#like i aspire to write an antagonist that interesting

[sassygwaine]

mr priest is such a cool fucking villain

[theelmoarchive]

Sanders Sides theory (rant). I know im mainly a mh acc here but I have thoughts i need to get out there

(just fyi this theory is Roman centric, I know most TSS people nowadays are talking ab Orange and Logan so if Roman's not interesting then continue on 🔥🔥)

(Also slight TW, talking ab the sides "ducking out" and depression themes, so yeah👍👍)

Okay so. I was scrolling through Sanders Sides theories and found that no one seems to have this theory, even though I thought the Roman angst enjoyers like me would be writing this all over the place but. Ig that means I need to talk about it.

I've had this theory for years now, since the day I first watched SVS Redux.

I think Roman is going to duck out.

I dont know if I have to explain why but. I mean, just looking at the explosive end SVS Redux had will tell you a lot.

He doesn't belive Patton when he tells him they love him. He thinks Thomas has lost all faith in him in favor of the person Roman views as the epitome of evil. He's been switching views left and right to stay on Patton's side (because Thomas prides himself on his morals), but he always ends up doing something wrong - he always ends up as an antagonist. He no longer believes that he is the one thing that being has kept him stable since "Am I Original?" - Thomas' hero. The only side he has a stable and positive relationship with is VIRGIL of all people. And tbh that could quickly be ruined too. Logan is second, though, but that's EXTREMELY fragile, as we've seen.

Roman always does something wrong and it will and has sent him over the edge. From Roman's perspective, with a very flawed view of everyone around him, he is inherently the thing that flaws Thomas.

+ Roman is really dramatic obviously, so ofc he would do this.

When you look at Virgil's reasonings for ducking out, it seems plausible after everything Roman has gone through recently, too. I mean like:

"I quit. Decided it wasn't worth it anymore"

Why would Roman keep fighting a battle he knows he will never win?

"Well, It didn’t seemed like I was wanted. You all made that pretty clear any time I showed up."

Again, from Roman's perspective, he is constantly and consistently antagonized.

"If I wanted to stand around being insulted, I would've shown up I would've shown up in person like I usually do."

[same thing]

"I actually think you were right to not want me around."

Roman fears that he is becoming the villain (as we see in SVS, SVS Redux and DWIT).

(In fact, Roman has already said something quite similar to that last one in sentiment.

In SVS Redux, Roman says this, which is pretty funny because of the dramatics and the stupidity, and does get shot down quickly, but I am begging you to listen to him.

"The blame falls to me. If you're missing that do-gooder drive... I think It's because I'm in the driver seat... And I'm an awful driver... Perhaps... Perhaps I should let Patton take the wheel.")

(2nd sidenote to the Virgil quotes, can we talk ab Thomas' acting again I just love how tired Virgil is in AA. He's so. Troubled. I love him.)

WAIT ALSO I FORGOT TO ADD THIS UNTIL I WAS AB TO POST IT-

"I've always aimed to protect you,"

THIS!! First of all his face makes me so sad BUT SECOND OF ALL yeah. Roman core idk what else to say, you get it right.

"I thought I was your hero."

So yeah.

Anyway, I think the episode where Roman does this will be centered around depression. Without Roman, Thomas is depressed. Let me explain this further.

Roman is Thomas' creativity, imagination, ego, passion, love, wills and wants, hopes and dreams, aspirations and enthusiasm.

Without any of that, what is left? A guy who can't even will himself out of bed, but can still feel the nagging voice of reason and logic telling him how unreasonable he's being. A guy who cant will himself to talk to friends, family and loved ones, but can still feel sorrow for letting them down and worrying them. A guy who can't will himself to pursue creative content that he relies on for a living but can still feel anxious about letting millions of people down and never being able to create again. A guy who cant even make food for himself or brush his teeth, but still knows he NEEDS to take care of himself. A guy whose only creativity is activly trying to disturb and scare him.

So yeah thats really awesome idk.

Furthermore, I think the sides might be SEVERELY impacted.

It has been said many times over the series that the sides are purely figments of Thomas' IMAGINATION. so. Without Roman, I doubt anything would be left. Obviously, if Roman does duck out, I don’t think they'd all immediately just cease to exist because an episode still needs to occur, but I find it likely that they'd all start slowly fading or maybe even "malfunctioning", glitching, putting them on a timer to get back Roman and making it far more tense.

Is this theory weird?????? I feel like it's the natural progression TO ME but I've seen no one even getting near this and im just confused ghfhfhfh. Maybe it is kind of weird and im just too much of a Roman enthusiast. SORRY I LOVE ANNOYING WEIRDO FREAKS!!!! AND IF I WAS HIM ID DUCK OUT TOO BECAUSE NO ONE IS APPRECIATING HIM ☹️☹️☹️ EVEN THOUGH HE'S LITERALLY WHAT MAKES THOMAS DO THINGS. 🙄🙄🙄🙄

Anyway.

I also think it fits really well because of Prinxiety's parallels, such as:

(using the ship name just as a duo name because that's what I usually do I am not trying to push the prinxiety agenda although I am a fan of it ghfyfgfh)

"Thanks everyone... Well, almost everyone."

And

"I mean, it's cool to see you all trying to be helpful. Well most if you, but-"

The only difference in these two is obviously that Virgil just silently ducks out, while Roman has the entire "You make us better" speech, probably effectivly saving Virgil and Thomas, because it seems like Virgil was going to insist.

(Also another sidenote that I think everyone will agree with: WE NEED A "YOU MAKE US BETTER" SPEECH BY VIRGIL FOR ROMAN that is all)

Also. Who can forget.

Virgil saying that he tried to "duck out" and then

"That's a thing you can do?"

😐

Do you understand what I'm saying. Do you. Huh.

Okay anyway.

Idk how to end this I feel like theres still more I wanna say but i forgot. In conclusion: prin up that xiety. Reminder that FWSA was real and not a fever dream. I lied this is actually prinxiety propaganda.

But Hey That's Just A Theory. A really quite depressing and sad theory. Thanks for tumbling down a hill with me 🫶

[saintsenara]

You mentioned fanon turning barty crouch jr. into an uninteresting character. I don't know much about what the new fanon characterisation has really done with him, but I'm curious for your thoughts on why he's a canonically interesting character. I agree that he is, but it sounds like you might have some interesting thoughts on it that are already fleshed out.

thank you for the ask, @jamesunderwater, and i'm sorry for taking so long to drag myself around to answering this.

as you may have gathered if you’ve read my views on jegulus or wolfstar, the common fanon interpretation of marauders-era characters and i don’t really get on.

this is not a new development - me and goofy fanon sirius have been beefing for over a decade at this point, i fear - but our enmity has taken on a new form since [roughly] 2020, when the emergence of what we might call the modern marauders subfandom brought with it a whole series of expectations about characters, ships, personalities, and appearances in first war stories which - let me state my position immediately - have absolutely nothing to do with the characters as they are in canon.

i could talk about sirius or regulus or james or snape or lupin until the cows come home - as, i’m sure, could many of us - but i also dislike the expectations the marauders subfandom has around its supporting cast. these characters - who largely fall under the categories of women, slytherins, or both - have names that we might recognise from canon, but they are - to all intents and purposes - original characters.

to do some marauders fan defending, i do understand the rationale behind this. hogwarts is a school, and it needs to be filled with the sort of incidental characters that lightning-era writers can pull from the canon text [shoutout to ernie macmillan, the mvp]. if you’re writing about lily, then she needs friends - why not have them be alice, marlene, dorcas, emmeline, pandora etc.?

