#other characters are there but not important enough to be tagged

[pomrania]

Beta pass! First I'll be reading the whole thing through and jotting down page numbers of stuff to take a second look at, then I'll go back to those pages and see if there's anything I need to say about them. Because I remembered how good it felt when I discovered that method (it works really well!) so I wanted to share it.

…you know, I've never actually asked: how many figures are there on the cover? Is the Fizzgig-looking one a separate character, or a symbiote of the one on the left? And I've also just realized an that character has at least three arms; I don't know HOW that's slipped by me for so long.

Huh, there's bits where I can definitely tell that you rephrased it from previous versions; generally I prefer how it had been, but "getting the meaning across clearly" and "having it be able to fit in the space available" outweighs a witty turn of phrase.

Something that occurs throughout, I believe: the thing about "you can find these [cards] in your download package if you obtained this game digitally, or on the Penguin King Games website". Individually, each instance makes sense that it's written out in full. Put together, it feels kind of odd, like why is that repeated. (There's other things that are repeated in full, but they're rules elements where "being able to find relevant information to what you're looking up" is more important than "artistic flow when you read the whole thing straight through", so I don't consider those to be a potential issue.) My suggestion would be to have it written out in full in the "what you'll need" section, while other instances of it to just refer to the cards, maybe giving the page number. If you make/made a conscious decision that you do indeed want that written out in full, in all instances, then I'll respect that, because you have enough experience in the field that if so then it's probably the best idea.

((So I wrote this all with page numbers listed, but then when I tried copy-pasting it into here, it decided to treat the whole thing as a sequential numbered list, so I'm having to put in the proper numbers manually; if something seems like it's referring to the wrong page, then it's because of that.))

2. "Random selection table" is listed as being on page zero.

6. In the third paragraph, the "optionally" just feels weird as something starting the sentence. Maybe move it to elsewhere in the sentence? I'm also not sure about the paragraph arrangement, like if the thing about a deck of cards should come before or after the thing about the print-and-play cards; it's not WRONG, but it could stand to be looked at some more for considering what the ideal flow is.

10. In the second paragraph, the phrasing "able to bring to bear, or tag, on a test" is mildly grammatically ambiguous; "tag" could replace "bring to bear" (as it actually means), or it could replace "bear" leading to "bring to tag". My preference would be for it to be rephrased, but it's not a major issue or anything. In the third paragraph, "afforances" is presumably a typo. In the shaded box, "descripition" is a typo.

14. "Cunning crafter", "centring" just looks weird to me, like it would be "cent-ring" instead of the "centre-ing" it actually is. If it doesn't look weird to you, then I guess it's okay; otherwise, consider what other words/phrases might work instead.

16. "Extra organs", the "always" effect: I'm assuming that you HAVE to make up an organ to say why you're immune to it, and you're not just "generically immune to environmental effects"? So it's up to the player to be on top of that. And the "with effort" thing for it, that's also an exception to the rules against doing multiple effortful things at once?

17. "Flowing form", if I recall correctly this isn't intended to work as a disguise unless you get creative with your in-'verse excuses, yeah? "Fluttering flight", it feels weird that the link is on "six on"; like, it should include the "take". Maybe also put the page number before the "on", but I hadn't been paying attention to how you'd formatted that in other instances, so I don't know if there's something established or not.

18. "Hearty humours", the description says "drawbacks" but I can't see any in the rest of that entry, unless you count "not being able to tag it for the rest of the scene after you've used its effortful use", but that isn't listed as a drawback for the OTHER forms which have something like that. "Hundred-handed", in at least one other instance later on, the "handed" is capitalized, but it's not capitalized here (or in the "random forms" table). One of those should be changed for consistency.

20. "Menacing missiles", so I assume that if being very accurate is important, then that calls for a test? But just hitting a medium-sized target, when neither it nor you are moving and nobody's trying to interfere, would be an automatic thing. "Mighty muscles", it refers to "striking stature (puny)" and vice versa, but they might need to be looked at together, to make sure that the multiplier on lifting capacity doesn't get applied twice; or more accurately, that it's very obvious that it should NOT get applied twice. "Mobile members", does the "always" effect mean you can act through your main body AND a detached member at the same time, or only one at a time?

21. "Peculiar poise", the "with effort" use, so I'm assuming that it gives you a few seconds of leeway with the GM's description, but once they've described someone's action AND the results of that action, it's now too late to interrupt?

23. "Striking stature", so being Puny doesn't reduce your lifting capacity but it divides your weight by ten, and I'm actually looking back at "mighty muscles"… okay, I see, that one doesn't increase your "lifting capacity" per se but rather sets it at "X times your weight". They do NOT in fact have an unfortunate interaction with each other; but they SEEMED like they do, when the text isn't directly compared. So this would fall under "potentially rephrase to make it EASIER to know what the answer is", but it's still functional as-is. "Vague visage", I'm trying to think of actions you COULD perform while doing its effortful use… that'd be stuff that doesn't involve acting on parts of your environment that you can't carry with you, so you could read a book, or doodle something, but you can't sketch your surroundings because that relies on your being "somewhere in particular" (unless the view is the same from anywhere). And I remember that this Form doesn't allow quantum teleportation without a high-calamity-threshold test; but while staying WITHIN the "somewhere around here", where do you end up when the effort is no longer sustained? Specifically, if it gets dropped involuntarily.

