#vanguard is the way to be

[revvethasmythh]

I think it's inevitable that a certain group of people will take Orym's statement about not being able to put down the lens he see the world through as further proof that his perspective is subjective and therefore untrustworthy as it applies to the Vanguard, but imo it serves as a stronger indictment toward those who are able to view the Vanguard as anything other than awful and predatory and murderous. Other people have the luxury of being able to see this through another lens if they so want to--Orym cannot. Because once a group like this has murdered your family, for the sake of a practice run no less, a test, it is impossible to view the situation in any other way. He is walking proof of the harm that the Vanguard does. His loved ones have been deemed "necessary collateral damage." His lens is not one that can or should be set aside in the assessment of the Vanguard, because if they are willing to commit such heinous crimes and excuse them as necessary collateral for ends that are so uncertain, then they are fundamentally not an organization that can be reasoned with or even should be sympathized with

[xxplastic-cubexx]

thought you'd enjoy this art by ozanpulat on insta.

OH I DO I DO VERY MUCH ENJOY THIS

[liorlen]

started watching the reboot and got nostalgic :)

[khainovo]

twitter trend w/ aichi

[kaiserouo]

this WILL become a competition among hunters

[utilitycaster]

@thmtrnfrvns replied to your post “ok so I was wrong about The Emissary and the...”:

didn't matt say that if you popped the bubbles those people turned to dust? Like the bubbles are the only thing preserving them? I might be totally wrong but I keep seeing this question being asked so I'm confused

​He hasn't, and I actually want to cover this. The lore has thus far been noncommittal, both from an out of world perspective (ie, the EGTW, for which this serves as a potential plot hook should people wish to explore it) and in-world (ie, in the canon of Exandria from the main campaigns and other canonical works such as The Nine Eyes of Lucien). We don't know if it's possible; we also very much don't know that it's impossible.

Which is what I want to talk about, because it's weird to me that this idea spread so much within the fandom - that the bubbles are an outright lost cause. I mentioned it before, but the argument the gods should be destroyed (even from behind the Divine Gate) in some sort of retribution for Aeor barely holds up as is; it certainly won't bring back Aeor, and the Divine Gate serves to hold back the gods already so destroying it only in order to kill them is purely an act of vengeance. But it really falls apart if there could be survivors of Aeor.

It's very easy to hold yourself up as the champion for people who cannot speak. They can't contradict you; you can say their motivations and desires are whatever you want. This is something explored in modern political thought, both in the many critiques of the anti-abortion movement (fetuses are fundamentally agency-less things) and in, for example, Dara Horn's People Love Dead Jews. Obviously this is true for any fictional character - none of them can respond to their advocates directly - but especially one who can't even in canon speak on their own behalf. If you say that Ashton would be on Ludinus's side, Ashton might, within the narrative, prove you wrong; but if you say the Aeorians would be, well, who knows. They're dead. Unless they're not. Bringing back anyone from the stasis bubbles fucks over that argument twice: now there are survivors, and those survivors can speak. (Worth noting that the two Aeormatons we've seen in C3 directly have not been in Ludinus's favor, and that his generals at least had no vested interest in sparing the Aeormaton they knew about; this isn't about the people of Aeor or what was lost, it's about pointing at corpses and saying they'd have your back if only they weren't dead.)

This a pattern for the people making arguments in Ludinus's favor. They invoke the titans (dead long before the narrative, and the person who killed the last two of them was Laerryn Coramar-Seelie, whom they don't seem to condemn for it, and they never really talk about what life for the titans must have been. It's not about the titans). They invoke FCG (dead, and they didn't really like them much when they were alive because of, you know, the whole faith in a deity thing, but now that he's dead they can pretend he's a mouthpiece for them. It's not about FCG, or Aeormatons, or Aeor.) They tried invoking the characters who were vaguely critical of the gods in the past but didn't have the lore to back it up and those characters (Keyleth, Essek, Percy) have all sided very clearly with the Accord, so now they stick only to people who can't weigh in and disprove the point. They make up hypotheticals about Bor'Dor and Petrov, the former of which is, again, dead, and the latter of which is a minor NPC with but a slim chance of appearing again whether he lives or dies and both of whom are equally representative of how the Vanguard preys on disaffected young people and chews them up and destroys them while telling them it's for the best, and ignore the many, many living who have been irrevocably harmed by the Vanguard.

It might end up being true that the stasis bubbles are a dead end, and I think it's pretty likely they won't get explored in-game, but if someone says they're absolutely a dead end - especially when Ludinus is going to invoke the fall of Aeor - it's worth exploring why they're saying that. Are they just misinformed (in which case you should still examine their argument, for, you know, not knowing the source material sufficiently well to craft accurate premises from which to argue)? Or would even acknowledging the possibility that they're not a lost cause destroy their argument?