[well, because dumbledore isn’t running a child army. it makes no sense for the entire order of the phoenix to be in the same school year - and the idea that alice is probably around ten years older than lily, that pandora is around the same age as narcissa malfoy and isn’t a pureblood, and that marlene, dorcas, and emmeline are hard-nosed ministry bitches in their fifties who can have mad-eye moody quaking with just a look is something which can be prised from my cold, dead hands.]

and if you’re writing about the epic highs and lows of high-school football going to school during a sectarian conflict, then you need some antagonists. which is to say, you need some slytherins.

the issue i have is that the three key slytherins who seem to have been elevated to principal cast in the marauders pantheon - regulus black, barty crouch jr., and evan rosier - get what can only be called the smol bean treatment. that is, that three teenagers who all canonically join a terror organisation are turned into soft and tiny babies who thought lord voldemort was just feeling silly when he said, "my aim is the eradication of the muggleborn population through violent means."

and even fics which do acknowledge that the three willingly become terrorists often go out of their way to provide justifications for this which don’t contextualise their decision [something which is important - you can’t write about snape becoming a death eater without acknowledging the way that poverty, loneliness, and a sense of hopelessness make someone an easy target of radicalisation] but which minimise it. sometimes, their violence is turned into romantic vengeance - i’ve seen a fair amount of suggestions that barty goes to torture the longbottoms because frank was the auror who killed evan. sometimes, authors imply - or even outright state - that there’s no need to see these boys as aspiring villains: voldemort is right; the class system is good and should be maintained; and purebloods [usually james, sirius, regulus, barty, evan and maybe a token woman or two] should stick together while the half-breeds and the mudbloods go hang.

this - like all aristocracy wank in this fandom - annoys me enough with regulus and evan. but it’s particularly grating when it comes to barty crouch jr. because - unlike evan, who is literally just a name in the text, and regulus, who isn’t much more - he actually has a canon personality.

and it’s fascinating. indeed, i would even go so far as to say that barty crouch jr. is the greatest villain in the harry potter series.

[my apologies to lord voldemort.]

after all, even though he’s been imprisoned under the imperius curse for over a decade, barty is still so lucid and powerful that he is able to:

produce magic capable of tricking the goblet of fire, which is treated by all the adult characters involved as unprecedented.

pull off a year-long impersonation of a man whom dumbledore evidently knows extremely well without being clocked until his mission has been successful, even though his opportunities to observe the real moody can have been virtually non-existent. he is in character within seconds of his ambush on moody’s home - after the intruder-alert dustbins are set off - and is able to persuade ministry personnel who can be presumed to have met moody personally [including both amos diggory and arthur weasley, who appear to know him not only personally, but well] that he is the real deal. he maintains his performance even under close scrutiny from the teaching colleagues he has to interact with daily at hogwarts, despite the fact that he presumably can’t get a great deal out of the real moody, since he’s having to be kept deliberately weak and docile under the imperius curse.

manipulate multiple people into become accessories to his crimes, without ever being suspected of doing so. with the hindsight of knowing who he is, the first defence against the dark arts lesson in goblet of fire, in which "moody" deliberately distresses neville by using the cruciatus curse directly in front of him, before swooping in to be the person to cheer him up so that he can plant information which will help harry win the triwizard tournament and deliver him to voldemort, is chilling. he just gets unlucky that harry has the biggest martyr complex in human history.

commit murder on hogwarts’ grounds without ever being suspected of wrongdoing.

execute lord voldemort’s plan to kidnap harry and use him in his resurrection ritual flawlessly. the plan itself may be convoluted - but dark lords are allowed to have a flair for the dramatic, as a treat - but, crucially, it works, and barty succeeds in every respect.

but, i concede, we’re talking about the adult barty here. perhaps he was once a sweetheart who went unfortunately off the rails after his father sent him to prison and then - in effect - drugged him for years. that wouldn’t be a ridiculous suggestion.

except for the fact that - canonically - the teen barty was just as clever, sly, manipulative, and - above all - ardent in his support for voldemort as his adult self.

at his trial in the early 1980s, young barty gives the performance of a lifetime. he screams, he shakes, he looks terrified of the dementors, he is pale and weak and harmless-looking, he begs his mother to help him, he pleads with his father for mercy, he maintains his innocence as he's dragged off to his cell. he gives off the impression of simply having been in the wrong place at the wrong time so well that harry is almost certain that his conviction is illegitimate. so too, it is implied, is dumbledore.

indeed, barty plays the part of the wrongfully imprisoned so well that - as canon tells us - he not only influences public opinion to be broadly in favour of his probable innocence [or, at least, his diminished culpability - sirius suggests that the widespread view was that he was probably there, but that he only ended up involved in what was clearly bellatrix’s idea because of his father’s failure to relate to him properly], but also changes public opinion against the government’s anti-death-eater strategy entirely.

following his imprisonment, his father - a man who never met an extrajudicial punishment he didn’t like, and whose ruthless approach to dealing with the death eaters in the first war [such as his use of internment for suspected terrorists and his order to aurors to shoot to kill] was, we are told, enormously popular with the wizarding public - is forced to resign in disgrace from his role as head of the department of magical law enforcement. crouch sr. is quietly shuffled off into a boring bureaucratic position, his ambitions to be minister in tatters, and his only way forward to free his son from the prison cell where he is languishing for the crime he very literally did.

[as an aside, i do think that we are supposed to read bellatrix as the ringleader of the torture of the longbottoms. but, all too often, that gets reduced to her doing everything while rodolphus, rabastan, and barty just stand there gormlessly. they were clearly performing the curses too!]

now, barty’s unusual cunning can - of course - be explained by narrative reasons. the text needs to conceal that he’s the villain [since, as with philosopher’s stone, it wants to imply that the dark lord’s faithful servant at hogwarts is snape] until the very end - and this naturally requires dumbledore to not think too hard about whether his good judy alastor is behaving even more strangely than usual.

the text also needs to suggest that he's innocent in order to properly stick the landing on the narrative role of his father - barty crouch sr. as with dolores umbridge in order of the phoenix, crouch sr. exists to show harry [and the reader] that the rot in the wizarding world was not caused by - and will not stop with the defeat of - voldemort. his ruthlessness and inflexibility, his lack of respect for due process, his astonishingly cruel treatment of winky [brutal beyond even the standard way in which wizards abuse their enslaved elves] all serve to teach harry that the anti-voldemort cause can become just as easily corrupted as the disillusioned young men in voldemort’s orbit. the suggestion that crouch sent his own son to azkaban without good reason, simply because he would not deviate from his beliefs, is an important lesson to harry about what "justice" actually means.

but, despite this, barty is also able to pull off his deception because he’s spectacularly talented. it’s not all just narrative.

and his talents are caused by characteristics which aren’t good or bad in and of themselves. he’s clearly very intelligent [he got twelve owls, the series’ benchmark for genius]. he’s hyper-observant, creative, adaptable, good under pressure, and possessed of nerves of steel. he shares these traits with other villains in the series - voldemort above all - but he also shares them with plenty of the heroes. harry, for one.

which is to say that all of his personality traits could be put to non-criminal uses. but - as with harry, who is capable of being quite sinister when he wants to be [for example, when he manipulates slughorn into giving up the horcrux memory] - they would give a non-criminal barty an edge. and this doesn’t seem to be present in his standard fanon persona - as sweet and goofy as all marauders-era men - to any great extent.

finally, there is another aspect of barty’s character which is absent from his fanon version - that he clearly has some sort of childhood trauma, but that this does not excuse any of what he does.

even though crouch sr. is right to send him to azkaban, he was clearly also a cold and distant father, who had absolutely no idea how to relate to his son.

