#so my reasoning is : she's the most moral/lawful/goody-good character you can find and lawful good in the truest sense of the term

[rosykims]

ive played dao like 9 times at this point and still. and STILL the isolde/connor decision has me tearing my hair out gnawing my keyboard stomping around the house ready to lie down and never get up

[gayregis]

I've listened to the part where Geralt talks with a very ill Cahir about Ciri and vengeance... it was one of the most emotional parts of the book by itself but also thanks to your take about the lost innocence of Ciri ! I felt it thrice hard in the feelings! Also, do you have thoughts on the declared love of Cahir for Ciri? Personally I see it as disturbingly romantic, let's say. Thank you for your commitment to the books and sorry to bother you

omg thank you for the ask. first of all i have to say you’re not bothering me!! tbh i have been loving getting asks because it gives me an opportunity to like bring more discussion to the witcher community... 

i feel like although reblogging pretty gifs of characters/landscapes from tw3 and any good fanart i can find is nice, my FAVORITE thing to do is write or read a really long textpost about the witcher books, i really like the discussion aspect of fandoms where people post their reactions and opinions to the content they like, because you get a bunch of shared reactions and differing opinions.

so no this is NOT a bother at all, and its nice especially to get asks about topics that i have strong feelings about but have not made posts about yet, like this one

ok, as for the actual topic: i hate forced heterosexuality, so you KNOW i hate that canon cahiri! it was out of line from sapkowski and imo, it came out of absolutely nowhere in tower of the swallow, it wasn’t something built up to or foreshadowed at all, so it felt not only weird in context but weird for sapkowski as an author.

my main problem with canon cahiri: i think it’s super creepy!

first of all, let’s discuss the age difference. cahir in baptism of fire is estimated to be “not over 25,” which i see as putting him around 20 to 25 years old, and i usually take the median of this which is around 23. while this “not over 25″ comment is said in the context of the hansa to remark upon how young cahir is (i believe it’s thought of by either geralt or dandelion, and geralt is around 60 years old and as a witcher he looks 45, and dandelion is 38 in tower of the swallow), and how cahir is described as a young man in time of contempt to illustrate that he has a sense of innocence to him as ciri cuts him down, his age gap with ciri is super innappropriate for anything to occur between them, since she is 10 or 11 during the massacre of cintra (as stated by geralt in something more), so she would be around 14 at thanedd, and 15-16 during baptism of fire to lady of the lake. so sapkowski deemed it fit to pair a 23 year old man with a 16 year old girl. this isn’t the first time he’s done something like this, what with essi being “not over 18″ and shani also bein around 18 / college age, and yennefer canonically looking around 20. listen, the man has some messed up values when it comes to women’s ages. we have to take it upon ourselves as people who like the not-weird parts of canon to understand how worldviews and personal biases affect one’s writing, and change it for ourselves to make it right so we can continue interacting with it, if we so choose (tldr: retcon some shit when it’s fucked up in canon).

now, before someone argues that “it’s fantasy medieval world, medieval relationships between men and women were just like that,” believe me, i am aware. i study ancient greece/rome and men who were in their 30s were most often paired with women in their teens as part of their arranged marriages. that is how their ancient societies functioned more than 2000 years ago. the issue is that this is a fantasy world, in which societal norms and laws do not have to conform to real-life earth history, and this is the work of a modern writer writing in the 1990s. it’s not “just how the times were,” it’s deliberately choosing to include an age gap like that to be something canonically acceptable by their society/ies.

also, one could argue that the age gap would be fine once they are older, like, when ciri becomes an adult she is already medievally-style betrothed to cahir so they start dating when she’s like 20 and he’s like 27. eh... that’s still an uncomfortable age gap, at least for when they’re in their 20s. people in their older 20s have more life experience than people in their younger 20s. but at least it wouldn’t land cahir in modern-day jail.

it’s still just an uncomfortably large age gap, and if you think about it, it’s even creepier considering that cahir met ciri when she was a helpless child around 10 - 11 and it just makes the bathing scene excruciatingly creepy too if you put it in the context that he eventually would fall in love with her. it even begins to not be about strictly age, but about life experience, development, and power imbalance within the relationship. i mean, he did literally kidnap her.