25. This still doesn't feel like "inventing new Forms", or at least, not with its current set-up. You have "the easiest way" which is reskinning things, and then in a shaded box there's something about a concept being represented by multiple Forms. Those both feel like side-things to an actual "how to invent a new Form", because saying "the easiest way" implies that there's a less-easy way, and a shaded box has generally been used for clarification or edge cases. If "how to invent new Forms" isn't something you want to write and/or you feel it wouldn't benefit the game, I'd recommend rephrasing things (possibly including the section title) to make it clear that these are the available options if you don't like the Forms as described. (Also, "hundred-handed", with the "handed" being lowercase, is here, if you decide to go with it being uppercase.)

27. "Hundred-handed" has the "handed" as uppercase here, if you decide to go with it being lowercase.

36. "Art of abundance", can the "summon more copies of yourself while sustaining the Art" only be done once, or can it be done as often as you can pay for it? "Art of alteration", I see you've changed the "forced to end it" thing from "being verbally called out" to "someone speaks your true name aloud". Does that mean "if they say it anywhere in the world", or does it have to be in the vicinity? Plus, that would mean that with what rules we have so far, it could only be done by other party members, which… MIGHT be the intended gameplay, but it doesn't match my albeit extremely vague and distant memories of the relevant cartoons.

37. "Art of autonomy", no problems here, just want to comment that I REALLY wish I had this, since later on today I'm walking somewhere and I can't rely on anyone having plowed or shovelled the sidewalks on the way. "Art of exposition", the bullet points (arrow points?) feel like they're just the sentences from a paragraph put on a new line each. EXTREMELY low-priority, since it clearly conveys all the necessary information, but it can be made to feel a bit better with the format it's in.

38. "Art of guising", so if a role is held by a specific person and it doesn't make you look like that person, then if somebody knows who that person would be… I'm not sure which option is funnier, "I hadn't realized we got a new [role]" or "huh the [role] looks different today". I'm assuming that if someone has a personal connection to the [role] then Shenanigans would ensue. "Art of indulgence", typo, "or the part of to be eaten". If it's not a typo and it's actually a valid construction, then I'd suggest that it be rephrased, because it FEELS like a word got dropped there. …Also, I'm assuming that this doesn't count as "removing Stress by eating something", except in VERY niche cases. "Art of iteration", can it be activated multiple times for the same outcome? Like, you activate it once, get a new result; decide you don't like that new result, then activate it a second time.

39. "Art of keeping", I'd suggest moving the "later" from the start of the sentence, to fit better as part of a bullet point. "Art of making", another instance of "bullet-point division doesn't feel quite right". Very minor issue. "Art of miscellany", does "item in another character's inventory slot" count as "held" or "worn/carried"?

40. "Art of negation", for an ongoing effect where the Art must be sustained, it's possible to act (or have others act) in such a way to end up somewhere that it's no longer an ongoing effect, yeah? And I'm assuming that if it gets dropped when the situation is still there, that you'd then immediately take the Stress you would have earlier. "Art of realization", I wouldn't say that a STATUE counts as a "visual depiction"; like, "a sword in a statue's hand" isn't a real sword, but it's still a physical (sword-shaped) object. Maybe change it to "artistic depictions"?

41. "Art of transition", I just realized; the "sustain" effect isn't just to chain leaps together to go farther, it could also be used to briefly check (as in "take a glance around" not "search the area") a bunch of unoccupied rooms behind closed doors… and I just realized that it doesn't include stuff on what counts as a valid destination any more. "Art of ubiquity", oh I LIKE the change you made to the last point of it, how a creature can react to your action as though you were at Touch range; it's more elegant than the previous thing, AND it neatly suggests potential (direct!) consequences.

48. The "maximum five dice" thing still confuses me. If your intent is that no roll should EVER have more than five dice, I'd suggest putting that BEFORE "you get an extra dice for each Trait you tag", since otherwise it feels like a) when using Traits you're limited to five dice, but Obstinacy and pushing your luck can give you more than that, and/or b) you can get up to five dice from "tagging Traits", which are then added to the "starting" dice to result in SIX dice.

57. Typo in the second paragraph, "quanities of food". Also, I don't believe an that meaning of "atomic" (as "indivisible") is commonly understood; I like how it's used, and it can be figured out from context, but it's up to you to decide if you think it's sufficiently clear.

59. In the shaded box, typo, "eligible perform a reversal" is missing a "to". Also, NOW it's clear what kind of circumstance there'd be where "participating in a test even if there's the maximum amount of Traits added" would be beneficial; genuinely uncertain if that should be mentioned alongside 'cooperative tests', you're the expert when it comes to writing this stuff.

62. Typo in the first paragraph, "immeditiately".

63. Typo in the shaded box, "conjuction".

67. I really appreciate the stuff in the shaded box, about how it's "swapping out Forms" because that's what makes it easier to play. Plus, "trying to figure out which Form/s would best represent the Shenanigans that happened upon the character" is good enrichment.

