#have i mentioned i love them yet bc I do

[lizord-lord]

They are high school mean girls. to ME.

(I will continue to give the distortion a different outfit in every single picture I draw them in it is my RIGHT as an artist)

[seventh-district]

Making Incorrect H:SR Quotes Until I Run Out of (hopefully) Original Ideas - Pt. 4 - Nuthin' but Boothill Edition

[Pt. 1] [Pt. 2] [Pt. 3] [Pt. 5] [Pt. 6]

[citrusai]

taash said "they were doing it" and people ran with the interpretation of an npc that doesn't know solas or the history of the elvhenan even when bellara interjected and said, no, that's not right. that's not how it was for the elvhenan. they formed bonds before they had physical bodies. and people ran to doompost or create weird anti-solavellan shit even though mythal & solas refer to each other as old friends and when she releases him there is no tenderness or love in it. it is the act of unchaining a dog from his post, the stepping down of a general. but to each their own ig.

[cozylittleartblog]

idk if I've said it before, but your portrayals of both Rouxls and Queen are among my favorites, and the way they are when you combine the two is the sole thing that got me to say "yes" to queenkaard. When I first saw it in the game and it started catching on as a ship, I was like "nooo I hc him as gay," but then after seeing your stuff I was like "oh nvm I totally see this now."

i think hearing "i didn't see this ship before, but after your art i understand it and/or even ship it myself" is one of the nicest compliments i get, because it makes me feel like i'm representing something meaningful and sweet about a pairing and having people understand what i think is so great and captivating about them. i've gotten a couple asks like this and sometimes i forget to respond but i always really appreciate them :) thank you very much

[themyscirah]

Complaining abt Suicide Squad yet again but the fact that they have Waller exposing the alien community to space racist attacks and talking abt how she got to her position through deceit and being a terrible person and stuff is just. Ahsfiwueh JUST SAY YOU DONT KNOW WALLER.

Anyways literally the 3rd mission of the Squad ever (and the first framed as smth Waller picked and not orders from above) was the Squad discrediting and stopping a rogue vigilante who was only arresting POC and funneling white people into white supremacy groups (of which he was the most prominent member) in SUICIDE SQUAD #4. and it's explicitly framed as this mission being personal for Waller that she's hiding from the government bc its illegal like. Guys. Please why are we having her incite (space bc comics) racist attacks now

Also the whole "Amanda got her position through deceit and being a terrible person" NO. she KEPT her position through being shitty and playing complicated political games!!! She wasn't always that way like there is a difference and it is IMPORTANT ppl PLEASEEEE. In Secret Origins #14 we learn Amanda's backstory and she used to be a normal, caring person! Like even after she entered into working in government and politics she wasn't automatically morally bankrupt like please people. She was originally given control of the Squad by Reagan (*sigh* 80s comics...) to distract and get rid of her because she was so successful at pushing progressive social policy in Congress. Acting like she's this static pillar of evil is such a waste of her character and so fucking uninteresting and disrespectful to her arc it drives me MAD.

Like I am NOT saying Waller is all sunshine and rainbows, she fucking SUCKS (said w love <3) but like there's a human being there. It's a progression, she has a character arc like please, DC, please!!! They've fucked up Waller so bad and made her so opaque and uninteresting she can't even be the protagonist of her own story for fucks sake!

Like I don't know how many times I have to scream it until DC hears me or remembers but WALLER IS THE MAIN CHARACTER OF SUICIDE SQUAD. ITS HER BOOK. yet right now she's a cutout to be used as the villain wherever the writers please. Even in her book we get none of her perspective really displayed, no exploration of her thoughts with any kind of understanding of the role she traditionally has played and was made to play in the story.

[blossoms-phan]

i still haven’t processed the last few preshows bc wtf do you mean they went to six flags and phil cried after riding kingda ka

[ismyteadoneyet]

How fortunate am I to have so many Things to love and be excited about, to appreciate and look forward to?

Things I feel so strongly about that they stumble into my mind, univited, at random times of the day? Things that spill into my speech and vocabulary without me noticing? Things that impact my vision to the point where everywhere I look, everywhere I go, I see ghosts of them?