[as another aside, this emotional negligence is bad enough without it needing to be written as having been accompanied by extreme physical and/or sexual abuse. there seems to be a real tendency in fanfiction - not only in marauders-era stuff, although the exaggeration of orion and walburga black into despotic villains is one example of this - to make childhood misery "worse", in order to justify a character’s later actions.]

voldemort demonstrably uses barty’s terrible relationship with crouch sr. [and his absolutely flagrant daddy kink] to groom him into taking the dark mark [not least because there’s otherwise no explanation for why he cheerfully informs him that he too is named after his dad], which he may very well end up taking when he’s still at school. my reading is that he’s recruited to inform on his father - since voldemort would undoubtedly wish to keep the head of the department of magical law enforcement under constant surveillance - and that this is why the dark lord pays him the attention he is so obviously lacking.

but, as with snape and regulus and draco malfoy and all the other young death eaters, barty also colludes in his own radicalisation. voldemort is a master at ensnaring recruits, sure, but he’s also a busy man. he only bothers to make the effort because the clever, creative, cunning, manipulative young man - who wishes to avenge himself on the father who never paid him attention [sound familiar?] - he finds before him is very much determined to become a spectacular part of his terrorist organisation. and stories which feature him owe it to him to give him that dark complexity of character

show the series�� best villain some respect.

[pattydia]

Hey so (sort of complicated question; I apologize because I’ve been thinking about this today and I agree with you about strange darling), what are your thoughts regarding: feminism re: strange darling and gone girl? Because they both sort of tackle the same subject- women faking being assaulted- but one of them is written by a woman. I personally think gone girl is more feminist than strange darling, which I think has issues in that regard; but I’d be interested to hear your take!

such a good question thank you anon. i have been thinking about this for hours and my thoughts are still not going to be that coherent but here goes:

okay so first and foremost i think female characters SHOULD be allowed to be multifaceted and selfish and murderous and evil!!! there’s no reason that every woman in media should be some sort of glowing endorsement for ~women as a whole~ because a) BORINGGG and b) god knows male characters aren’t held to that standard!!!

my issue with strange darling’s woman protagonist (antagonist?) is not with her actions (because: fiction) but rather with the fact that she seems to be the projection of some kind of misogynistic fantasy that the writer/director holds. women doing bad things is not the issue; using a woman doing bad things as a GOTCHA! moment is.

to me it feels like mollner is getting his kicks from making up a type of woman to get mad at — a woman who offers sex and then rescinds it, a woman who lies about being assaulted — because these are literally the worst things a man can imagine a woman doing to them. the fact that she’s a murderer is almost secondary; her REAL crime is that she’s fucking men over!

because of that i don’t view gone girl in the same way even though it tackles similar themes. idrk what makes a feminist film or if every movie with female leads should be aspiring to be a feminist film but …. women writing complex women characters will always get at a layer of honesty that men simply cannot access because it comes from the personal experience of living in this world as a woman!

anyways, i struggle with strange darling because its plot relies so heavily on “upending” gender stereotypes in a lazy way that doesn’t say anything more than ‘lol you THOUGHT it was the MAN who was bad cause he’s a MAN but ACTUALLY it’s this BITCH WOMAN!!’ and then the scene with the cops towards the end is so ham-handed in its ‘woman believes fellow woman; is PROVEN WRONG like an IDIOT while level-headed MAN was CORRECT ALL ALONG!’ messaging that it’s kind of laughable.

this isn’t to say that i didn’t find the film interesting or entertaining. i think it’s beautifully shot and well acted but suffers from a weird and heavy-handed script. i won’t lie my perception of it was heavily clouded on my first watch by shirtless and bloodied kyle gallner but now i am seeing more clearly!!

[anti-katsuki-lounge]

So while browsing Reddit, I can across a very interesting post that was posted on the Writing Tips subreddit. An aspiring author wanted to write an antagonist turning heel and was curious about what crimes a character would have to commit to be considered irredeemable. One of the answers stuck out to me:

“Reformation isn’t redemption”.

In a previous post of mine, I outlined how anyone can dislike a character for whatever reasons they want. One of the points I’ve made is that if a character has done awful things that a reader can’t stomach, they aren’t required to “get over it” when the character tries to fix their behavior and become a better person.

I feel the quote I listed above helps detail this argument when it comes to not only Katsuki, but Endeavor as well. No matter how good their character arc is, no one is obligated to forgive them for their past actions. Sure, Endeavor’s trying to better himself, but that’ll never take away from the fact he abused his family to the point where Shoto was traumatized to the point where he didn’t want to use his flames, Touya nearly burnt himself alive after suffering a mental breakdown, and Rei had to be sent to a mental institution after being pushed to the point where she couldn’t even function properly. Katsuki may be less of a dick now, but that still doesn’t take away from the fact he physically and emotionally abused someone just because he didn’t like him.

Dabi said it best, the past never dies. While Endeavor and Katsuki (ok, maybe not Katsuki, but let’s pretend for a sec that Hori actually tried with Katsuki) are trying to be better people, no one is obligated to forgive them. Is it good that they’re trying to be better? Yes. However, no one is obligated to give them a second chance. They made their decisions in the past and now they must suffer the consequences of those decisions for the rest of their lives. People are allowed to be hesitant and outright resilient in liking Katsuki and Endeavor despite their changes BECAUSE reformation is not redemption.

This goes for real life too. If someone who made you miserable and inflicted trauma on you is trying to be a better person, you’re not obligated to forgive them for their past actions.

Ultimately, I think that’s one thing that Hori gets wrong when writing the “redemption” stories in MHA (I put it in quotes because people use the term redemption story when talking about a character reforming themselves): a “redemption” story is about a character trying to be a better person, not to get the audience/universe to forgive them for their crimes. Hori desperately wants us to forgive Katsuki and Endeavor rather than have them seek atonement. Well, he does have Endeavor admit that he doesn’t deserve forgiveness, but Hori does this thing where he constantly retcons things and has the narrative paint him in a positive light. He doesn’t have it anywhere near as bad as Katsuki does, where the narrative will go out of its way to make Katsuki seem like the most amazing person alive, but it’s still an issue with his arc.

[the-bigger-fish]

You know, I'm not normally the type of guy to post this sort of thing but I really want to get it off my chest....

I really enjoy Viv's shows and general works. Like, for some weird reason Helluva Boss (and to a lesser extent, Viv's body of work as a whole) has become a show i hyper fixate on the likes of which haven't been seen since I was a Transformers Prime and MLP fan back in 2010.... BUT that being said, I also find myself also very critical of her works for a lot of reasons as well. (Not as a hater, but as someone who loves the show and wants to see it improve.)