79. For 11+, when it says "probably shouldn't require a test", my thought was that it should mention "taking six" on a roll.

81. In the first paragraph, "impact penalty for that would normally be suffered" feels like it's either missing a word or contains an extraneous word.

85. Typo in the shaded box, "explicity".

87. Typo in the last paragraph, "inflcit".

88. Ooh I like that thing about ganging up on NPCs, it makes so much SENSE for this game. Third paragraph, I'm genuinely not sure if there IS an HTML version of the current document; I'm reading it from the pdf, since the other relevant option was an epub file. (Also, another instance of the full text about print-and-play cards.)

102. Typo for the first word, actually, "Ths". So, it makes sense that a particular Gizmo has to be rolled for, if it's part of your starting inventory, since some of them are of more obvious use than others. But do you have to roll for ALL your starting inventory if you include a slot or two for Gizmo, or only what Gizmo is in that slot?

120. The note here made me grin.

122. Calling something "Western fantasy" raises the question of whether "EASTERN fantasy" will be a future table. Also, what other kinds of settings there could be… I've recently read the Murderbot books, and I think a lot of the corporate-run stations and planets there could ABSOLUTELY be improved by a bunch of God-eaters running around.

Not specific to any page, but something I realized I should prolly mention. Impact modifiers. When they're listed as "+1" or "+2", it FEELS like they should be additive with each other. (Most often it was seen in the playset stuff, like "XYZ approach has a +2 impact modifier in this situation" feels like that +2 is "in addition to" and not "instead of".) My thought is maybe renaming them to "tier one/two/three positive/negative"; this would add a layer of distance between "what it is" and "what it does", which would be a benefit for "not getting it confused with direct modifiers of the kind encountered in other games most notably D&D", but a detriment for "remembering what it actually does to the roll". Plus all the hassle which goes along with changing something. You're better equipped to make any judgement on the issue; it's just something an I had to raise.

Eat God playtest draft 0.5.0 is now available

Version 0.5.0 of Eat God brings several major changes, foremost among them a full rewrite of the Forms and Rebellious Arts, in a more structured and (hopefully!) more readable format than the previous wall-of-text presentation. This update also includes print-and-play cards (and corresponding VTT resources) for all Forms, Arts, and playset NPCs and locations. A full list of updates is available here, or under the cut below:

Download package now includes print-and-play cards for all Forms, Rebellious Arts, and playset and NPC locations

Revised introduction to provide a link to the new Form, Art, and playset cards

Expanded discussion of the mechanical effect of Traits

Forms and Rebellious Arts are now numerically indexed in their descriptions as well as in their lookup tables

One additional Form (bringing the total up to a full 36 for the first time!), and a full rewrite of all existing Forms

Full rewrite of all existing Rebellious Arts

Added discussion of how to handle resisting Stress when multiple God-eaters are affected by the same threat simultaneously

Small clarifications to activation timing for Rebellious Arts and what it means to "activate an Art in conjunction with a test"

Greatly expanded discussion of how to adjudicate Limit Breaks

Reformatted examples of Limit Break effects and added a few more examples

Random inventory table slightly revised to make its implicit milieu more consistent, and moved from the Inventory section to a separate appendix in preparation for adding multiple random inventory tables for different milieux

"Effect modifiers" renamed "impact modifiers" to avoid ambiguity with other uses of the word "effect"; relevant terminology throughout document revised accordingly

Simplified rules for how Forms influence impact penalties (formerly effect penalties)

Added first-pass rules for imposing temporary Traits upon NPCs

Added discussion of how cooperative tests work in the context of multiple God-eaters ganging up on a single NPC

Reformatted playset location/NPC/calamity tables for better readability

Added "Appendix B: Additional Tables"; right now this just contains the relocated starting inventory table (see above)

[couldeatthatgirlforlunch]

Something About Curly Hair and Any Character You Have in Mind

I've always had a fantasy of someone playing with my curls. Delicately pulling on them, like a kid pulling on a string. Playfully and adoringly watching the curl bounce back. Maybe the person could even praise it, saying it's cute, or beautiful, or mesmerising. Especially if they don't have curly hair.

A few minutes ago, my girl friend did it to me, exactly how I've always dreamed, even if inside I wanted to pull away, afraid that she would mess it up, I didn't, and she didn't, and even if she did, I wouldn't care, because I'm starved. So here's this little scenario that I finally felt courage and inspiration to write.

This was written based on my own experience having 123B hair, that has some volume on it (how do you even measure that??), with definition, so you must imagine it was very indulgent.

Also works for Readers of any race!!!! I just specify they have natural curls, didn't even mention the colour.

Gn!Reader and Gn!Character so you reaaaally can imagine whoever you want. But the character probably doesn't have curly hair, and learns to do different hairstyles on you (it's different doing it on yourself and then doing on other people, so you still can imagine any gender or appearance on them). Sex is mentioned. I'm tagging this with the first characters that come to my mind while writing this, just to make it easier.

Might edit this later because it's currently 3am and I'm sleepy as fuck

Divider

They love you. That means they love everything about you. And they love your hair.

They think the volume is sexy. Think clouds can't be softer. Think the way the light reflects on it is ethereal. Think the curls smells heavenly. Think the shape is unmatched.