How lucky am I to have so many Things I love and cherish enough for them to reshape my very person, change my beliefs and make me grow? Things that make my own loved ones see the Things out in the wild, and go out of their way to make sure I see them too?

How wonderful is it that I have Things that I love so much that the very act is deemed and dubbed "not normal", making my love for them seem like it's more than they are supposed to recieve? An out-of-the-ordinary and above-the-norm appreciation for the Things that make the people around me shake their heads, call me "silly".

My dear, beloved Things, may I always stay silly for you ❤️

[moeblob]

What Deacon thinks: what did that mean? did he want me to wear a collar too? why else would he mention my neck? i mean, if he /asked/ me i would wear one but he didn't so would wearing one be weird?

What Ymber meant: It's nice to be near someone who isn't tethered to this world to serve it with a physical reminder for all to see.

[guinevereslancelot]

starting to kind of date someone right before christmas is so stressful fr. do i get him a gift or what we've been on two dates but i'm seeing him tonight n it's christmas eve.....but what if he didn't get me anything then it will be weird.....

[dyketennant]

oh i can already tell i’m about to have some really unpopular opinions about the edge of sleep tv show

[dimiclaudeblaigan]

Another reason why the whole "forced marriages" concept (that Rhea haters ate up like pie) is bullshit.

Speaking for Faerghus, since this seems to be an issue players point the finger at Faerghus for, it's just... not true? This NPC does understand there are political implications to his marriage, but he wasn't forced into it and neither was his wife. They married for love.

The only known case of an arranged marriage prospect within Faerghus' known cast is Ingrid, and that's something Ingrid has taken on for herself as well. She knows her lands struggle with crops and that her people go hungry. She's choosing to deal with a non-romantic marriage for her people.

But what about Glenn, you ask? There are two aspects to that:

The marriage was arranged when Ingrid was born, but it's worth noting the marriage was arranged between Gunnar and a childhood friend's son. She wasn't just being married off to just anyone. It was both a childhood friend (who Gunnar clearly had deep trust in)'s son, but also a family member of the royal family's right hand family. But what about the Houses paralogue, you ask? Gunnar wasn't aware of the man's crimes, but as soon as he found out he rejected the proposal. Gunnar cares about his daughter's happiness and wellbeing. The only reason they're searching for a marriage candidate is because Galatea lands desperately need the financial support.

Ingrid is the only case we know of where she's being "married off" (her endings rebuke this entirely anyway because she does end up marrying for love if paired with someone). Nobody else in Faerghus had a marriage forced or politically forced on them (and frankly I still fail to understand how the Church is supposedly at fault for concept of this being the case period anyway). Dimitri, the literal prince and at the time of birth immediate heir to the throne, was never forced to marry. Felix has never been pushed to marry. Sylvain has never been pushed to marry (despite how important it is that they continue that bloodline). Annette, a female, has never been pushed to marry.

In other words, the major political players have never put their kids into arranged marriage with a single exception of necessity for one family (Galatea), and in Rodrigue's case with Glenn, it was done with a childhood friend's lands' welfare in mind. Gunnar could have married Ingrid to anyone at any point, but the most important aspect of it is that when it was arranged without her say so (i.e. at her birth), it was done with the son of a man who Gunnar trusted implicitly.

After Glenn died, Ingrid was plenty old enough to have a say so in who she might be married to. Presumably the issue wasn't pushed on her for a while after Glenn died for emotional reasons, but once they tried again, Ingrid had a say in things. Her father sent her letters specifically for her input. No, she doesn't want to marry for political reasons, but she understands how much her lands need it. Still though, her father won't force her to marry some scumbag. If she tells him she won't marry someone, he accepts that.

In other words, the only argument that can be used for "forced marriages" falls flat on its face. It's not a regular practice in Faerghus. None of the heirs to specific territories are being married against their will. The only instance we know about isn't so extreme that Gunnar is just going for it and picking the best dowry without considering his daughter's happiness and health.