Which then leads to the reason why I wanted to get this off my chest... Stolas is a good character, heck he might even be a GREAT character..... On paper, that is.... Like, he has all the elements for what could be a really interesting and nuanced character and antagonist of the show (Antagonist meaning "Someone who contends with or opposes the Protagonist, not necessarily meaning he's evil...) Like, having a well meaning, but sheltered, privileged, and ignorant man make a mistake in the throws of passion that causes not just turmoil in his family whom he loves dearly, but also with his friends and many others as well and thus tries to make things up to everyone? That's genuinely an incredibly arc for a guy to go through and honestly quite fitting for a show that aspires to ape plays and theater so much, too. It's just that... The show never really seems to be interested/able to show him going through this arc it seems? Like, I'm not sure if it's a production issue given that animation is hard, a monthly-ish web animation is probably even harder and you can't cover everything you would want to realistically in the show proper. (Which honestly makes me wish we had side comics or prose to compliment the episodes and shorts as well, because it genuinely feels that we missed a chapter or three at times...) But like, it feels like we're told Stolas is one thing (Kind, loving father, ignorant and delusional yes, but does try his best to make things up when he realizes he's screwed up.) and then shown an entirely different character instead. (Coercive, airheaded and easily distracted to the point of forgetting important things like his daughter and the like, classist, and more than a bit obsessive towards Blitzo and way to stuck in his own world to actually be able to right his own wrongs.) And as we all know what Rule 1 of storytelling is, ESPECIALLY visual storytelling like animation:

SHOW, DON'T TELL

Now, I'm not saying Stolas has to be perfect (in all honesty, the fact he's so deeply flawed makes him farm ore engaging in a "Greek Tragedy/Shakespearian type of way fittingly enough) it's just, it feels like the show wants us to view characters and plots in general as one way, while showing us something completely different from what we've been told. (And honestly, that just might be the result of general teething issues regarding the show's hard switch from "Dark comedy where Logic and consistency need not matter as long as the joke lands" to "More serious character drama where actions do have consequences, no matter how far fetched they might be.")

Which isn't to say I'm blindly bashing the show or hating on Stolas or Viv, I think both the show and him has a lot going for it and that some of the more vocal critics take things way too far when it comes to criticizing Stolas and the show, it's just I'm saying this from the bottom of my heart as a fan what my biggest problem with some of my favorite aspects of the show are and hope they can be improved upon because dang it, I really wanna see this show be as great as i know it can be! Same with my birdy boi, too!

(P.S. Stolas totally got his fortune paving the entirety of Hell's roads with his good intentions. That's just facts right there.)

(P.P.S. If this does well enough, maybe I might write more writing critiques and general thoughts as a whole. Let me know what you guys think.)

[allthatmay]

Been doing a lot of thinking about Shanks...

And the more I think about him, the more I consider whether he could be some kind of antagonistic force. (In my heart of hearts? I don't believe it. But speculation is fun!) This is a bit of a jumbled mess of thoughts, but I figure it'll be interesting to write it down and see how wrong I am at the end of the series.

So, here's two predictions I think are pretty likely:

Luffy will destroy Mary Geoise and, with it, Fishman Island and part of the Red Line—thereby creating the All Blue. (I think this is fairly self-explanatory considering Madame Shyarly's premonition.)

Luffy will find the One Piece, but Buggy will become the Pirate King. (Perhaps becoming the Pirate King has some greater meaning/responsibility that Luffy rejects? Whatever the reason, Buggy seems to be heading in that direction—he's essentially been used as a placeholder before, after all, as a Warlord and Emperor.)

When I think about Shanks' role in the future, it's very foggy. We don't know a lot about Shanks, obviously, but if Buggy is to become the Pirate King, then the way they've juxtaposed him with Shanks is interesting. Shanks and Buggy are, like, opposites in terms of ambition (by which I don't mean what they seek, but how they seek it, and how they feel about their ambitions altogether).

[Important note: There's some great posts (try here, here, here, and here) talking about Shanks and Buggy's history. The gist of it is that Buggy never truly believed in himself because of Shanks' obvious potential; that Shanks was a bit of a bully, intentional or not; and that Buggy set his sights on a lesser treasure, never aiming for the OP because of Shanks' existence—only for Shanks give up on heading to Laugh Tale, their dream, altogether.]

Shanks was always the one considered to be Roger's successor; he was the one who got the hat. He shared his aspirations with Buggy, promising they'd go to Laugh Tale together—and then gave it all up when Roger returned from Laugh Tale. Which, of course, hurt Buggy tremendously, alongside all of Shanks' other transgressions (such as the mishap with the Devil Fruit, and losing Buggy's treasure map).

Buggy's feelings for the hat, and for Shanks, sour and complicate as their lives go on, even as they find distance from one another. While I do think Shanks has a lot of regret for what happened with Buggy, he tries to look toward the future, hence the importance of Roger's legacy and the straw hat. Buggy, of course, knows the importance of the straw hat more than anyone—it's why he's so furious to see Luffy with it.

Keeping Buggy in mind, Shanks meeting Luffy becomes more interesting. He gives up the straw hat he loves (that Buggy loves) to a little boy he supposedly loves—but why? Because he sees Roger in Luffy, because he believes Luffy is The One, or because Luffy ate the legendary fruit? Would Shanks, in a universe where Luffy wasn't chosen by the Gum–Gum Fruit, give up his arm to save Luffy? Would he give Luffy the hat? A classic question. I mean, I like to think that he would—I think Shanks comes across as a sentimental, kind man, if a little rough around the edges—but I don't know so.

Besides, simply giving Luffy the hat could be construed as an antagonistic act, as it potentially puts a target on Luffy: the right people will know whose hat that is, and will wonder why he has it. Oda frames it as an inheriting of wills, but it's not like he's not retconned things before! Either way, the feelings Buggy must have when he sees the hat not on Roger, not on Shanks, not on himself—but on Luffy? Some random kid? Fuck.

Fact of the matter is that we all know Shanks saved Luffy, in part, because Luffy ate the fruit. But what if that was the sole reason? What if Shanks saved Luffy simply because he knew that Luffy, as Nika, was the only one who could find/use the One Piece? Perhaps Shanks' plan is to use Luffy to grab power for himself. In a story about governmental oppression and the corruption of those in absolute power, it doesn't seem too far off. Especially if Shanks' past and his mistakes have warped him a little.

Extrapolating from what little we know of Shanks, and of Joy Boy and the Void Century, I'm not sure what Oda will do. The basic possibilities, as I see them, are:

Shanks is an ally to Luffy and gives himself up for Luffy's sake. Perhaps he dies while helping Luffy, potentially before they've had a chance to meet again. (I can see him dying in the fight against Blackbeard or Mary Geoise, for instance.) Or perhaps Oda makes it rhyme: perhaps he's sick like Roger, or something, and he acts in sacrifice, the way Roger did in unleashing the Great Pirate Era.

Shanks acts as an obstacle for Luffy to fight in pursuit of the OP. I think this one makes the least sense because the only reason I could see Shanks doing this is to test Luffy, but he already knows that Luffy is Joy Boy, so there's no point. Then again, we know Shanks has decided to go after the One Piece now...

Shanks is antagonistic, but has a change of heart! By which I mean: Luffy does it again, folks! Shanks is using Luffy as a means to dismantle to world order, after which he can seize a lot of power for himself—but Luffy persuades him against it. (Look, this doesn't make sense with the Shanks I envision, but what do I know, huh?)

Shanks is the antagonist. I mean, I guess we don't know his background, do we? People have long suspected he's of noble birth, having been found in God Valley. Regardless of whether he's working for or against the World Gov, we have no idea how powerful Shanks really is. And, if he's got less than noble ambitions, a small, trusted crew makes sense, I suppose. Yet Blackbeard fills this role pretty neatly: a tale of betrayal in pursuit of power, playing the long game, etc.