cahir in tos calls ciri a “woman” when she is like, 15 or 16 (with the rose tattoo) (to anyone reading, please don’t come at me with that “the age of consent is 15 in poland, just because it’s 18 in the US doesn’t mean your laws and culture apply to everyone” ... please do not try and justify this with laws, legality is not morality. only saying this because i’ve seen it in other posts). like.... hm! don’t like that! she is a teenager... he is in his 20s... this should not be occuring.

sorry for the loooong explanation, but every time someone brings up the subject of age gaps on tumblr it turns into crazy discourse with everyone trying to justify it.

but yeah, CANONICALLY cahir would have been 16-21 (median 18) when he met ciri at 10-11, and 20-25 (median 23) when he declares his love for her at 15-16. that’s ... not good ... to put it more into perspective, these are their ages on a traditional school system path: a 18 year old is a high school senior, an 11 year old is a 6th grader. a 23 year old has been out of college for 2 years, a 16 year old is a high school sophomore. ITS NOT GOOD

my other problem with canon cahiri: it’s boring and contradicts sapkowski at his own game.

all of the witcher is about taking fantasy tropes and inverting them, like you can’t have some random peasant kill a dragon, you’d need a professional, and also guess what, the dragon isn’t evil but a dad trying to protect his wife and child.

all of the characters in the hansa (as well as the four main characters of geralt, yennefer, ciri, and dandelion) are inversions of the tropes they represent. for some examples, milva’s trope is something like the hot action girl who only exists to be the only girl in the company and to be sexy eye candy. instead of falling into this, she is actually an action girl, not bothering with sexiness and appeal to the gaze of a male audience but a “get shit done” type, who also dresses and acts “like a man.” regis’ trope is all vampire tropes ever. he/vampires in the witcher doesn’t/don’t fall into any of the traditional european vampire myths like burning in sunlight, needing to drink blood to stay alive, being disdainful of humanity, having aversions to garlic, belonging to a super-secret orderful society that lurks in the shadows and controls everything like puppetmasters, etc... instead, he is the epitome of redemption arcs and overall “goody-goodiness,” understands humanity perfectly and does things out of his good nature. i already talk about regis too much, so i’ll quit it. 

cahir is an inversion of every knight trope ever, particularly the evil knight. he scars ciri’s memory as a night terror, but actually is not ... a bad person. he’s just some guy, pressured by his family and his society to do what he saw as an assignment like a college kid might see their final essay assignment posted on canvas. except you know. the final exam was to kidnap a girl. and he got an F on that and failed the course (ie got thrown in prison). ANYWAYS, cahir is meant to be this inversion of the knight tropes, so WHY, WHY, WHY make him become the knight trope of being the one to romance and to save a hapless princess? if we’ve learned anything about ciri, it’s that she’s the inversion of the princess trope! she KILLS PEOPLE. she ALMOST KILLED CAHIR. she can defend herself and kill for herself, she doesn’t need the knight trope going to protect her! 

heterosexual romance as the Big Reason and Motivation behind all of a character’s actions is tiring, annoying, boring, and not well-thought out. it’s so base and not unique, it doesn’t fit in with everything else about the witcher.

how i would fix it: not make them fall in love.

cahir already HAS a motivation to find ciri and to help her. he needs to APOLOGIZE. he needs to say, hey, i’m sorry i kidnapped you and ruined your life, i made peace with your dad, he doesn’t wanna kill me anymore, i can only hope that you can forgive me too after i SET THINGS RIGHT. 

as opposed to regis’s arc (i swear i am not playing favorites with regis, i just tend to compare and contrast regis and cahir’s redemptions because they are quite different yet they join the hansa side by side so they’re bound to be compared), cahir actually can find the one (not many) people he wronged, and set things right on his own accord, not go forth with a larger mission to assist all humanity, or whatever.

i think cahir also had this WONDERFULLY UNDERUTILIZED anti-imperialist message as part of his character that pains me to see being swept under the rug for some cheap lame romance story. sapkowski already created some anti-war sentiments with the battle of the bridge in baptism of fire, and he tried to create anti-racism sentiments throughout the book/at the end of lady of the lake. anti-imperialism fits with the rest of the saga as a message.