The one time it was decided before she was old enough to give her input, Gunnar didn't need to "consider" marriage prospects and be unsure who to pick, because it was planned between two old friends who trusted each other and presumably felt that their child would be safe with the other family in question.

My biggest problem with people saying this claim is supported is that for the most part, people just take Claude's words in GW at pure face value and assume it's absolute, definite truth when he gives nor has any evidence to back it up (mainly because he blames it on the Church, which still doesn't make sense because such things are out the Church's jurisdiction. No amount of "seeing what the world is like without Rhea" is going to change Faerghus' politics, so even if his claims were true, Claude would have to go talk to every single individual territory within Faerghus to realize the truth if he's that dead set on his view of this, as each territory does its own thing politically).

He brings it up like it's a fact in Faerghus, which as I've said before, he has literally no knowledge whatsoever about Faerghus, and it shows. He doesn't even know extremely basic things, such as the previous king literally dying in the middle of making friends with a foreign land. He knows that Lambert died in Duscur during the Tragedy, and that's... basically the extent of his knowledge and understanding about it. For some reason though in Hopes, he thinks he understands Faerghus as well as he understands Almyra.

It's also annoying because in Fodlan games, a character can just say something - literally anything at all - and it's eaten up immediately and taken at pure face value with no thoughts actually put into questioning its validity. And before anyone says "but Dimitri didn't argue this in Zaharas!" yeah, I'm aware, and I feel that was a huge reason why that chapter, trying to be the "we fight as allies this once" chapter, was a total flop, aside from other things (particularly in the SB/GW department with Dimitri and magically wanting to "talk things over" with someone who had just murdered one of his dearest friends mere hours ago tops in SB, or in GW where politics would demand more from him).

The games have a problem with trying to introduce false concepts through characters who don't know better (i.e. introducing incorrect perspectives that we're meant to understand are just perspectives and not the truth nor fact) but then not refuting those claims, despite the game itself as the story progresses outright denying those things, whether outright or passively (in the latter's case, again, other important political figures having no talks of marriage on the table at all).

In the screenshots, the NPC is aware that politics have to get involved with his marriage, but he wasn't forced to marry and neither was she. Not only does he mention it, but he wants people to know they married for love. He's basically saying he doesn't want people to misinterpret their reasons for marriage (wanting land, wealth, etc).

In Ingrid's case, it was started with that goal in mind, but it started out in safe hands. After that she always had a say in who she might marry, and ultimately didn't marry for political reasons. The one person who was possibly going to marry for political reasons in Faerghus and not out of love ends up not even doing that.

Honestly, in Claude's case, I feel like he was just written with no purpose in mind except to rock the boat unnecessarily, because everything he claims in regard to Faerghus is purely speculation on his part. He knows absolutely nothing about Faerghus (in both games, but his ignorance in Houses isn't malicious, whereas you could argue in Hopes he's attempting to overthrow what he believes are their systems when even if they were, it would still be none of his business) but talks like he's lived there or spoken to its people who make the decisions he claims are happening.

Also, the concept of Dimitri being forced to do this that and the other thing are just... not true? Dimitri is happy to be able to help others and make reforms for his lands. He likes that he's able to have the power to make good change and help people. He knows that you need a certain degree of power to be able to push things in a better direction and to have a voice. By having the most important voice, he can make other voices known that otherwise would not be. When people have no choice but to listen to the king, he can demand that other voices are heard.

Even in his A support with Shez, he believes his happiest moment will be when he dies after dedicating his life to "a peaceful kingdom full of joyous citizens". I get the whole "but he isn't living for himself!" side of things, but this part of this post is specifically about how Dimitri is supposedly "forced" into doing things because he's king; but plain and simple, he wants to be king because by having the highest power in his land, he can make positive change happen

"This bad thing is happening in the Kingdom!" Well now he can change that. He wants to change things in his land for the better, and he understands that his position is a necessity for that. That's why he's so upset when he's "rendered powerless by age" in Houses, i.e. can't ascend the throne yet. He wanted to make change and couldn't. He wanted to do right for the Kingdom, but he couldn't yet.

