#nothing can diminish that

[alpacacare-archive]

its DESTINY

#repostober #day 18 actually on time! wow #undertale #papyrus #danganronpa #dr1 #kiyotaka ishimaru #yes. mashing favorite things together again #but it was meant to be #so many similarities between these two goofs #loud eccentric passionate autistic supportive of their friends always wearing the same outfit EASILY the best character in their franchise #HARDWORKING TO THE POINT OF WORKAHOLISM!!!!!!! UPLIFTING OTHERS WITHOUT ERASING OR DIMINISHING THEIR OWN GREATNESS!!!!!! #always eats the same thing (taka - rice balls toast and a banana- papyrus - DINOSAUR EGG OATMEAL NOT SPAGHETTI sorry its a pet peeve) #kindhearted and so aggressive about it genuinely believe that anyone can improve themselves and theyre both so silly and quirky all the tim #literally the only differences that i can think of are that taka would throw himself overboard if someone authoritative told him to #before they could even finish their sentence while papyrus is an anarchist arsonist who cusses and his intended jokes are actually funny #' * SIGH * ... WHAT A TROUBLED YOUNG HUMAN ... 'FUCK' ISN'T EVEN IN HIS RARE VOCABULARY ! HOW DOES HE FUNCTION UNDER THESE CONDITIONS ?? #he would take taka under his wing and get him back on the straight and narrow (give him weed) #and i feel like after the three day long yell over how a skeleton is walking and talking as if that were normal he'd really look up to him #fav things about this are the way takas shirt hangs off of papyrus' rib cage cus theres nothing there but a spine #that was so fun to draw sdfhg #taka cosplaying papyrus is my gift to humanity today

[demon-diva]

I’ve peaked.

Move aside future kids and wife nothing is ever going to top this feeling.

#I don’t give a fuck if gale doesn’t approve #don’t get me wrong I like gale #but nothing can diminish my joy in this moment #not even the loveable gremlin who eats my shoes #astarion #lae’zel #shadowheart #wyll #karlach #bg3 #bg3 approval #bg3 act 1 #astarion romance #astarion approves #karlach romance #karlach approves #baldurs gate #baldur's gate iii #baldurs gate astarion #baldurs gate 3 #baldurs gate iii #DnD #rpg #d&d

[burr-ell]

To expand on the previous post (with excellent addition by @kerosene-in-a-blender), I genuinely believe Laudna as a character would be a lot stronger in one of two scenarios:

1. Ditch the Whitestone stuff. I say this as someone who has produced almost nothing but de Rolo content—that is too big a part of Campaign 1 not to completely overshadow anything different the character tries to do in a long-form narrative. I think they could have threaded that needle, but that requires so much more focus and attention that a fast-paced story about a moon conspiracy just isn't built for. It's been 65 episodes and Whitestone nostalgia is all the character has meaningfully contributed to the narrative.

They put themselves between a rock and a hard place before the story even started. You can't bring in Delilah too often without inevitably treading on Campaign 1, but you also can't use her too little—not just because she's Delilah Briarwood, but also because that's the patron of a PC and your PCs need to be taking center stage. And yet there is nothing Delilah's presence has done in the story thus far that could not have been accomplished by a completely different, hitherto-unknown necromancer patron. Laudna's experiences in Whitestone could be replaced with a similarly traumatic backstory (it's not like Exandria is hurting for necromancers abusing power) and she'd have to actually elaborate on it and flesh out the worldbuilding and think about the backstory instead of being able to lean on "Hey, you guys remember that Briarwood arc? Freaky, right?"

2. Keep Laudna as she is and use her in an EXU miniseries. Set it in northwestern Tal'Dorei, where she's been wandering aimlessly for thirty years, spending half the time disassociating and half the time making her dolls. She meets a colorful group of people and they go on some adventures, and she finally decides to take back her life and do something about the voice in her head. You'd basically keep the Whitestone episodes of C3 as they are, give or take a few beats, as the climactic episodes of the series, and then the newly fire-forged friends set off for whatever new journey awaits them.

Maybe Laudna switches patrons; maybe she ditches the warlock thing entirely; maybe she ends the miniseries not knowing what she wants but excited to learn about it with her new companions. Mini-campaigns don't have to worry about that kind of thing! You can have your Whitestone nostalgia and some fanservice while still telling a pretty fun story, and it won't feel like a weird extra appendage to a main campaign that otherwise has very little to do with it. I wouldn't say it's a story I'd be interested in seeing continue, but it's perfectly serviceable for something small and self-contained.