Shanks doesn't die and everything is hunky-dory. Look, I don't want my favourite swashbuckling drunkard to die, but this sounds pretty boring, doesn't it? Shanks guides Luffy right to the finish line and everyone cheers! "The One Piece is the friends we made along the way! Yeah!"

SO, what do I actually think is going to happen?

I don't know. This is a mess. I have so many more thoughts but this is already too long. Send help.

(something about how shanks not wanting to become the king perfectly sets up buggy to take the position... something about luffy denying becoming king for freedom-related reasons... something about how shanks never got to give the hat back to roger, so it would make sense if luffy also can't return the hat, and thus gives it to buggy instead... something about buggy finally getting closure... )

[iridescentscarecrow]

hi i'm the op of that post (stackslip) PLEASE elaborate on chainsaw man's metanarrative

hi! um. you've given me free reign, i hope you know what you're doing. anyway: fair warning in advance that this is based entirely on how i like to interpret and think of the csm story and doesn't necessarily hold true, partly because of the level of abstraction that i'm operating at here. i'm normal and i like metanarratives a normal amount. this might be a little long. but.

um. thinking about how protagonism in CSM is inflicted on denji by the author insert that is makima. i've brought up the Icon of chainsaw man before in my part 2 analyses but basically:

the Chainsaw Man is the role that denji occupies in the story, right? it's the title of the manga. it's what the public Sees him as. it's what makima quite literally produces. the relationship between denji and the chainsaw man in both aspiration and idealisation forms a major stem of both part 1 and part 2's narrative.

this production occurs on two levels: (1) what Chainsaw Man is, and should be, and (2) how denji is developed as a protagonist by makima.

"you don't get him at all." chainsaw man is her blorbie (i think i'm funny). the point is that the Presentation of chainsaw man, the one that the audience is initially set up to expect, is almost entirely synonymous with makima's version of the CSM that we get later. i think a lot about how part one borrows from, amplifies, and later subverts shounen tropes. the CSM as an idea persists in how it's discordant from denji's normality in part 2 but part 1's direction in how denji voluntarily inhabits the chainsaw is what i'm pointing at here. (there's a lot to be said about how denji's idealisation as tied to the icon of the CSM is intertwined with his wants but that's not relevant in this meta except in the minutiae of his adherence / resistance to this role.)

the thing is that makima is instrumental in pushing this role onto denji. she sees chainsaw man, he is chainsaw man. it's (and i sound insane here but please hold on, i beg) like writing.

i think her addressing him in the last battle scene, the "i'll kill you personally" is indicative of her finally divorcing denji from the chainsaw; forming The Chainsaw Man in full, while still obviously curating the denji that would support this formation throughout the story.

a small side here but: "but she never even saw me once, even from the start." // fujimoto's writing actively utilises characters towards the end goal of shaping the protagonist. this struggle here is one between a character and an author.

now continuing; the way that makima provides for and then systematically removes these initial connections simulates traditional story structures with its setup, its confrontation and resolution. her excellence as an antagonist rests upon her identity as a narrative device which develops the protagonist and pushes him through this structure. the conflicts and the loss that a protagonist usually naturally (at least in-world) goes through in a story are instead all artificially created by makima.

"how could i make you so hurt that you'd no longer be capable of living a normal life?" // her molding of denji isn't just passive emotional manipulation, it's active writing. she herself is aware of the tropes and the character relationships that are being built up, that are being subverted. she herself embodies, espouses and resolves the themes of multiple arcs (thinking of the end of the bomb devil and the darkness devil arc here / thinking of how she draws the shutters on ignorance and on wanting).

there's a lot i try to extrapolate from her commentary on movies during her date with denji especially in context with the story simulation that she herself is doing throughout the manga. i find it interesting how the ending to the movie date or the "good" movie founds itself on shared feeling: denji sees makima cry at the same movie as he does.

"the drinks yesterday were delicious." // you talked about her goals already in your post but makima's search for real intimacy (and equality in a relationship) coincides with denji's one. to me, it comes off as a writer trying to find a mirror of understanding in their own creation. the way she visualises the CSM (as "chaos" to her order) reveals a relationship quite like the flawed connection that one has with characters one makes: and this relationship is what denji (the 'stage' of this process) responds to so emphatically: "she wasn't looking at me this whoole time."

so, yeah; CSM to me operates at two levels: the one with the deeply human character relationships that construct the story and another layer where fiction and ideation mesh. it's important to note that this is something fjmt quite likes doing in his other work: using characters to specifically engage with the telling of his stories or exploring his characters' nuanced reactions to fiction and its weight.

thinking of makima as the 'Author' is misleading, though, and it ignores the fact that makima is both a device deployed by the actual author and in-world by the structure that are the higher ups. she is the control devil; she controls the scaffoldings of the story but she in herself is an agent of the author, of the narrative, of the aforementioned higher ups.

i don't know. is an artist ever truly original in their art? do they not operate within a greater structure, borrowing from and being regulated by it and its interpretation of their work? are makima's plans not ultimately upset by her creation?

denji materialises as a character from multiple active sources instead of the unitary source that makima believes herself to be. he's a passive character and yet he refuses to be a stable creation (psst. it's that universal tussle between the living art and the artist -- something fjmt's already tackled in his oneshots).

i don't know (2). this interpretation's been simmering in my head for a while, but i wasn't very Sure about it. but hm. this writeup primarily bases itself off part one (since it's well. complete) but image and image production specifically coming into fruition as a theme in part two makes me feel increasingly confident in this interpretation. it's strange how it somehow all ties back into storytelling.

[understandingbimbos]

So. There's a few things I need to address. My documentation and study of bimbos began as a personal project. I only started a blog because I was putting a ridiculous amount of work and thought into this and figured it should be shared (and still, there's SO much I haven't shared yet...). And that's part of why this blog isn't so well managed, not consistent, and very informal. I write every post with the assumption whoever reading will have some familiarity with the fetish and that was kind of a mistake when dealing with subject matter as delicate as this and if I want to be able to attract literally any other audience. But the blog is here now so its kind of a moot point. I won't be rewriting posts. I want to kill myself every day, its astonishing I can write anything. Anyway, recently I discovered an adult performer named Celestina Blooms, in particular, this video:

We share a lot of the same thoughts. And her criticisms of BimboTok are a lot better articulated. Here are some of things she's said that stood out to me (paraphrased):

"As an actual political movement, the Gen Z bimbo isn't actually very helpful beyond being satire because there are contradictions."

"It makes no sense to be expected to have every single decision in your life, in every area of your life, be a form of activism."

"If you don't spend enough time watching all their videos to completely get the point it looks like they're satirizing the ideologies they're preaching."

"They're kind of taking this thing and being like 'Hey! This thing is leftist because I'm leftist and I said so!' when the thing is still something very tied to a lot of systems of oppression."

"I think there's an issue with saying that being feminine is feminist."

"Because there are so many minors on TikTok they'll come across this trend and see the cute aesthetic and cute clothes, and for good measure, the ideologies a lot of them agree with and be like 'Fuck yes! Sign me up!' and before you know it they're dressing like a bimbo, calling themselves a 'bimbo', and all this stuff while not even being aware of this whole other world of bimbofication as a fetish and unknowingly calling attention to themselves."