When you move your hair, it's like being a kid and having a first crush again. Especially if the action causes the delicate smell of it travel through the air faster than they can blink, and they're swallowed in a fog of you.

When you sleep in the same bed together for the first time, and every other time after, they like to wake up before you. Just to admire your peacefull beauty for a while. Like the rest of the world doesn't exist. That's the best way to start a day.

Sometimes, boredom doesn't get to them because tracing curl patterns in your hair with their eyes is entertainment for a lifetime. Never before have they noticed that someone can have more than one curl texture, and how unique and perfect that mixture can look.

There's moments where they get distracted by you. You, taking their attention from something supposedly more important at that moment. Either you smell too nice, or look too good, or shine too bright. And they just can't seem to find anything more interesting than looking at you and your hair.

The first time they touched it, they were surprised by how soft it was, like cotton. Almost weightless, despite it's volume and length. Other people's hair surely doesn't feel like this. They spend so much time touching it the first time, that you have to ask them to stop, or you wouldn't have a nice hair day the next day. They looked like a kicked puppy, so you taught them to gently scrunch from the bottom.

They think bonnets are funny at first, but not in a bad way. They're not laughing at you. Mostly giggling, actually. They understand you may have needed some courage to look like this with them around. And it's like a tiny, almost nonexistent, relationship goal. To be intimate enough to feel confortable wearing a bonnet in front of your partner. And they love that you have no problem doing it.

They even buy silk sheets and pillows if it might help you. It might be morte confortable and not mess with your hair. And they understands sex while having curly hair might be frustrating at times.

Speaking of, they won't pull or mess with it unless you ask for it. They took very seriously your lesson from the first time. And if you have some instructions to give them on how to do it while causing less damage, then you certainly will lift a weight off some shoulders.

Oh, and the difference of how it looks when it's wet and then dry? They can't believe their eyes for a moment. Logic seems to escape. It feels impossible. But it isn't. And they're amazed. Almost jealous for not being as gorgeous as you. They understand why someone would be jealous of you.

Actually, they partially think others should be. If someone dares to utter you are less than stunning, then oh boy. God help them.

Any styling is great. And they're so in love with you, so focused on you, eyes solely on you, that they think no hairstyle looks as good on other people, as they look on you. Even if you hate it, he thinks it looks way better than it would have on anyone else.

Also, they learn some things. They learns to curl with their fingers, how to put on clips, how to do some braids, or buns, or pigtains, or anything you wear often. Even something you never did, but they think will make you ethereal, they will do it on you. They might not even teach you, just so you'll need them for something.

They feel part of their heart breaking if you straighten it. Sure it looks good. If it makes you happy, than they're happy. But it's far from a favorite look on you. It's not the natural you. And they love you. They might love a modified version of you, but only because they love you. Just the way you are.

And if you ever feel insecure, I assure you, they're gonna fix you right up.

Like, comment and reblog 🥰

[kevingorg]

was the post about locking ao3 fics inspired by a particular (perhaps recent?) incident? also how does one lock fics?

yeah it was, but it is also just always a mantra that bears repeating in rpf spaces, especially w things like willmack that draw in new fans who aren't as familiar with the concept of the fourth wall. as for locking fics, here's a verbose tutorial below the cut because i am incapable of not overexplaining:

locking a fic just means that the only people who can see it are registered users of the archive who are logged in at the time of viewing. a locked fic won't show up in the tag if a user isn't logged in, and it also won't show up in external search engines like google, so it really is one of the most basic & most important precautions to keeping rpf spaces happy and healthy. the process is super easy, too -- it's literally one click as you're posting a fic.

if you're posting a new fic, you can go through all the rating/archive warnings/fandom/character/ship fields before having to worry about it -- you're gonna want to scroll most of the way down the form, to the 'privacy' section.

once at the privacy section, there are three check boxes. the one that locks your fic is the very first one.

that's the most important one. comment moderation means that you have to individually approve each comment before it appears below your fic, and is good if you're worried about someone leaving hate or starting discourse in your comments section and you want to get ahead of it. the question of who can comment is solved by the first box if you check it, too. if you check the first box, then only registered users can see your fic, so only registered users can comment. that one's mostly there as a tool for authors of unlocked fics who are worried about spam/hate in their comments. these are great tools for writers maintaining their peace on the archive and i encourage you to make liberal use of them.

this is how it should look when you're done if you only want to lock it:

then go through the rest of the steps for posting, and when you post your fic the title should appear like this:

the other option is for if you're editing an already posted fic to lock it retroactively. go to the fic you want to lock, and click the 'edit' button.

then it's just the same deal. scroll down to the privacy section right above the text box, check the first box, and when you're done, go ahead and just hit 'post'. nothing else about the fic will change unless you edited it directly, your work will just only be shown to registered users now. previous comments/kudos from guest users will still be displayed, but those users will no longer be able to see the fic, and it will be removed from search results for guests.

i hope that was helpful for you & i appreciate you asking! a lot of rpf authors have been around long enough to see some really insane things happen when the fourth wall gets too thin, so it means a lot to me that newer fandom members are willing to learn. happy rpfing!