What it has not been serviceable for is the long-form story of Campaign 3.

Honestly, I was a little concerned about all of this even before I started watching all the way through, but I wanted to give it time and judge it for myself. I don't believe in unfounded doomsaying, and I wanted to give the show a chance to do something interesting. And it has been 65 episodes, over 260 hours of content, which I think puts us well past the window of "give it a chance", and Laudna has spent the vast majority of her time not meaningfully engaging with her levels of warlock if it doesn't contribute to creepy girl vibes. (She frankly isn't engaging with her levels in sorcerer, either.) She's never even addressed potentially finding a new patron—so does she not want to? But then why is she so distressed about the idea of Delilah resurfacing? And if she does want a new patron, why has nothing actually happened in the almost-thirty episodes we've had since the Whitestone trip? If she's been "fighting Delilah for thirty-odd years", why didn't she take the chance to explicitly try to connect with, say, the Sun Tree? Or literally anyone else?

And honestly, as a Campaign 1 fan I have to say I'm also frustrated at how Delilah's presence specifically undercuts that story. Like, yeah, you have a technical reason for why she's still here, but "well she IS a powerful necromancer" is just a mechanical explanation, not a dramaturgical one. Her story is done. The chapter closed. She had ample opportunity, including when specifically asked by the Hells, to state any specific goals—any at all—and didn't. This is the woman who menaced Percy and Vex? This is the woman who permanently killed Vax? ...Really?

It could have been an interesting challenge to take on in referencing something from the past while bringing something new to the table, and it's not like they haven't done that before; they've already shown with Jester and the Traveler that it can be done. But they haven't done it here; any opportunity for Laudna to grow beyond her vague concepts—"What if Sun Tree Body...with Delilah patron? What if weird scary girl...but happy?"—has been generally ignored. Her killing Bor'dor is the first time in the entire campaign that she's done something that really got my attention, and in two episodes it's almost immediately papered over, followed by some inexplicable "must you continue to reconquer?" word salad about the gods.

Marisha explicitly refused to create a new character until she knew for sure whether or not Laudna would be resurrected. But if she enjoys her so much, when is she going to do anything meaningful with her?

#critical role #cr meta #long post #i would love to believe that something will happen with her but i've been hoping for something to happen all this time and it hasn't #it seemed like it would! and then it kinda just. fizzled out and got papered over #like you can't just say 'nono her character is great she really picks up after 300 hours of pure aesthetic and nothing else' #like. that's a lot of potential and increasingly diminishing returns #and it's WEIRD. because i've had beau for five episodes and she's so much stronger as a character #i've never been really into keyleth as a character but she similarly feels really grounded #and patia was around for four episodes and was an absolute tour de force #like we KNOW the player can do better. why isn't she

[sastiel-is-my-serotonin]

Sam being addicted to demon blood so Castiel offers an angelic fix, love that idea. And propose an expansion on that idea, that Sam gets so used to angelic energy he's capable of manipulating it the same way he can with demons. And angel blood is so much more potent and stronger he doesn't need to constantly drink it to keep these abilities. It's still incredibly taxing and difficult, but imagine everyone's surprise when Sam's able to take down angels without a blade of any kind. That he's able to do it with their grace and diminish it into nothing.

#He didn't know he had it in him until he was backed up into a corner with people depending on him #And he truly felt like a monster realizing what he had done even if it was out of necessity #And he can't even begin to look Castiel in the eyes afterwards knowing there's guilt in Castiel for offering that as a solution #Unaware of the side effects #Like that's free angst right there!! #sam winchester #castiel #sastiel #samstiel #Also what if I say Sam can either diminish the grace into nothing or rip it out of the angel and use that grace for himself... #So many ideas with this!!!