Basically what I'm saying is that people keep using Claude's Hopes rhetoric as "fact", but literally none of it is. It's all based on the most severe amount of ignorance in both games and him for some reason believing that he knows jack shit about Faerghus. That includes the marriage "issue", which while I'd say it may exist in Adrestia (ex. Bernadetta being planned to marry Ferdinand), does not exist in Faerghus as any sort of "issue".

I don't recall if it's really even present in Leicester? So either... Claude just pulled that argument out of his absolute ass, or he's seeing an issue in Leicester and for some reason assuming his country's politics are every country's politics, which is, again, total ignorance (and he makes no effort to ever found out if any of that is true).

[archondorian]

does anyone know of any witcher fic that includes accurate horse care. asking for a friend

[thegreatyin]

vake yearner anon here! that is SO cool (and tragic) tysm for clearing it up :D! in the time between me sending the ask and you answering it, i thought it was because she wanted to go back to the surface, and apparently dying within the neath makes surface travel illegal(?). which reminded me of lark, the guy having an arranged marriage. he's died at least once, right? does he know about the whole no-surface thing?

lark very much knows about the "no surface thing"! it's a little more complicated than surface travel simply being illegal, though... at least not by the standards of humanity.

you've mentioned you're new to fallen london, so i'll omit the finer lore details for the sake of brevity and spoiler avoidance. essentially, dying in the neath means you can no longer come into contact with sunlight- if you do, you burn up and die for good. no slow boat, no second chances, nothing. the minute your body perishes in the neath, you're forced to stay there for the rest of your days. it's why surfacers are relatively rare to find, and why most londoners can't leave no matter how much they want to.

and lark wants to. desperately.

see, lark originally intended for his stay in the neath to last a month or two at maximum. he was planning on going in, committing a few mildly significant acts of robbery, and getting the hell out. he very much did not intend to die, and he very much did not intend to stick around to the extent he has now.

except, well. accidentally falling off the edge of the travertine spiral tends to do pretty significant damage to one's livelihood. and neck. and pretty much every other part of their body.

and thus lark woke up on the shore of london several weeks later with a missing eye, a new acquaintanceship with the boatman, and a complete and utter inability to go home.

forever.

he's. not happy about it!! he's really not happy about it!!! it's a whole thing!!!! he tried to go on a diamond heist (aka started the light fingers ambition) specifically to pay for an egregiously expensive mythical cure-all that could get him the heck out of here!!!!!!!

it has not gone well for him so far. it will continue to not go well for him for a very, very long time.

but yeah, TLDR, if you die in the neath you're eternally stuck in the neath (because sunlight automatically tries to kill you). and while the yearner hasn't necessarily died before... let's just say she's banned from the surface for. Other Reasons. the very same reasons (and forces) that control the no-dying policy. but the relationship between light and law and the sun is a whole other suitcase to unpack. all you need to know is that sunlight is very very very bad for neathly folk and testing your luck by trying to go up once you've died is a very very very VERY bad idea.

she wouldn't want to go back anyway. d█████ has never been a surface kind of creature.

[linagram]

the tragic case of linagram 2 ships

[verdantdaises]

Important question, do you write them as dogs or as people?

Good question!!! I deliberately leave it ambiguous bc I don’t really care what people picture in their heads like idc truly ahaha

Either way they have some fur and are dog men or are humans and have skin it doesn’t matter to me, I do mention skin a bit but people can interpret it however they want :))

[themyscirah]

This is technically a Diana's age poll but I framed it partially around Julia's rescue because that's the event I need to contextualize and whether or not Diana is a thing yet is p important for my purposes. I would keep the Pérez run and postcrisis continuity in mind when answering this bc that's when this is relevant but I'd keep in mind that even though Diana is very young there (like early 20s) we don't know I don't think if she ages differently as a child (esp as a themysciran AND being made from clay) and in some versions she is older than she looks and was made earlier

Edit: I accidentally logic-ed this out in the tags lol 🤦‍♀️but feel free to still vote however you want. Going to publish this anyway bc I think I made some good points later in my tags