[azumetapraline]

🎉My contribution for the Magolor Collab!!! 🎉

Thank you again for the opportunity to work on such an amazing project! Everyone did such an amazing job for this zine!!

(I'm posting it late for a few reasons, sorry about that!)

I chose the prompt in which everyone has fun in Magoland because I really wanted to draw a happy piece with everyone having fun! I'm super proud of the final result! I do slightly doubt some style and composition elements, but overall I'm very happy with the result, those dozens of hours of work truly paid off! 🩵

On another note, if you want to join in a little idea I had, please contact me (here or on Discord)! I would like to make a small print-run for this zine, so I'll try in the next days/weeks to gather the most people possible to reduce the printing costs! I'll only charge the printing and shipping, because this zine is non-profit!

I'll get you posted once I have more info from the mods and/or the ones interested!

[makiswirl]

can i just say. and this is probably a niche hill to die on. that i am so gobsmacked every time someone vaguely hints at the idea that jotaro doesn't care meaningfully for the other crusaders, usually particularly kakyoin and joseph, when those two actually tend to be the ones he reacts to being hurt the hardest

like he cares for his loved ones!!!! that literally plays into his character motives in every single part he shows up in!!! stop lying to me!!!!!!!

[infernaltenor]

back on my bullshit

[icy-book]

Lark deals with his feelings immediately follow Terry Jr's death. Or, more accurately, he doesn't deal with them,

Hitting it with yet another fic I just randomly wrote and then finished on a whim with no outline or plot. Enjoy!

[moeblob]

Look, I just think it's VERY funny and on brand that I thought of an entire premise of colorful characters for half the cast and immediately drew the only one void of color.

[hellofastudysession]

am i rlly going to write a death note literary analysis when i could be doing other things

about the discourse going on in the tag abt "death note is acab and thats why the characters couldnt better the world with the note (/written in somewhat jokey matter)" vs "death note is trying to say we all have potential for evil, especially if you get a chance to insta-hurt ppl without repercussions, and it doesnt matter if youre a cop or not", i personally feel like it ignores the things that i like abt death note, which is "both of these things are true", and simultaneously "both of these things do not matter". the first part of this is dedicated to the first point, the latter to the last.

first point. i think its an important part of the message and themes (unintentional or not, and i lean on the former because... come on, can you really say the author intended you to not think of the cops as good people, at least compared to light and l) that light is a cops son, and that almost everyone who gets the death note is cop adjacent/thinks like a cop and is already corrupt/powerful when they get it (mello raised to think hed be just like l, yotsuba group is self explanatory; you cannot look me in the eyes and tell me teru "churchill" mikami, who was hand selected by light out of a bunch of rabid kira supporters, is a normal citizen). i appreciated the cop post bc its rlly important to not gloss over that aspect.

all of this would be an argument for "only someone like them would do something like this, and i am not like them, so im above them and immune to thinking about what id do with it", but... misa is the MOST important outlier in all of this bc her murders are solely selfish in nature and shes not doing any of this for "the greater good"!!! her nature of being an exception and still a very very bad person is really really important...

or it would be if death note gave a shit about her character at all!!! im not talking about her tragic side, im talking about exploring the ramifications of her killing people the way lights murders are (somewhat) explored. that would strengthen the message greatly! but shes dismissed and that weakens it overall. firstly, she's dismissed by the characters when l only sees her as a way to get to kira and basically shelves her the rest of the time. secondly, shes dismissed by the narrative when her character is gradually ground down to a stump and (not to sound perilously close to the bad takes ppl meme about) she never faces repercussions for her actions. every other character using the death note is treated relatively seriously, but misa just dies bc her love is dead. im not saying this isnt a... fitting punishment or that it isnt in character, but it doesnt fit snugly into the theme other people are talking about of "you reap what you sow" at all.

we do have something of an equivalent to misa's grayscale motives. surprise surprise, its light yagami. first is light's characterization in the musical (i will also note that misa never kills anyone in the musical). light's thinking is coplike, yes — he literally starts his first song by talking about "throw[ing] away the key" — but also, oddly enough, could be read as progressive and therefore sympathetic to tumblr ("let the corporations make the regulations / and hold no one accountable when everything gets wrong / let the rich and famous get away with murder / every time a high-priced mouthpiece starts to talk, his client gets to walk"). compare to the anime and manga, where his bigotry and pride and disgust come from a place of lukewarm dissatisfaction and boredom. the musical has much less time to play around with lights character, so it gives the audience something to immediately hook on. more on how that actually plays out later.

in the animanga, none of this is justified from the start. animanga light could say he was just killing people to make humanity way, way worse, and that wouldnt matter, because at the root of it, it was always his boredom that made him pick up the note. of course he actually believes in justice and believes hes doing the right thing (no, he believes he's doing the wrong thing, for the sake of the world... the right thing, because he is god...), but it was boredom at the start. all animanga light says about justice and righteousness and the law is a front in the end, bc he is exactly like l and misa — amoral. selfish. searching for entertainment. hedonistic. we know this. he kills naomi misora*. he kills lind l. turner. everything hes saying deserves to be dismissed from the beginning.