[wonder-worker]

Queen Margaret (of Anjou) had written to the Common Council in November when the news of the Duke of York's coup was proclaimed. The letter from the queen was published in modernised English by M.A.E. Wood in 1846, and she dated it to February 1461 because of its opening sentence: ‘And whereas the late Duke of N [York]...." However the rest of the letter, and that of the prince, is in the present tense and clearly indicates that the Duke of York is still alive. The reference to the ‘late duke’ is not to his demise but to the attainder of 1459 when he was stripped of his titles as well as of his lands. If the queen’s letter dates to November 1460, and not February 1461, it make perfect sense. Margaret declared the Duke of York had ‘upon an untrue pretense, feigned a title to my lord’s crown’ and in so doing had broken his oath of fealty. She thanked the Londoners for their loyalty in rejecting his claim. She knew of the rumours, that we and my lords sayd sone and owrs shuld newly drawe toward yow with an vnsome [uncounted] powere of strangars, disposed to robbe and to dispoyle yow of yowr goods and havours, we will that ye knowe for certeyne that . . . . [y]e, nor none of yow, shalbe robbed, dispoyled nor wronged by any parson that at that tyme we or owr sayd sone shalbe accompanied with She entrusted the king's person to the care of the citizens ‘so that thrwghe malice of his sayde enemye he be no more trowbled vexed ne jeoparded.’ In other words the queen was well informed in November 1460 of the propaganda in London concerning the threat posed by a Lancastrian military challenge to the illegal Yorkist proceedings. Margaret assured the Common Council that no harm would come to the citizenry or to their property. Because the letter was initially misdated, it has been assumed that the queen wrote it after she realised the harm her marauding troops were doing to her cause, and to lull London into a false sense of security. This is not the case, and it is a typical example of historians accepting without question Margaret’s character as depicted in Yorkist propaganda. Margaret’s letter was a true statement of her intentions but it made no impact at the time and has made none since. How many people heard of it? The Yorkist council under the Earl of Warwick, in collusion with the Common Council of the city, was in an ideal position to suppress any wide dissemination of the letter, or of its content.

... When Margaret joined the Lancastrian lords it is unlikely that she had Scottish troops with her. It is possible that Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, sent men from Wales but there was no compelling reason why he should, he needed all the forces at his disposal to face Edward Earl of March, now Duke of York following his father’s death at Wakefield, who, in fact, defeated Pembroke at Mortimer’s Cross on 2 February just as the Lancastrian army was marching south. The oft repeated statement that the Lancastrian army was composed of a motley array of Scots, Welsh, other foreigners (French by implication, for it had not been forgotten that René of Anjou, Queen Margaret’s father, had served with the French forces in Nomandy when the English were expelled from the duchy, nor that King Charles VII was her uncle) as well as northern men is based on a single chronicle, the Brief Notes written mainly in Latin in the monastery of Ely, and ending in 1470. It is a compilation of gossip and rumour, some of it wildly inaccurate, but including information not found in any other contemporary source, which accounts for the credence accorded to it. The Dukes of Somerset and Exeter and the Earl of Devon brought men from the south and west. The Earl of Northumberland was not solely reliant on his northern estates; as Lord Poynings he had extensive holdings in the south. The northerners were tenants and retainers of Northumberland, Clifford, Dacre, the Westmorland Nevilles, and Fitzhugh, and accustomed to the discipline of border defence. The continuator of Gregory’s Chronicle, probably our best witness, is emphatic that the second battle of St Albans was won by the ‘howseholde men and feyd men.” Camp followers and auxiliaries of undesirables there undoubtedly were, as there are on the fringes of any army, but the motley rabble the queen is supposed to have loosed on peaceful England owes more to the imagination of Yorkist propagandists than to the actual composition of the Lancastrian army.

... Two differing accounts of the Lancastrian march on London are generally accepted. One is that a large army, moving down the Great North Road, was made up of such disparate and unruly elements that the queen and her commanders were powerless to control it.” Alternatively, Queen Margaret did not wish to curb her army, but encouraged it to ravage all lands south of the Trent, either from sheet spite or because it was the only way she could pay her troops.” Many epithets have been applied to the queen, few of them complimentary, but no one has as yet called her stupid. It would have been an act of crass stupidity wilfully to encourage her forces to loot the very land she was trying to restore to an acceptance of Lancastrian rule, with her son as heir to the throne. On reaching St Albans, so the story goes, the Lancastrian army suddenly became a disciplined force which, by a series of complicated manoeuvres, including a night march and a flank attack, won the second battle of St Albans, even though the Yorkists were commanded by the redoubtable Earl of Warwick. The explanation offered is that the rabble element, loaded down with plunder, had descended before the battle and only the household men remained. Then the rabble reappeared, and London was threatened. To avert a sack of the city the queen decided to withdraw the army, either on her own initiative or urged by the peace-loving King Henry; as it departed it pillaged the Abbey of St Albans, with the king and queen in residence, and retired north, plundering as it went. Nevertheless, it was sufficiently intact a month later to meet and nearly defeat the Yorkist forces at Towton, the bloodiest and hardest fought battle of the civil war thus far. The ‘facts’ as stated make little sense, because they are seen through the distorting glass of Yorkist propaganda.