the fact that cahir was instructed by his family to hate the northern kingdoms, despite the fact that they were related to northerners, is really profound as something to happen to a character, and holds a lot of meaning in today’s society. the fact that he broke, finally, after he lost ciri, just completely lost his mind and had to be restrained because he was wailing so hard, because of the pressure that this society put him under to succeed and achieve pride for his family, is such a great example of the tragedies of society. then he speaks out against his leader and is jailed... and yet, after this, he gets to learn from his mistakes and redeem himself as a good person, and his character has developed SO much. he is not doing what his country wants him to do, he is not doing what his family wants him to do. he is doing what he wants to do because it is the RIGHT thing to do. that already is such a powerful message, he doesn’t need anymore character motivation!

so yep that’s my thoughts on why cahir is a good character asides from all that forced romance biz

[saotome-michi]

10 female characters I’m in love with from 10 fandoms 

Tagged by: @gwkimmy

Tagging: @aprincesswholovesinsects, @madelide, @dorotheian, @letheandlilies (Only if you have the time!! But also anyone can do this!!!) 

Lol i’m just going to use this as a chance to promote some shows I’ve been watching. In order of most recent to least. 

1. Hamasaki Yuka (Saikou no Rikon) 

I’m only three episodes in, but damn am I liking this jdrama (which means you all should try watching it!!). 

Saikou no Rikon looks at two couples and their troubled marriages. Despite the corny sounding premise, the story is surprisingly heartfelt, possibly because of the relatable characters. One of them, the cheerful, lazy, and somewhat crass Yuka, divorces her husband because even though she loves him, she can see he currently hates their married life and thus, her. She’s a character who I initially found annoying, but am quite fond of now. Maybe it’s because her aggressive and “unsophisticated” ways remind me of myself and other women in my family. Plus, I do like a woman who stands up for herself. 

2. Phryne Fisher (Miss Fisher’s Murder Mysteries)

God I love this woman. God I love this show. If you’re not watching it you really, really should it’s on Netflix and it’s fabulous. Phryne’s fabulous. Honestly, all the female characters are quite well developed– I dare say this show could pass the Bechdel in its sleep. 

Phryne Fisher is a woman way ahead of her time, the 1920s to be exact. She’s charming, vivacious, accomplished in many different skill sets and fields of knowledge, and very against the idea that one must stick to social norms just because. So of course she becomes the first and only Lady Detective in Melbourne, Australia. Dressed immaculately (because she likes it and, as she tells her companion Dot, “A woman should dress first and foremost for her own pleasure”), she goes around stirring things up in search for the truth. (While also flustering Detective Inspector Jack Robinson, who I was not impressed with at first but now have a serious crush on. He and Phryne have the most beautiful chemistry and I want them together now.)

3. Rita Madsen (Rita) 

I started watching this show on Netflix, because I wanted to improve my Danish and I heard it was good. It is good. In fact it’s fucking great. It ended up exceeding my expectations with the first episode alone. 

Rita Madsen is a stubborn and willful schoolteacher fighting against the establishment (who or what that establishment is changes case-by-case). She says whatever’s on her mind in blunt and provocative fashion, and honestly? It’s a joy to watch. She’s also the single mother of three children, who the show also focuses upon. In order from oldest to youngest: there’s Rikko, who’s about to get married to his uptight girlfriend; Molly, who doesn’t know what she wants to do with her life; and Jeppe, who at age 15 is the only kid who’s still at school and discovers that he’s gay. They’re all very realistic and relatable characters, and it’s nice seeing them slowly grow–Rita, most of all, as she has to learn to confront her own occasional hypocrisy and struggle with parenting. 

4. Tracey Gordon (Chewing Gum) 

Chewing Gum is comedic genius and Michaela Coel should be proud - not only because of her fantastic screenwriting, but also for her marvelous performance as Tracey Gordon, the show’s protagonist. Tracey is honest, outspoken, and wonderfully cringy, and her actions lead to all sorts of hilarious outcomes. Many of the female characters on this list are “cool”; Tracey isn’t cool in the traditional sense, but she’s unabashed around who she is and that makes her the coolest person on the show. 

(Shameless plug-in: This show is on Netflix and you should really give it a go, the characters are hilarious and relatable, and I think it’s one of the few shows that really depicts sex as the awkward, messy activity it is.)