"but doesnt that mean you agree with the discourse post you wrote this post to argue against?" like i said, i agree with both of them! but i... still think its not right to reduce death note to the message of "the power to kill people is bad". because that is not exactly what the story is saying, even though that's literally its whole plot and therefore reaching that conclusion is self explanatory (lmao). let's look at the concept of mu. nothingness. "there's no heaven or hell". The Real Slay The Princess (Death Note Essay) Starts Here.

in light's final moments in the death note manga, while screaming about not wanting to die, he remembers that the first day they met, ryuk told light that "there's no heaven or hell. no matter what they do in life, all people go to the same place. all humans are equal in death". it is retroactively revealed that light knew this the whole time, operated under this knowledge for all the years we watched him — the knowledge that nothing he does is actually bad, that nothing any human does is actually bad, that shinigami are not "evil", that the universe does not care. that no one cares except humans. this oblivion absolutely terrifies him more than anything anyone could ever do to him. its what he thinks of before anything else as he flails there, screaming, dying. one could say everything he does after that day is him trying to escape that fact, or wrest control over it. but it doesnt work.

here are the lyrics of requiem, the musical's final song, sung over the bodies of l and musical light, a light who was at least somewhat good-intentioned at first: "sleep now, here among your choices / then fade away / hear how the world rejoices / shades of gray / gone who was right or wrong / who was weak or strong / nothing left to learn". this is the final message the death note musical and the manga chose to leave us with. there is no judgement. even after all that acknowledged hurt, after all the damage done, there is no judgement.

in the manga and anime alike, the world is just as fucked when light picks up the death note as when he dies. sure, we as readers can guess otherwise logically (and be optimistic, believing the world was never fucked regardless), but that's not what death note wants you to think. it ends with matsuda and another member of the task force noting how the world is worse again even though they killed kira (matsuda is clearly much worse for wear, but still determined), we see the shitty motorcycle band again, it ends with misa and a whole kira cult on a mountain even though kira died a long time ago...

its extremely important that light is never killed by any human or any aspect of the law. he is always killed by ryuk: a chaotic force completely detached from human sensibilities, one that does not care about good and evil. same with l; in the anime, manga, and musical, he is always killed by rems senseless, morally gray love (and you could argue in the kdrama that hes killed by love there too lol). justice is just a set dressing.

this is not just because death note is a tragedy, because good and evil can still matter in a tragedy. the theme of "nothingness" and "good and evil doesnt matter here" is also shown in a situation relatively unrelated to light winning or losing, or being good or bad. and its in fucking lawlight of all things. we all know ls not a good person. we know lights not a good person. this is tip of the iceberg death note knowledge. but the moment they start to interact, none of that starts to matter. textually, their relationship becomes more important than the people theyve killed and hurt. and the thing is? the thing is? THAT WORKS STORY-WISE. THAT'S ENTERTAINING. AND IT'S NEVER TEXTUALLY CALLED OUT IN A LASTING WAY. l and lights relationship, no matter how much i meme it, is genuinely important to the themes and "mu" because it makes it clear that despite all the pretensions, despite everything, this was never about good and evil. and it still works in the story. this is why death note is simultaneously a comedy — isn't the battle of good and evil supposed to matter more? well, fine, i'll keep watching this anyway. that suspension of disbelief comes crashing down the moment l dies, though, and a relationship built on nothingness (the "mu" sort, meaninglessness, not "character development" nothingness, theres plenty of character development) gives way to just nothingness (again, "mu", not light's post-l depression nothingness), forever.

(an aside: there is no one to root for in death note, and the only things to root for are either interesting character relationships, convoluted plots, or complete and total destruction: for everything to end so no more damage is done.)

not to say that death note does not encourage its readers to consider what damage they might do with the death note (obviously.), or that its characters never do. look at matsuda, a much easier heroic figure to latch on to than soichiro because of his unique place in the cast dynamic and because he's willing to consider both sides of the situation and kill light instantly for all he's done. its just that the story's own stance on the subject is... complicated by the existence of shinigami worldviews and by its own insistence that the world cannot change for the better.

also, this is not to say that this is executed well by the death note manga at all. it is a very strong tool, artistically, to establish and then violently remove any emotional connections between characters and make your story only about the exceedingly convoluted lengths characters go to to survive and catch each other so the reader can realize how ultimately pointless all of this is, but like... is that a good story choice if that's all you do? i would say not really. add in a good dollop of misogyny that destroys the second-to-last character who might actually be an interesting contrast to the rest of the cast's dull one-track focus on winning and justice, and youve got yourself a shitty story that... honestly still achieves what it went out to do, just not in a way id ever want to replicate.

anyway, back to the parts death note's actually trying to say. no matter what any human does in their life, no matter how they try to hurt or help the world, they all die in the end. hey, light, they all die in the end. once dead, they can never come back to life. and the seasons turn. and the world rejoices. and you say "goodbye"...

that's all.

no analysis of death notes overarching theme would be complete without nears final monologue, the definitive roast of light, the "you're just a murderer" speech: "what is right from wrong? what is good from evil? nobody can truly distinguish between them. even if there is a god." if we take this as talking about the actual god in the room (ryuk) as well as light, then near admits that humans will never be able to withstand these overwhelming forces and that, using justice and happiness and selfishness, they are just scrabbling to find meaning in things they ultimately have no control over.