The ravages allegedly committed by the Lancastrian army are extensively documented in the chronicles, written after the event and under a Yorkist king. They are strong on rhetoric but short on detail. The two accounts most often quoted are by the Croyland Chronicle and Abbott Whethamstede. There is no doubting the note of genuine hysterical fear in both. The inhabitants of the abbey of Crowland were thoroughly frightened by what they believed would happen as the Lancastrians swept south. ‘What do you suppose must have been our fears . . . [w]hen every day rumours of this sad nature were reaching our ears.’ Especially alarming was the threat to church property. The northern men ‘irreverently rushed, in their unbridled and frantic rage into churches . . . [a]nd most nefariously plundered them.’ If anyone resisted ‘they cruelly slaughtered them in the very churches or churchyards.’ People sought shelter for themselves and their goods in the abbey,��� but there is not a single report of refugees seeking succour in the wake of the passage of the army after their homes had been burned and their possessions stolen. The Lancastrians were looting, according to the Crowland Chronicle, on a front thirty miles wide ‘like so many locusts.“ Why, then, did they come within six miles but bypass Crowland? The account as a whole makes it obvious that it was written considerably later than the events it so graphically describes.

The claim that Stamford was subject to a sack from which it did not recover is based on the Tudor antiquary John Leland. His attribution of the damage is speculation; by the time he wrote stories of Lancastrian ravages were well established, but outside living memory. His statement was embellished by the romantic historian Francis Peck in the early eighteenth century. Peck gives a spirited account of Wakefield and the Lancastrian march, influenced by Tudor as well as Yorkist historiography. … As late as 12 February when Warwick moved his troops to St Albans it is claimed that he did not know the whereabouts of the Lancastrians, an odd lack of military intelligence about an army that was supposed to be leaving havoc in its wake. The Lancastrians apparently swerved to the west after passing Royston which has puzzled military historians because they accept that it came down the Great North Road, but on the evidence we have it is impossible to affirm this. If it came from York via Grantham, Leicester, Market Harborough, Northampton and Stony Stratford to Dunstable, where the first engagement took place, there was no necessity to make an inexplicable swerve westwards because its line of march brought it to Dunstable and then to St Albans. The Lancastrians defeated Warwick’s army on 17 February 1461 and Warwick fled the field. In an echo of Wakefield there is a suggestion of treachery. An English Chronicle tells the story of one Thomas Lovelace, a captain of Kent in the Yorkist ranks, who also appears in Waurin. Lovelace, it is claimed, was captured at Wakefield and promised Queen Margaret that he would join Warwick and then betray and desert him, in return for his freedom.

Lt. Colonel Bume, in a rare spirit of chivalry, credits Margaret with the tactical plan that won the victory, although only because it was so unorthodox that it must have been devised by a woman. But there is no evidence that Margaret had any military flair, let alone experience. A more likely candidate is the veteran captain Andrew Trolloppe who served with Warwick when the latter was Captain of Calais, but he refused to fight under the Yorkist banner against his king at Ludford in 1459 when Warwick brought over a contingent of Calais men to defy King Henry in the field. It was Trolloppe’s ‘desertion’ at Ludford, it is claimed, that forced the Yorkists to flee. The most objective and detailed account of the battle of St Albans is by the unknown continuator of Gregory’s Chronicle. The chronicle ends in 1469 and by that time it was safe to criticise Warwick, who was then out of favour. The continuator was a London citizen who may have fought in the Yorkist ranks. He had an interest in military matters and recorded the gathering of the Lancastrian army at Hull, before Wakefield, and the detail that the troops wore the Prince of Wales’ colours and ostrich feathers on their livery together with the insignia of their lords. He had heard the rumours of a large ill-disciplined army, but because he saw only the household men he concluded that the northerners ran away before the battle. Abbot Whethamstede wrote a longer though far less circumstantial account, in which he carefully made no mention of the Earl of Warwick. … Margaret of Anjou had won the battle but she proceeded to lose the war. London lay open to her and she made a fatal political blunder in retreating from St Albans instead of taking possession of the capital.' Although mistaken, her reasons for doing so were cogent. The focus of contemporary accounts is the threat to London from the Lancastrian army. This is repeated in all the standard histories, and even those who credit Margaret with deliberately turning away from London do so for the wrong reasons.