5. Amanda Rollins (Law and Order: SVU) 

After many, many years of people telling me I should watch SVU, I have finally started watching it... from Season 14, since those are the only seasons available on Netflix. (Don’t worry, I have watched around 4 episodes that were pre Season 13 and therefore do know something of Elliot Stabler and his beautiful partnership with Olivia Benson) 

But maybe it’s because I started from Season 14 that I seem to have a different opinion of Amanda Rollins than most other fans do? Correct me if I’m wrong, but after prowling around the internet, it seems that most fans dislike Rollins or at least find her tedious. I, on the other hand, really like her and her character growth... hmm guess that’s a mystery we’ll have to put aside for now. 

6. Na Kyung Shim (Strong Woman Do Bong Soon)

If you’re also a fan of the show, you might be thinking: What about Do Bong-Soon herself?? But while I love our plucky heroine, I love her plucky best friend/sidekick even more. Na Kyung Shim doesn’t get that much screen time, but in the scenes she gets she shines as a sweet and snarky girl, who just wants the best for her friend. And I just have such a weakness for those kinds of characters. 

(Also if you haven’t watched Strong Woman Do Bong Soon and you’re looking for a new rom-com kdrama to watch you should totally pick this one) 

7. Chaewoon (Love Barometer) 

I’ve talked about my foray into Korean webcomics before, but in those posts I neglected to mention Love Barometer, and that is a crime that I must correct. 

Love Barometer is one of the cutest romance manhwas that you will ever read and I stand by that statement until my inevitable demise. The thing I love about it? The lack of unneeded drama. Our heroine Chaewoon has a good head on her shoulders and that means that most problems that might, in other manhwas, drag on for entire volumes before getting resolved, don’t exceed more than two chapters here. And it’s wonderfully refreshing. (Also the romance!!! Is so cute!!! I’m going to die!!!). 

(The series is on Lezhin FYI and I think the first 30 chapters are like free to read.)

8. Road Kamelot (D. Gray-man) 

Listen: I have loved Road Kamelot since I first saw her at age 13 and I have loved her ever since. My first online blog had her photo as the header and the only D. Gray-man fic I ever tried writing was Allen/Road. I would gladly give up my life for her, which probably makes it a good thing that she’s not real. Nonetheless... I love her. 

Road’s featured here because I’ve been catching up with the new chapters of D. Gray-man and wow has that been a trip (still can’t get my head around certain plot twists). I think I might give my Allen/Road fic another try... 

(Also if you’ve never heard of D. Gray-man before, you should give it a go if exorcists are like your thing.) 

9. Ren Kougyoku (Magi) 

(Beautiful edit made by @skania) 

My love for Road Kamelot can only be rivaled by my love for Ren Kougyoku (and I just realized that both of their initials are R. K. :O what could this mean?!?) and they definitely share some similarities, starting with the fact that they will both kick your ass if you cross them. I feel like a proud mother, watching Kougyoku grow from being a princess ashamed of being “lowborn” to a proud and beloved Empress T_T 

I’ve finally read the last few chapters of Magi and honestly? It’s always sad to finish a manga that you’ve been reading for a long time, but in this case the farewell was made easier by the fact that the whole last arc of Magi was disappointing, which meant that I could say a preemptive farewell to it a year earlier. But although the ending was anti-climatic, at least I can rest assured that Kougyoku’s character arc was, for the most part, wonderfully executed, and that her friendship with Alibaba will go on for their lifetimes. ( “Alikou 4ever!” my shipper heart cries, but I shove it down and tell it to save its energy for fic writing). 

10. Renee Walker (The Foxhole Court) 

Oh Renee, love and light of my life. You are possibly the only Christian character whose moralizing I enjoy, because from you it actually makes sense and doesn’t sound patronizing. 

Renee’s one of the most beloved characters in the fandom and I don’t think my reasons for loving her are particularly unique; One of her most-quoted (aka most used in photosets and moodboards and whatnot) lines is “I am a bad person trying very hard to be a good person” and that’s the appeal–at first glance, she’s a harmless, goody-two-shoes Christian, but the truth is she has one of the darkest backstories out of anyone in the series, still carries that darkness around because it’s still needed, and that speaks to her strength. What a badass bundle of goodness she is. 