but of course, near does not stop there. "[...] even then i'd stop and think for myself. i'd decide for myself whether his teachings are right and wrong." nears alright with not having control over everything, because near can still control nears own actions. these forces can and do exist, but they have no sway over nears own humanity — unlike light, who caved.

one of the creators of death note said they believe its message is "life is short, so everyone should do their best". the first time i learned this, i was like, thats... nice and optimistic, but an awful reading of the story! "life is short, so everyone should be desperate and striving like light yagami", who literally cut off other ppls lives for his own life? what character in death note are we supposed to strive towards when we "do our best"? they all do awful things with their lives! honestly, maybe they shouldnt have tried their best, if this is what their best is!

but with the view of "mu"... it makes a bit more sense. just a little. maybe.

there is no good and evil. there is only what humans think, and no matter what we do, we all die in the end. it is easy to be crushed and terrified by this in the same way light is, but what is more important than justice and righteousness and finding meaning is... doing your best. not being a person that hurts others too much. not letting yourself get swallowed up by an ideal. not going too far. and simultaneously, trusting yourself.

it leaves a few questions, though... was the currently dead l even a little bit right about his blatantly amoral approach, then? was there a point to this pain, and me slogging through this dumbass manga, and all the people that have lost their lives to a selfish teenage cop's son and the whims of everyone chasing after him? was there a point to any of this...?

the manga** never answers this. it stays clinically impartial until the very end. the musical is anything but clinically impartial (and i love it so much for that), and its ryuk that has the last word.

"there's no point at all."

of course theres no point. none of this was ever supposed to happen. that is what matters more than all the hurt and the crimes and the pain.

and that's... actually okay, because it's over now.

yes, death note has many really important themes present in its story, but its viewpoint is nihilism first and foremost. thats why its so fun and easy to play around with all the other messages, because no matter what fun or torment or awful things or righteous justice or absolute nothingness or sentimentality happens in between, there is always an end.

there is always the end.

[moldy-flowers]

The interesting experience of being pro Sasuke, anti konoha, pro tobirama, anti Naruto ending, pro Sasusaku, anti Itachi, pro Sakura, anti SasuNaru, pro Tobirama×Izuna, anti Madara, pro karin, anti Orochimaru, pro Uchiha and anti Hashirama. And also as much as I hate the guy danzo was kind of hot when he was younger...

[g0nta-g0kuhara]

It's Gonta's Birthday today!!!

[wildstar25]

What physical part(s) of Arsay does her partners find the most attractive! Is it the same for all partners or does it differ between them?

(also optional bonus ask of what part(s) of/about Arsay generally do they love the most, physical or not!)

Meanwhile, if you were to ask the same of Arsay:

[scattered-winter]

every day i kick a rock and bash my head into the wall because i'll never get to go on a big space adventure and become tightly close-knit with my new found family up there <//3

[cluescorner]

Randomized Robins AU - Ages + Worst Trait Exercise:

Steph (25):

Says her worst trait is her murderous rages (she is exaggerating for dramatic/comedic effect, she’s killed 3 people tops and for very good reason)

Thinks her worst trait is her spitefulness (one of the few traits she definitely got from her father + one that prevents her from fixing her relationships and living her best possible life. She’ll refuse to interact with someone she dearly loves after an argument (happens significantly less after Tim’s death) or will say things she knows are hurtful just for the sake of having the last word. This trait will worsen in some ways as the list of people who have wronged her and those she loves grows, but will also ease up as she matures and realizes the harm it’s doing to her relationships with those she loves most.)

Her worst trait really is her spitefulness

Cass (26)

Says her worst trait is her self-righteousness (she believes that her goals are righteous and, as a result, she is righteous. Cass becomes very defensive whenever someone questions the mission and often does not second-guess herself. This is a trait she only develops later in life as she grows closer to Bruce/learns to understand herself more/starts to love herself more. But she knows she isn’t perfect and when somebody she trusts criticizes something she is doing she is willing to listen. She just usually isn’t the one to START the introspection.) 

Thinks her worst trait is her self-righteousness. 

Her worst trait actually is her obsessiveness (she gets it from Bruce and, while not as bad as him, she will easily become preoccupied with her night-life and the mission if someone isn’t there to pull her back. She will do this to the point of self-destruction and it hurts her relationships with the people she loves, especially Steph.)

Tim (24)

Says his worst trait is his spitefulness (he actively rejects the idea of mending his relationships with the older members of the family and this causes him to also lack good relationships with the younger ones)

Thinks his worst trait is his obsessiveness (similar to Cass, if he gets fixated on a task or idea he will neglect everything else in his life in order to dedicate more time to it. Unlike Cass, he will almost never be dragged away from it unless Pierrot snatches control of the body and forces them to take care of themself.)

His worst trait actually is how manipulative he is (the KING of guilt-tripping and using people’s emotions against them. He’ll do whatever he needs to do to get what he wants, he’s not above crocodile tears. And he will do it to whoever he needs (or wants) to with little care for how his actions impact others.)

