo this quest should have some immediate repercussions, like some actual penalty for the Inquisition if Cullen is in withdrawal), give Vivienne the wrong vivern's heart, force Blackwall to keep lying about his identity, generally influence your companions to make questionable decisions. And no matter what you do, your choices won't be approved by all your companions: sometimes they will argue with you, question you on them, mention how they think you fucked up on low approval.

Rook though? No, Rook is always a good guy, Rook can't be bad, Rook is a hero. Rook has to be a hero. In the narrative and in companions' eyes. Whatever happens it's fine eventually. Oh, you're a crow? You're still a hero, you did a good job, you made the right choice, and those bad bad higher-ups condemned you for doing so. I get that some factions would limit you to being basically a good guy, like Shadow Dragons, because it requires your character to have a strong moral compass to be in an oppositional organization with the goal to abolish slavery and defeat corruption in Tevinter, and it's totally fine, but when ALL factions make you out to be a hero.. it just. Well it sucks? It feels like one backstory reskinned basically.

And even if all faction options in their nature were a predisposition for you to be someone with a strong moral compass (say, every faction would be like Shadow Dragons in nature), it doesn't mean you wouldn't have the capacity to be wrong, have biases, and make bad decisions. You can fight for good causes (or believe you do) but still be an asshole and commit heinous things. You can simply be someone rude and angry or just a terrible friend, independent of your moral/political stances. Even if you're a Hero.

And even if we argue that being a good guy specifically is what the story requires of Rook, why make a story—an RPG—that limits you so badly? And how good and impactful can a story about regrets be where you can be no wrong and nothing is essentially your fault, nor framed as such?

[anistarrose]

The thing about the "fridged" trope is that obviously you can't have a female love interest dying as a defining moment for a male character because that's not feminist, but you also can't have a male love interest dying as a defining moment for a female character because then she's just going to have an arc revolving around her relationship with a man and that's also not feminist, and you also can't kill off a love interest from a gay relationship or a relationship involving a nonbinary person because that's burying your queers, which is at least as bad as misogyny if not even worse, and now suddenly you can't kill off romantic partners at all in stories because no matter the demographics, it's going to be problematic somehow, which is... a pretty ridiculous limitation to impose on storytelling.

And, like, it would be satisfying to have a solution other than "it depends on context if not straight-up vibes, and it's usually very reasonable for audience members to have a range of opinions on the execution of one specific instance," but. Yeah, you do kind of have to just vibe check it in a deeply subjective manner sometimes.