[hauntilily]

kaiai sketch page

[trainingdummyrabbit]

ok. ready now. talking about manager!donqui's story log ^w^

ok so first of all. fucking adore the way this one was written. its worded very vividly, and the way it builds up to the culmination of their actions, their emotions, circling around and around itself, again and again, redefining itself slowly, bit by bit. the slow descent from "it must be for the best" to "the family is suffering" to "Something Has To Be Done" was Very delicious.

that slow creep of distance between quixote and the family. from watching from behind a pillar, to across the hall, from the description of echoing laughter to him and the knight being in a little world of his own-- eventually to going off entirely by himself. [Step by step. One; Two; Three.]

especially taken by the description of the way the human guests regarded them- "...polite and innocent affability, at worst." / "Our sacrifice was all it took to perpetuate this idyllic reality. / … Yes. Our sacrifice, and only our sacrifice." the silent implication that not only were they nothing in the eyes of the guests, but that what they had to suffer through was an 'acceptable sacrifice'. that none of it mattered.

and then, the description of how sancho interacts with the rest of the family. dotted with awkward silences, this odd discomfort... but still so clearly noting that the entire time; she Had watched. she Had listened. she had simply never acted upon any of it before. perhaps never know How. especially the end of rodya's snippet-- allowing her to go off on her own, but quickly deciding to accompany her, as "It would be easier for you to have me there to smooth things out." as if she too began to understand the way sancho acts. knowing she has difficulty with that communication and preparing for it, yes; but also the fact that she is going out of her way to assist. no longer so intently avoiding one another.

(also intently thinking about "I merely thought to break the ice, given that you have remained entirely silent since the moment you stepped into this room." god. man. Man.)

i do think about the fact, though. that even as the cracks began forming, even as they were committing that Sin-- not a single time did it seem to focus on Sancho and Her Emotions, Personally. implications were there, yes, but the thread of the story dances around them, leaves them undefined. simply; "it must be for the best." "hating that echoing laughter-" "for The Family to be sealed away for another eternity--" "...while I bear the responsibility and the guilt; … go seek the happiness that you lost." she continues to completely avoid Herself as a factor. she takes this weight entirely upon herself. despite her opening up more to the family, she refuses to engage with how all of this afflicts Her. its painfully restrained.

the implication this "happiness" was not meant for her. that "dreaming" wasnt something that was in her bounds to reach for. and killing their father was the final nail in the coffin, asserting all of this to be undeniable, unbreakable. A Simple Truth. in this act, she proves his actions to be just as foolish as she had insisted them to be, and bars herself from ever thinking about them again. a conflict of ideals with no mediator.

"… but for me— … No, for us, our Family… it was nothing more than a culmination of our worst nightmares." / "In my hand that wielded the lance ... lingered a foreign and unfamiliar sensation. / My very own thoughts then are alien to me. How did I feel as I buried their still living bodies into the earth? How did I feel as I so mercilessly tore through their skulls? / I open my eyes and look at my hands, sodden with sweat. I wipe them dry." her complete and utter dismissal of self. 'I wipe them dry,' almost as if to disregard, to hide the proof of her emotions. the implication that the guilt she felt killing her family members on quixote's command was so immense she went to the priest on her own volition, only to immediately take up some of his burden instead of actually addressing that clear distress she was under.

the way her final words are interspersed with narration of her father, the rain, the collapse of la manchaland. her words speak of forward motion, but her eyes remain rooted to the spot. she cannot, and does not look away. sancho noticing quixote's hesitance, being the one to plead to him to stop. he doesnt fight back. "As if to say that his love for us hasn't changed." she breaks it with her own hands, but that tie between them doesnt fully snap. and instead, in the face of this sin she has committed, she relegates herself to holding the family aloft.

and in a way, she really does become him.

[astralleywright]

i will say, the switch around from people claiming that the backlash against ashton was bc he failed to represent the anti-authoritarian, politically leftist ideology of many punks to those same people turning on ashton for expressing the anti-authoritarian, politically leftist ideology of many punks is so funny

[themirokai]

He would not fucking say that except it’s she would not fucking have her long hair down.

[revvethasmythh]

The research notes on distilling dunamancy found in Brenattos apothecary are so interesting actually. It’s not outright stated who’s notes they are, but with a retrospective lens it’s quite clear that they’re Ludinus’. There are fragments there about his musings on some of Trent’s protégées showing proficiency with early dunamancy, that he is planning to incorporate it into his own skill sets to aid him in his pursuits, and he records how it seems the Kryn have been quote unquote “learning to bend and break the threads of destiny for hundreds of years. Be this truth, I cannot imagine the Raven Queen looks down upon them favorably either, though the thought brings a laugh to my lips.”

[xxplastic-cubexx]

kinda cryin at learnin my cats favorite toy was a lil captain america but also that dhe got his eyes ripped out

[knightofspades]

Happy Birthday, Kyou

he is such a character

[echosong971]

she wanted snuggles

[khainovo]

day 2 // favourite team

they are all drunk and having fun :)

day 3 and day 4 are going to be posted together because tomorrow is the heaviest day of our midterms wish me luck besties