She also brings up Pink Bimbo Academy in this video (not by name, and if you somehow see this Celestina, sorry for blowing up your spot!). I bring this up because PBA actually reached out to me like two weeks ago. We had an extremely brief conversation. He lost all interest as soon as he realized my blog isn't primarily about real life bimbos and, like Celestina, I don't believe bimbos are really a real life thing. This is the reason for my last text post (now pinned).

Up until this point I didn't realize Pink Bimbo Academy was a guy, or extremely weird. He's one of those bimbo enthusiasts that genuinely believes every woman should be a bimbo, unless they're trans that is, because according to him a bimbo can't have a penis or possess any "masculine" qualities. He seems to view bimbofication less as a fetish and more of a means to an end. To him, bimbos are the peak of femininity and bimbofication only helps women to become more of who they're "biologically" meant to be. He has entire rants against feminism up on his website and aspires to create an actual real-life bimbo finishing school, like he's a super villain or some shit, like the antagonist of every school-set bimbofication story come to life. And unfortunately, he's basically the resource for bimbofication online. I have to assume not everyone that follows his guides reads all his posts and FAQ but its more than disappointing to have a transphobe be one of the main vanguards of this fetish today.

Anyway, I can't recommend Celestina's video enough. Its a bit long but all worth watching and has made the prospect of writing this book exciting again. I would suggest this video of hers too:

Post-script: After over an hour of writing all of this I realized I actually did something extremely stupid here. Celestina follows me on here, possibly one of the first people to follow me. I kept wondering why one of her icons looked so familiar and it took me until literally just now to figure it out. I hope she doesn't mind the plug, because you all should follow her too!

@celestinablooms Twitter Instagram

[lucky-draws]

the phrase "born from a wish" and how exactly it can be applied to maria is still so interesting to me like. whose wish is it..?

like i really enjoy the idea of maria as an entity created by james, and ive usually used that interpretation in art or writing, but i do also like the idea of maria being "created" by mary instead. and not just as a sort of idealised version of herself - free of disease, beautiful, desirable, maybe a product of some sexual repression etc - but also out of her sheer loneliness? like of course she's longing for james but their relationship is obviously degrading and so you can think of maria as being born out of marys wish to 1. not be sick and 2. not be lonely. so maria is sort of. both an aspiration and a companion to mary.

and if maria was born from mary's mind, maria's feelings about herself and about james are going to be slightly different. does she have more sympathy for mary? less of the accursed creator vibe and more of an understanding? is she a more complete copy of mary because she has been produced directly from mary's consciousness, instead of being born simply from james' wishes and his perception of mary? does that make it easier or harder? her role as james' antagonist/enemy could be sort of motivated by her bond with mary.

and idk basically it's like what are we. are we beautiful twin sisters dying in the lake are you my mother are you my clone are you my rival are you my enemy are you my friend are you myself. it's all of the above i guess really.

[rubberduckyrye]

Struggling to sleep but I've been seeing rumors that Dottore will be playable and get done kind of redemption arc like Childe and Wanderer.

Problem with that.

One: Childe never got a redemption arc. Hes just a very charming character who is a likeable antagonist. But also, as the 11th harbinger, hes still just a cog in the machine. Always has been.

Two: Wanderer's redemption is less about "redeeming" him and more about how this poor fucking guy couldn't catch a break and eventually he snapped, was manipulated and abused and tortured for centuries and is an allegory for abuse victims in general who acted out in horrible ways but are on the path to recovery after finding someone willing to let them have that safe space to do so. I see this less as a redemption arc because even as "Scaramouche", he HAD kind traits associated to him (like according to some lore he was kind to kids and elderly folk) so this story is about rehabilitation and recovery and less about redemption.

Three: While rehabilitation is overall the ideal for criminals rather than harsh punishment and imprisonment, when you have a character like Dottore--who, if Wanderer/Scaramouche is an allegory for an abuse victim in recovery--then Dottore is an allegory of an abuser. And not just any old abuser--a serial abuser. A selfish man who is arrogant and likes to hear himself talk who all lives in danger for his selfish aspiration for experimentation. A man who does not care for children or elderly people, only for himself... you can kind of see where I'm going with this. These are two very fundamentally different kinds of "bad"--Scaramouche was a bad person, yes, but he wasn't what I personally would consider to be "evil". Then you have Dottore who is evil, borderline a predator in behavior and in practice. I don't think he has any right or reason to be doing what he is doing.

As in. I havent seen a whole lot of redemption arcs for these kinds of characters done right. That's a big point of concern.

Another big point of concern is, I'm sure Dottore has his reasons for doing these things, it has yet to be revealed what those reasons are, aside from "Mad scientist wants to do horrible science" and for his own selfish gain.

His motivations don't line up for a redemption arc is what I'm getting at.

I really hope HYV doesn't. Try to redeem Dottore. Like I really hope they don't try. Just make him playable as he is people love a fucked up mad scientist you dont need to make every playable character the Traveler's friend PLEASE for the love of god.

And it's not that I dont have faith in the writing team to tell a good story (well... I dont exactly have full trust in them after the disaster that was the Sumeru Interlude Quest, but that's beside the point) but I have. Literally never seen a character who is a symbol of evil (i.e. the man has no redeeming qualities in personality, no apparent kindness or even willing to change his ways) redeemed in a good, tasteful, and thoughtful way. Like ironically I think the closest I've seen was... Teppei from Higurashi GOU/SOTSU. And that was incredibly muddied by the fact that Satoko herself became that kind of "evil" that wasn't truly redeemed by the end. Even that left a bad taste in my mouth.

So I just hope Dottore, if hes playable... idk. Don't try to redeem him, I don't think it's possible to redeem characters who symbolize the peak of humanity's "evil" so I don't want HYV to try. Like either keep him to be a terrible awful man or give us a fresh new Segment gone rogue who doesn't have anything like that attached to him.

It would be FAR more interesting of an allegory to me if they went for the latter route, actually. Kind of like, a family member of that "irredeemable evil" who now has that tied to them as a sin of the person they are related to but not themselves guilty of. It could be fun to see how HYV would treat such a character, and if done right, it could be a really fun way to explore how people (especially victims) often associate family members of abusers to the abuse they carried out but actually had no part of.

Anyway that's my 3AM rant of the day. I have Insomnia. Can you tell?

[ohwolfling]

THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT MY FELLOW WRITERS

tagged by local legend @theletteraesc

if you see this and you want to do it, DO IT! I am too sleepy to figure out who has tagged whomst in our little corner of writers. <3

Last book I read: I'm currently reading Neuromancer and (unfortunately) rereading Cyberpunk 2077: No Coincidence for my big spring project (info here). I'm also reading Patrick Swayze's memoir, The Time of My Life, co-written with his wife, and that's been very meaningful to me and my current journey of gender/my relationship to how masculinity has shaped me. I read random passages from Lord of the Rings for about two hours recently, just to be there again, and before that I finished Lanny by Max Porter and Bravely, the Brave novel by Maggie Stiefvater. I recommend them both to lovers of any kind of folklore.

Greatest literary inspirations: the Brontës, Tolkien, and all the romantic poets. Huge Chaucer people-are-messes-are-metaphors guy. But truly, in my bones, I am a run on sentence Anne Rice refused to edit. If I'm writing SCENES or screenplays or plays, it's Tennessee Williams, Martin McDonagh (mostly Pillowman and In Bruges), and German absurdism that I aspire to.