... The uncertainties and delays, as well as the hostility of some citizens, served to reinforce Margaret’s belief that entry to London could be dangerous. It was not what London had to fear from her but what she had to fear from London that made her hesitate. Had she made a show of riding in state into the city with her husband and son in a colourful procession she might have accomplished a Lancastrian restoration, but Margaret had never courted popularity with the Londoners, as Warwick had, and she had kept the court away from the capital for several years in the late 1450s, a move that was naturally resented. Warwick’s propaganda had tarnished her image, associating her irrevocably with the dreaded northern men. There was also the danger that if Warwick and Edward of March reached London with a substantial force she could be trapped inside a hostile city, and she cannot have doubted that once she and Prince Edward were taken prisoner the Lancastrian dynasty would come to an end. Understandably, at the critical moment, Margaret lost her nerve. ... Queen Margaret did not march south in 1461 in order to take possession of London, but to recover the person of the king. She underestimated the importance of the capital to her cause." Although she had attempted to establish the court away from London, the Yorkist lords did not oppose her for taking the government out of the capital, but for excluding them from participation in it. Nevertheless London became the natural and lucrative base for the Yorkists, of which they took full advantage. The author of the Annales was in no doubt that it was Margaret’s failure to enter London that ensured the doom of the Lancastrian dynasty. A view shared, of course, by the continuator of Gregory’s Chronicle, a devoted Londoner:

He that had Londyn for sake Wolde no more to hem take The king, queen and prince had been in residence at the Abbey of St Albans since the Lancastrian victory. Abbot Whethamstede, at his most obscure, conveys a strong impression that St Albans was devastated because the Lancastrian leaders, including Queen Margaret, encouraged plundering south of the Trent in lieu of wages. There must have been some pillaging by an army which had been kept in a state of uncertainty for a week, but whether it was as widespread or as devastating as the good abbot, and later chroniclers, assert is by no means certain. Whethamstede is so admirably obtuse that his rhetoric confuses both the chronology and the facts. So convoluted and uncircumstantial is his account that the eighteenth century historian of the abbey, the Reverend Peter Newcome, was trapped into saying: ‘These followers of the Earl of March were looked on as monsters in barbarity.’ He is echoed by Antonia Gransden who has ‘the conflict between the southemers of Henry’s army and the nonherners of Edward’s. The abbey was not pillaged, but Whethamstede blackened Queen Margaret’s reputation by a vague accusation that she appropriated one of the abbey’s valuable possessions before leaving for the north. This is quite likely, not in a spirit of plunder or avarice, but as a contribution to the Lancastrian war effort, just as she had extorted, or so he later claimed, a loan from the prior of Durham earlier in the year. The majority of the chroniclers content themselves with the laconic statement that the queen and her army withdrew to the north, they are more concerned to record in rapturous detail the reception of Edward IV by ‘his’ people. An English Chronicle, hostile to the last, reports that the Lancastrian army plundered its way north as remorselessly as it had on its journey south. One can only assume that it took a different route. The Lancastrian march ended where it began, in the city of York. Edward of March had himself proclaimed King Edward IV in the capital the queen had abandoned, and advanced north to win the battle of Towton on 29 March. The bid to unseat the government of the Yorkist lords had failed, and that failure brought a new dynasty into being. The Duke of York was dead, but his son was King of England whilst King Henry, Queen Margaret and Prince Edward sought shelter at the Scottish court. The Lancastrian march on London had vindicated its stated purpose, to recover the person of the king so that the crown would not continue to be a pawn in the hands of rebels and traitors, but ultimately it had failed because the Lancastrian leaders, including Queen Margaret, simply did not envisage that Edward of March would have the courage or the capacity to declare himself king. Edward IV had all the attributes that King Henry (and Queen Margaret) lacked: he was young, ruthless, charming, and the best general of his day; and in the end he out-thought as well as out-manoeuvred them.