Pierrot (Insists: “Age doesn’t apply to me! And even if it did, I'd probably be the oldest. Or the youngest! I’d never be a middle child, though.” Mental assessments by the Bats have put him around 21, with a margin of error of 3 years. Pierrot has called this “blatant character assassination by my eternal rival!”)

Says his worst trait is that he is an irredeemable psychopath without any regard for the wellbeing of others (this is a lie and everyone who's important to him understands this). 

Thinks his worst trait is his parasitic nature (he literally would not exist had Tim not suffered the way he did. Plus he is a living reminder of one of the worst things that happened to many of his loved ones. He is a parasite injected into a functional person's body and contributes to his continued suffering. This is also a largely incorrect judgement of himself, caused by his actual worst trait.)

His worst trait actually is his limited sense of self (he doesn’t really know who he is outside of ‘inheritor to the legacy of the Joker (a man he despises yet also views as a father)’ and ‘chip in Tim’s brain that became sentient’. He slowly develops an identity over the course of his life and relationships with other people, but he lacks the foundations of identity that most people have. Pierrot will often almost become a caricature of himself and what others perceive him to be because it's the only person he knows how to be. This causes wild swings in how he behaves and relates to others, sometimes to the detriment of himself and others.)

Dick (17) 

Says his worst trait is his clinginess (he is a very extraverted person who likes to be around others, which mixed with his fear of abandonment after his parents died means that if he goes a few days without seeing/talking to a friend he will get very anxious.)

Thinks his worst trait is his anger issues (he gets ticked off very easily and will explode on people. He’s kind at his core and is usually very nice, but he has a temper that can escalate significantly. Spoiler (and later Twist) help him channel this anger into something positive.)

His worst trait actually is his anger issues.

Barbara (18)

Says her worst trait is her disability (internalized ableism, she thinks of herself as less valuable than the other Bats because she cannot be out there in the capes like they can. She will grow out of this as she matures and as she learns how invaluable her support for the team is.)  

Thinks her worst trait is her disability 

Her worst trait actually is her overly-independent nature (In an attempt to overcompensate for everything she can no longer do, she has resolved to do literally everything that she possibly can without any help from others. This results in many instances where she either takes on too much and winds up not being able to fully realize any of her tasks or where she makes her life and the lives of others significantly harder by refusing help when offered/not asking for it when she needs it.)

Damian (16)

Says his worst trait is his perfectionism (he is overly critical of both himself and others, taking any flaw or problem and amplifying it to an absurd degree. This is due in part to his life with the LoA (where even a brief misstep could lead to death), in part to how others treated him initially as Spoiler (any flaw was fixated on and used as a reason to either mistrust him or portray him as unworthy of the mantle), and in part due to the fact that he is Bruce’s son (the only person with worse perfectionism problems than Damian). Gradually, Damian has improved in this regard but it’s still a massive barrier to both his own happiness and his relationships with others.)

Thinks his worst trait is his perfectionism 

His worst trait actually is his perfectionism

Duke (16)

Says his worst trait is his definitely-real secret evil side (says this as a ‘my dad is a villain so who knows??’ joke)

Thinks his worst trait is his impulsivity in his words (Sometimes he will crack a joke or say a remark without thinking it through, leading to a LOT of hurt feelings and drama. He’ll say something without thinking it through and wind up seeming insensitive. This isn’t done because of malice, rather because Duke is someone who’s quick to act and speak. But while the mantle of Insight and his awakening powers have helped him with his actions, they do not always help with his loose tongue. As such, Duke gains an unfair reputation in the media as an instigator and will accidentally cause family drama through what he says.)

His worst trait actually is his impulsivity in his words

Jason (14)

Says his worst trait is his bad manners (he grew up on the streets and has no idea how rich-people society works, which he’s pretty insecure about considering he’s now the youngest kid of Bruce freaking Wayne). 

Thinks his worst trait is his reactiveness (Jason never got the privilege of planning ahead for various events in his life, so he instead needed to rely on being swift and harsh in how he could react to situations. It’s saved his life on multiple occasions and helps significantly in his role as Spoiler, but it can also lead to extreme overreactions (accidentally causing kidnapping scare after Jason ran away following a fight with Dick) and a struggle to plan things out ahead of time. As he grows more secure in his place in the family and in life, this trait will lessen but never fully dissipate.)

His worst trait actually is his reactiveness

[resizura]

listen i’m not saying that old resident evil was peak female rep and without its faults but its so sad to me seeing how quickly the female characters in the franchise got sidelined or fell to tropes

[graceful-not]

Yk what actually. I'm sick of staying quiet Conya is a perfectly fine ship. I don't understand why people dislike it so much. In early Ninjago? Sure, back then it wasn't the greatest dynamic and didn't really have much in terms of actually substantive interactions. But people are still casually hating on it and putting it on DNI lists right next to ships like Greenflame like they're comparable and I'm sickkkk of it it's been YEARS!! Their dynamic has grown so much since then!!!! They're on the same level as Braincell for me in terms of ships I really like I think they have a great and interesting dynamic!!!! They're cute together!!!!!! EVEN OUTSIDE OF MUDSHOCK!!!!! RAGHH!!!!!!!!!