(Btw The Foxhole Court is a book series that reads like an angsty YA series and a sports manga combined, so if that in any way sounds appealing to you, you should give it a go.) 

[sepiadice]

In defense of alignments

I avoid homebrew systems. I’m more than happy to sit down for homebrew settings, or accept any limitations you wish to introduce, but as soon as you begin tweaking with or adding mechanics, I’m out. Further, I will not touch your heartbreaker with my standard issue ten-foot pole.

Mostly because I prefer systems designed to be as intuitive as possible,[1] as simple and user friendly as possible, and so adding new mechanics, mostly only noted down for the GM’s eyes, so I don’t even have a standard issued reference book.[2]

Also, most of the time, the presented selling points are either:

Hey! I fixed the magic system![3] Hey! I fixed/got rid of the alignment system!

On that last point… well, fair play if you just ditched it. I personally like it, but plenty of systems function perfectly fine without it.

Still, the odd vitriol felt for alignments always confused me. It’s possibly a feeling grandfathered in by grognards and outdated GMing philosophies, which deserves to be challenged and considered.

I believe the biggest misunderstanding is simply thus:

Alignments are a starting point and basic reference for a character’s motives, not the be all end all of them.

Like introducing someone as a vegetarian, it just gives a general thrust of their personality, but they probably possess more depth than not liking meat.[4]

There’s a reason alignment is kept in the same box as Name, Race, and Class: they’re important to know, but it’s flexible trivia.

Yes, my character may be a rogue, but Trix has never stolen a thing. She’s a stage magician.

Alignment does have a few mechanical components, but such spells only tell you what team they’re generally on.

Besides, it’s always a super fun discussion topic to debate where characters fall on the chart.[5]

Just because a character is Lawful Good doesn’t necessarily mean they’re unmovable goody-goodies.

I mean, take Sam Vimes as an example. He’s a man that believes in Law, with a capital L, and is steadfast in bringing justice the proper way, even when other means are simpler. Yet he is rough and tumble, very suspicious of those around him, and believes, at all times, that deep down he is not a good person, despite every action showing otherwise. He is a Lawful Good Character that is conflicted and complex.

Heck, Even Captain Carrot Ironfoundersson, a near textbook goody-goody, who resolves child gang conflicts by introducing them to football and a ridiculous scouting set up, still has a sense of cunning to him. He memorizes the law book, to the punctuation, and thus knows it well enough to exploit Exact Words.

The best advice I’ve heard about playing a paladin, the paragon of Lawful Good, is not to play them as men avoiding the breaking of their vows and falling. The best way to play a Paladin is with the knowledge that, as with apples and birds, even those with a higher purpose must someday descend. The question isn’t If they’ll fall, but When. The paladin must always be asking themselves ‘Is this the cause worthy of me sacrificing my powers and position?’

Maybe they’ll be lucky, and the answer is always no, and they reach their ends days as a paladin.

But they must always be ready to consider it. The final weapon in the Paladin’s arsenal.

AD&D instituted a vow of poverty on paladins not as a limitation, but to tell the player that, hey, your character can’t put their own glory and profit above the cause. They serve their god and the people, willing to sacrifice what’s necessary, including their very Paladinship.

Returning to the broad concept of alignments: with the right consideration, alignments don’t even limit a character’s narrative role.

One of literature’s most famous antagonists is arguably Lawful Good: Inspect Javert. ((the song “Stars” is an example of a wrong-thinking paladin, and is thus beautiful)) Heck, Javert could be played as a wrong-thinking paladin, and still be impressive. At least, based off my knowledge gleaned from the Movie and the 25th Anniversary concert of Le Mis.

Javert’s main belief is that law is the only path. Now, that may sound like Lawful Neutral (and I admit is a valid reading), but his solo, “Stars”, makes it very clear that Javert equates abiding the law with being a good and pious person. He doesn’t follow the law because there’s no other way, he champions the law because he views it as wholly good.