It cannot be argued that no damage was done by the Lancastrian army. It was mid-winter, when supplies of any kind would have been short, so pillaging, petty theft, and unpaid foraging were inevitable. It kept the field for over a month and, and, as it stayed longest at Dunstable and in the environs of St Albans, both towns suffered from its presence. But the army did not indulge in systematic devastation of the countryside, either on its own account or at the behest of the queen. Nor did it contain contingents of England’s enemies, the Scots and the French, as claimed by Yorkist propaganda. Other armies were on the march that winter: a large Yorkist force moved from London to Towton and back again. There are no records of damage done by it, but equally, it cannot be claimed that there was none.

-B.M Cron, "Margaret of Anjou and the Lancastrian March on London, 1461"

#*The best propaganda narratives always contain an element of truth but it's important to remember that it's never the WHOLE truth #margaret of anjou #15th century #english history #my post #(please ignore my rambling tags below lmao) #imo the bottom line is: they were fighting a war and war is a scourge that is inevitably complicated and messy and unfortunate #arguing that NOTHING happened (on either side but especially the Lancastrians considering they were cut off from London's supplies) #is not a sustainable claim. However: Yorkist propaganda was blatantly propaganda and I wish that it's recognized more than it currently is #also I had *no idea* that her letter seems to have been actually written in 1460! I wish that was discussed more #& I wish Cron's speculation that Margaret may have feared being trapped in a hostile city with an approaching army was discussed more too #tho I don't 100% agree with article's concluding paragraph. 'Edward IV did not ultimately save England from further civil war' he...did??? #the Yorkist-Lancastrian civil war that began in the 1450s ended in 1471 and his 12-year reign after that was by and large peaceful #(tho Cron may he talking about the period in between 61-71? but the civil war was still ongoing; the Lancasters were still at large #and the opposing king and prince were still alive. Edward by himself can hardly be blamed for the civil war continuing lol) #but in any case after 1471 the war WAS believed to have ended for good and he WAS believed to have established a new dynasty #the conflict of 1483 was really not connected to the events of the 1450s-1471. it was an entirely new thing altogether #obviously he shouldn't be viewed as the grand undoubted rightful savior of England the way Yorkist propaganda sought to portray him #(and this goes for ALL other monarchs in English history and history in general) but I don't want to diminish his achievements either #However I definitely agree that the prevalent idea that the Lancasters wouldn't have been able to restore royal authority if they'd won #is very strange. its an alternate future that we can't possibly know the answer to so it's frustrating that people seem to assume the worst #I guess the reasons are probably 1) the Lancasters ultimately lost and it's the winners who write history #(the Ricardians are somehow the exception but they're evidently interested in romantic revisionism rather than actual history so 🤷🏻‍♀️) #and 2) their complicated former reign even before 1454. Ig put together I can see where the skepticism comes from tho I don't really agree #but then again the Yorkists themselves played a huge role in the chaos of the 1450s. if a faction like that was finally out of the way #(which they WOULD be if the Lancasters won in 1461) the Lancastrian dynasty would have been firmly restored and #Henry and Margaret would've probably had more space and time to restore royal authority without direct rival challenges #I'd argue that the Lancasters stood a significantly better chance at restoring & securing their dynasty if they won here rather than 1471 #also once again: the analyses written on Margaret's queenship; her role in the WotR; and the propaganda against her are all phenomenal #and far far superior than the analyses on any other historical woman of that time - so props to her absolutely fantastic historians

[randompiggy]

I also just wanna say that Megan Rapinoe is the most consequential american player of her generation and we are blessed beyond words to have seen her play

#what a bullshit way to go out; this has to be the end of artificial turf; but literally nothing can diminish that career she’s had #it’s so hard to imagine what this sport will be without her but we are so lucky #nwsl

[illithilit]

That moment when you realize that Mourndax is so flippant about everything bc ofc he is. Man's barely had any agency in his life under his parents' control, and he's less than five years removed from that. He hasn't exactly had time to learn how to make decisions of his own, and acting like you don't give a shit what the outcome is, or that you've simply changed your mind about it for no particular reason is a lot easier than admitting to still remembering how much the leash hurt when pulled on.