Things in my current fandom I want to read but I don't want to write: I need so much Rogue/Alt recs that are heavy and sensual and atmospheric but don't completely retcon the complication of their own timeline (Cyberpunk 2077). Dying for Aylin/Isobel smut that is feral and sincere. Shadowzel girlies, help me. Also, SH, Lae, Wyll as a polycule could be a vibe. HALSIN FILTH (Baldur's Gate 3).

Things in my current fandoms I want to write but I think nobody would be interested in them but me: More that I think people want a very specific thing from me BUT I do want to write a sort of fragmented, each chapter is a time jump unpacking of how Gale gets to that orb, like emotionally/trauma-wise, not literal. I also think that there's room to explore that Gale is not so monogamous in a traditional sense after healing from Mystra and I know that that really ruffles feathers. Murky waters of interpretation with some of that stuff in the game as it stands. With 2077, no one wants what I am writing there ever so lmao but I have my ongoing super philosophical and spiritual fix it fic of the Sun ending and some Johnny PL Tower ending stuff I'm playing around with.

You can recognise my writing by: I will not let you know anything until I make you feel like you're in the room. The stage picture is specific, layered, and emotionally resonant, and you will know about it. Alternatively, you are so horny and also a single tear is sliding down your cheek.

My most controversial take (current fandom): Every origin character in Baldur's Gate 3 is a main character and as plot relevant as every other origin character. There ARE characters who are too far gone in their experience of systemic trauma and those people are the fucking villains/personal antagonists. The god ending is Gale's WORST ending, narratively speaking. It is on par with Lae'zel going to Vlaakith. Interpretation is good but put down the STEM and know how to recognize literary devices, story arcs, character archetypes, etc to support those. Your head canon is not a vision from on high, babes.

Top three favourite tropes: HEROIC FATIGUE, COSMIC PLAYTHING, and just like... so many versions of hurt/comfort tbqh. I am the protagonist/eldest child on a genre tv show psychologically speaking.

What’s your current writing mood (10 – super motivated and churning out words like crazy, 0 – in a complete rut): ricocheting wildly between a 2 and an 8. Brain and body have not been operational at the same time in a long while but strangely my creativity seems to be healing and growing actually?

Share a random frustration: when my monitors go to sleep, the blue light at the base of them flickers. I have no idea why. I can't figure out how to stop it. If I try to search the web for a solutions, it thinks I mean a flickering blue screen and Google is atrocious now so it won't accept any phrasing that tries to eliminate that. I sleep in a little eye mask but I still KNOW they're there and it pisses me off.

[if-i-was-a-cucumber]

currently watching part 1 || dangerous romance

the first episode of dangerous romance (2023) is premiering and of course i have thoughts <3 i'm basically just going to be writing this as i watch the episode and some pictures. obviously, if you haven't watched the episode and don't want any spoilers, avoid this post.

sailom is my delusional spirit animal, everything i aspire to be and like to pretend i am. i've already decided this upon watching episode 1. he's cute and hard-working and look at how he takes no bullshit from anyone!! even old people!! and he's so engaged and self-aware with the costs and pricing of his workplace!!

everybody meet sailom's older brother, aka saifah "you don't need to work," "stealing money from your patients is a good business strategy," "i plan to live off you in the future" [last name here]. but he's also very attractive so i'm letting it slide.

about to wax poetry over this shot right here. call me talay from vice versa or blame my laptop's display because the coloring of this picture right here is so on point for the message they're trying to drill in about sailom being different. what i mean is his shirt's a different shade of white — if you glance between the rest of the students his seems a bit more yellow whereas their's are a bit more blue. it makes it look like a bright spotlight is right over him, pointing him out to everyone as "look at him, something's weird about him." not sure if this was on purpose but i like it a lot!! i love these kinds of little details!!

THE BOYS ARE ALL HERE!! (well i missed JJ but he was hiding in the back so sue me.) i know more or less the storyline we'll be getting from perthchimon but marcpawin intrigues me — especially since dangerous romance seems very, very similar premise-wise to my gear and your gown (2020) (which if you didn't know, stars marc and pawin). i'm currently watching that so i am in a bit of a marcpawin phase rn, but worry not for i can separate characters from actors! this one is interesting though because it seems like pawin is the antagonist-esque asshole-ish character this time, if you get what i mean. look at his face in the corner over there. look at how he crabbe-and-goyle follows kanghan around.

all in all i'm excited!! i'd write more but i think this is too long already for one post, see you all in the next premieres

[samsonjbodney]

Update - 1/3/2024

Link: Hallowed Book 1: The Forebearer's Flight (WIP) (Update: 1/3/2024) - Hosted Games / Works In Progress - Choice of Games Forum

So this WIP’s gone through a bit of a restructuring, by that I mean I rewrote it and changed large aspects of the premise. Although the core features will remain the same in this version. I hope you all enjoy!

This update covers the prologue as well as the first chapter, both taking place when the MC is a child. I won’t be focusing on the MC’s childhood too much but it is important to show a little of it for various reasons. The plan is for the next chapter will move through the MC’s adolescent years and to their early adulthood where they’ll stay for the duration of the first book. I attempted to get most relevant exposition done with early so it doesn’t drag subsequent events down.

I’ve made a few decisions for game mechanics going forward I want to elaborate on.

Relationships

In all likelihood there’s still not going to be romance in this game. However, I wanted to make relationships more complex than like/dislike since I don’t think the MC being at odds with the rest of the cast would work well with the story anyways (this doesn’t mean the MC can’t dislike or hate characters who’re antagonistic to them). So I’ve taken a slightly different approach.

Using the new character Livia Sparrow as an example. My idea is for the MC’s relationship with her is to tie it into their history with each other as well as Livia’s worldview, wherein she’s a princess who aspires to be a leader. So the MC can either butt heads with her by refusing to let her take the lead, in which case they become frenemies of a kind who lock horns at times.

Or if the MC chooses to listen to her their relationship will be something akin to the kind you might see between a knight and a queen, not necessarily in the sense that Livia thinks she’s better than the MC but in the sense that their dynamic is a bit different.

That’s just one example of course. There’ll be other characters the MC can have more ordinary friendships with.

Stances

Occasionally (when these choices appear they’ll be written in bold) you’ll be met with a choice that will determine the MC’s stance on something for the foreseeable future. In this demo for example there’s a decision as to whether or not the MC develops a certain fear after the events of chapter 1. This will effect flavor text and alter certain choices you can make.

My aim is to write in a way where it’s narratively satisfying whichever stance you pick.

Glossary

I won’t be adding a wiki into this project but I decided to add a glossary in the stats menu to reduce confusion. While I’ll endeavour to write in such a way that it’s not needed I understand the use of fantasy terms, names, etc can be a bit confusing sometimes. So I think the glossary will help with that.

Skills/Knowledge system

I’ve mentioned in the original post that this game isn’t a stat-driven one. So I’ve decided to take a slightly different approach here. Instead of raising a stat throughout the game you’ll acquire certain skills/knowledge as the story plays out depending on your choices. There will not be any premature game overs in this so pick what interests you most.

[ashesandhackles]

8 TV Shows

Thanks for the tag @yletylyf <3 <3

Rules: list eight TV shows for your followers to get to know you better! 1. Buffy the Vampire Slayer Years, years ago, I sporadically watched earlier seasons of Buffy and enjoyed it for the campy fun they were. And then I watched, "Innocence" - Season 2, episode 14 and I was obsessed with Buffy Summers. Buffy Summers is that one character of all time for me - she is heroic, aspirational but she is also flawed and messy and so delightfully complex. I love her and I forever have a soft spot for Sarah Michelle Gellar for playing her.