It’s why Javert takes Valjean as his nemesis. Valjean is a scofflaw, lies his way to power, and flees the law. A good man, Javert believes, wouldn’t do such things. It’s only after several chance encounters, over the course of years, maybe decades, for Valjean’s true nature to be crystal clear to Javert.[7]

Because, until their final encounter, Javert could always be suspicious. Always know that Valjean’s morally good acts must have some devious intentions. Valjean becomes a mayor for power. Adopts the daughter of a dead woman as a cover or to con money from people. He’s at the barricades because he’s an anarchist.

It’s only when, alone with one another, and Valjean being able to kill Javert without any possible repercussions, able to rid himself of the one man who knows Valjean’s history and will not cease hunting him when possible, that the truth becomes clear. With nothing to gain, and when it is tactically disadvantageous, Valjean spares Javert.

And Javert’s realization that law and goodness can be independent of one another shocks Javert so deeply, so thoroughly, that Javert can no longer bare to live. His Lawful Good alignment is so core to him, that he ceases once it breaks.[8]

Javert is solidly Lawful Good.

In Pratchett’s Night Watch, as it is subtly parodying Les Miserables, Sam Vimes is essentially cast broadly as Javert, taking only the barricade from Valjean. This is because, as a Lawful Good Character, Vimes can only don the boots of another Lawful Good character.

Comparing Javert and Vimes also showcases a nice bit of fidelity to the alignment system: how the character internally defines the terms, and how resolutely they hold it.

Javert believes Good comes from the Law. When the two are opposed, Javert’s rigid beliefs allow him to only crumble.

Vimes believes the Law serves the Good. When they are opposed, the Law must be redefined to support Good.

So, when building a character, maybe consider how an atypical alignment might feed into story roles.

Admittedly, it’s hard to make a Chaotic Evil hero. I can think of no perfect examples, with only Belkar Bitterleaf (who’s a supporting protagonist) coming close. Sure, they can be protagonists, moving the plot forword by their actions, which 8-Bit Theater showed us with Black Mage, but a protagonist is different than a hero.

A hero has to have admirable traits. It’s literally in the definition. It’s hard to admire someone who, by their alignment, is entirely selfish and focused on disorder.

Lawful Evil at least has a code of ethics, so with the right plot, they can be forced to do right if it suits their purpose. Even neutral evil can swing that way. Chaotic Evil might be locked out of the Hero badge. But I’d be happy to hear arguments against that idea.

Honestly, the only alignment I find restrictive is, ironically, Chaotic Neutral. Because that means you’re solidly dedicated to anarchy and so forth. Good for comedic characters, certainly, but not for much else. Even True Neutral can be moved into various positions based solely on the need for survival, but CN is bound by the need to justify their chaotic label.

Again, in a straight comedy, or a comedic bit character, that’s good. They can even be used to incite conflict. But it’s hard to tell a compelling, serial narrative without being forced by character growth to position the CN elsewhere.

So, for those of you who dislike D&D’s alignment system, that’s fine. Feel free to disregard it. It’ll leave no damage.

But I implore you. Don’t just put in a different alignment system. That’s just being petty. Either eschew it, or embrace it. And let those of us who like it have our fun.

Thank you for reading. If you want to see more content from me, please consider supporting my patreon. I’m intending to expand the scope of my tabletop output, and money would help that along immensely.

Until next time, may your dice make things interesting!

[1] See: my many snipes at (and one full essay about) my hatred of Shadowrun. [2] For those who want to snark about my love of GURPS: that’s a system whose necessary components fit in a 32-page document, and that’s still bogged down by overwritten text. Heck, it can be distilled down to a single sheet of paper. [3] Possibly an essay topic for another time. [4] Maybe that is the full extent of their personality, but I probably don’t want to be their friend. [5] Maybe if literature classes brought that aspect into analysis, I’d make fun of the subject a little less.[6] [6] Or maybe they’d find a tedious way to ruin it. [7] Javert’s delayed realization can be easily justified by the two figures having very rare direct interactions with one another. At least in the movie, the two just kinda bump into one another occasionally, and have to just deal. [8] The miniseries adaptation, by the way, modifies the sequence by having Valjean present for the suicide, then smiles as he walks away from the man who just drowned himself.[9] [9] That’s the only thing I saw of the miniseries, and it instantly murdered Valjean’s character. Dude, a man killed himself, stop looking so triumphant!