2. Fruits Basket

I first read Fruits Basket as a manga, saw the first anime adaptation and the reboot came out during the pandemic. Fruits Basket is a very important piece of media to me because of the way it tackles abuse and the nature of systemic abuse. The show/ manga's ideas of rehabilitative justice were truly ahead of its time. Also the anti hero of the story is my all time fixation - Shigure Sohma.

3. Inuyasha

Another long running manga turned anime. Something about this series turns me into a nostalgic goo. It's probably Rumiko Takahashi's brand of characters, where there is something interesting going on with each of them. But my forever love from the series is Sango, the girl who crawls out of her own grave <3

4. Fushigi Yugi

I greatly dislike the main lead in this anime, I great dislike the romance in this series but my heart went out to the antagonist, the main lead's once best friend Yui Hongo. And if this series wasn't so enamored with its ridiculously cheesy and tiresome main romance (i do not have enough criticism for how truly bad it is, believe me), it had decent worldbuilding and politics. A fact that the original manga author knew and corrected with her spin off prequel - the vastly superior manga Fushigi Yugi: Genbu Kaiden (with likable main heroine! an intense romance that never takes over the plot!). She is currently writing Fushigi Yugi: Byakko Senki and I am curious to see what she does there.

5. Nana

Nana is about my early 20s life lol. Co-dependent, almost romantically charged friendship with a roommate/best friend? Check. Misogynist, controlling boyfriends? Check. Intense but fucked up relationships? Check. It's like this show reached into my heart and displayed it to the world.

6. Shadow and Bone

I'll be honest: my interest in the show is largely due to the fact that I have read the Six of Crows duology and loved those books. I only read the original Shadow and Bone series recently, just so I can keep with the main plotline in season 2 and boy, the original trilogy is very poor lol. The only thing that has bones of something interesting is Darkling and his relationship with Alina, and watching Season 2, I feel the show writers aren't comfortable tapping into that. Too much time moralising "this is bAd!!" - lol, yes we know. It is very childish finger-wagging writing, and it's very boring and not at all reflective of human experience (Shadow and Bone writers need to watch Nana to understand how to write abusive relationships without making it look like they are doing 'Toxic Ex Boyfriend for Dummies'). The reasons why Crows shine so much is because they are based on books that are good. And I agree with general consensus that the moral universe of the Crows and the Shadow and Bone stories do not match at all, and it creates horrible discrepancies in narrative framing.

7. Cowboy Bebop

This is a show that has influenced my writing the most: dream-like vigenettes for characters? People dreaming and having nightmares? Characters stuck in the past? I wish I could be as subtle and genre-bending as this show often was. So beautiful.

8. Death Note

If you have inhaled animes during your teen years, you won't go without bingeing Death Note. Fantastic premise, fantastic protagonist and just outright brutal to watch. I keep returning to it time and again.

Tagging @merlins-sequined-hotpants @hinnyfied @bluethepineapple @phantomeo @thedreamermusing @turanga4

[simplegenius042]

Soulmate AU Protagonists and Antagonists Story Idea

Admittedly, I've never been the biggest fan of soulmate AUs. I suppose it's never been something that fits the whole schtick I'm going with in the fanfics I'm writing (the whole theme of "screw destiny" and the subversions or alternate perspectives of things such as fate, destiny, the chosen one, etc).

That doesn't mean I hate the AU, or the stories I've read (no matter if they were either incredible or cliched, dark or wholesome). But besides the worldbuilding and the dynamics and the slowburns, there really wasn't much to offer for me. Not that there wasn't any unoriginality, but it was lacking some kind of specific conflict (whether it be in the story itself or between characters).

I have read plenty of ways the AU is handled. And the general consensus I've found is mostly along the lines of "slowburn of Character A & Character B, dislike/enemies-to-fated-lovers" (whether the enemy part is justified or not depends on the themes) and rarely found any subversions like "Character A rejects Character B for, let's face it, justifiable reasons and ends up with Character C outside the universe's laws and society expectations" and even rarer "Character A doesn't like Character B very much and the universe acknowledges this so allows A to fate themselves to the better suitor, Character C". And these stories ARE enduring to read, but it just wasn't enough for the itch I was trying to scratch (It's really hard to explain, and a strange feeling overall).

Like, mostly it's heavily focused on the romance aspect (understandable, soulmate is in the name) instead of the implications that come with the fact people have soulmates and have initials/marks/symbols/names/countdowns/etc, etc to prove it. Most of the time, those implications are brushed over briefly (again, understandable), and rarely touched upon. Not only that, but the AU itself doesn't leave much argument on the pros and cons of being fated (besides the obvious "mutually disliked persons/enemies are fated" to each other) or the morality and potential existential conflicts that are there in the AU, if that's easy to understand (which I've rarely seen anyone touch upon, which is again, understandable, as that's not the whole point of the AU, and it is nobodies responsibility to write those specific premise out).

Don't get me wrong, overall the AU is an incredibly interesting premise to write out in beloved fandoms, especially with your favourite characters involved, but it just wasn't something for me...

...until today.

Given the implications of the soulmate AU (specifically, that you have a soul that is bound to another person, therefore implying a level of spiritual mythos (destiny, magic, red string of fate, etc), and even more religious ones (like God, angels, heaven and hell) exists in the AU), I think I can write a fulfilling fanfic with it. Both with original (well, I say original for some of these characters, but also somewhat alternate take on) characters and even an intriguing conflict.

The conflict and arguments of the story centres around two pairs of character. First pair are the protagonists; the (re: God's) Angel of Life, Archangel Metatron, and one of Death's aspiring newest recruits, an Angel of Death by the name of Azriel (and no, this is not Azrael, the (re: God's) Angel of Death, Azriel is the growing human soul of a girl at 11-years-old now who literal-Death-itself took in because she died an infant and couldn't be taken in to either Heaven nor Hell due to not being able to live for long). The second pair are antagonists; a hellborne-demon from the Sloth Ring by the name of Xiang Ba'al, and his adopted daughter, the wrongfully damned soul of a young girl (around 10-years-old) by the name of Jezebel Ba'al (Jazzy for short). Now despite being protagonists and antagonists, these two pairs of characters fall in a (light and dark, respectively) grey morality with mixes of blue/orange morality (which is a given; these are beings with a limited and/or flawed understanding of human beings and who live in two very flawed and different systems (both Heaven and Hell have issues)). This light/dark grey morality eventually evens out and gets greyer and greyer as the story goes on.

Essentially, both pairs fight for and against the soulmate system... both understand that the system is both a great idea but severely flawed and go about to preserve yet change it... however, how they both go about it is the difference. The angels' method, while manipulative on emotional levels, is less likely to cause physical harm, but is also slow and time consuming which may not even work sometimes leading to unexpected confrontations between humans. Meanwhile, the demons' method, while physically forceful to horrific degrees, gets effective results fast, but is a violation on the humans' right of choice.

Additional Notes: Metatron and Azriel have a flawed yet growing mentor/student and brother/sister dynamic while Xiang and Jazzy have a pretty caring yet horrifyingly psychotic father/daughter and master/underling dynamic. They both travel and pop up in any universe with a Soulmate AU.

Anyway that's just me talking about things on my mind and my ideas of a fic series I'm going to write.

Chow!