#the moral of the story is I will gut you if I need to; I will carve my way out with only my teeth // Mourndax headcanon. #all the world will be your enemy and if they catch you they will kill you -- but first they must catch you // Vhaeraun headcanon. #also probably why Vhaeraun feels like so much of a crutch to him #he's a control figure even if Vhae doesn't actively control him #but the idea of letting someone else make his choices feels safer #meanwhile I'm so sure Vhae's perspective is knowing that feeling full well and wanting to help dig Daxie out of it #bc while yes there are plenty of things you can say about Vhaeraun #he does actually care a LOT about his followers #he's canonically one of the most responsive of any deity #ALSO I think the fact that Vhae ISN'T controlling Daxie and being more of a guard rail to grip onto #while he figures out his shit and or at most gives nudges in certain directions #is legit why Daxie's as attached to him as he is #sort of like the whole father figure I never got to experience / son I never wanted type deal #also ALSO as a little thought on Vhaeraun??? #while I haven't actually decided how I'm going to view what happened between Lolth and Corellon #there's something SO intrinsically hurtful about helping your mother escape from her husband #and then she goes and forges a society built upon hating and diminishing a piece of what you are #like before the point he turned on her Vhae was nothing but a loyal son to her #even if I'm so sure her choices were more reactionary towards Corellon than anything to do with him I just...... #idk how you wouldn't take that extremely personally. that shit's devastating fr

[randomidiocyncrazies]

Help I'm being held hostage by fem!Nie Mingjue AU

#mdzs #nie mingjue #i just think. it'd be sooo fascinating bc it could indirectly affect so many things #like. not in a big picture way #but in the small things #how would NMJ as a woman be perceived? how would she have survived in the early days after her dad's death? #we know nothing about Nie women cultivators #but since their technique is known to Really Mess The Cultivator Up #i can kind of imagine that women are discouraged from pursuing training beyond the basics #bc their role would've been to support the clan in ways other than fighting/achieving high cultivation #so like. NMJ's role as daughter of the sect leader would've been to support her younger brother and make a beneficial marriage alliance #except her dad died a horrible death when she was a teen and her brother was a literal child. and someone had to keep the sect together. #(she'd look at the raging shell of a man her father became just before the end; she'd see her baby brother in his place) #and... would NHS be able to avoid his responsibilities for so long if he had an older sister instead of a brother? #would NMJ still be a front line commander in the Sunshot Campaign? i like to think she would but idk the logistics #and if NMJ had a diminished front line role would she still have met Meng Yao/JGY? #also. LXC would have a Very Different relationship with her if they're still in each other's orbits #bc LXC would be baffled by the concept of being Friends with a woman #the fem!nmj agenda

[crusaderce]

constant questions when making au's, one being would an uv-band from ons keep a demon from dying from the sun in demon slayer??

#it would be funny as hell #if a demon tried thinking it was fine and just poof #bonfire in the day #only works on vampires xD #nah but for a demon slayer au i am so stuck on demon or human verse for a default #probably demon that didn't bother ever challenging for a rank?? #its hard trying to place strong characters in a universe with ranking cause like you dont wanna boot other charatcers b u t you dont want t #diminish your characters actual strength #honestly ons vampires vs kny demons would be interesting #both have advantages #since we dont really know if vampires can regenerate #i like to think they can to a limit unlike a demon #since the whole remove the heart aspect of a vampire #like to think physically and stuff are vampires but overall abilities go to demons?? #if its dealing with blood arts and stuff #but then again urd did step on a missile like it was nothing #SO- #idk #and ky slashed an entire skyscrapper in half #i know that the demons in ons are probably superior depending on which ones like ashera or shikama #the power scaling is just so different and difficult sometimes T-T #but like demon-powered up humans vs regular humans of kny?? yeah

[tardis--dreams]

One thing you need to know about me is that I will never reblog anything that has the addition "this should be reblogged by everyone" or anything of the like.

#unless it's like #really funny and not a guilt trippy kind of bullshit #i can agree 130% with a post and then see that comment and I'm like #yeah no. go fuck yourself. #(this point has been made so many times but people don't get why it's annoying apparently. people don't dislike your stupid addition #because they secretly disagree with the post but because now it seems like some weird social obligation to rb is #rb this or you're a bad person is a clever marketing strategy but it's quite stupid because it weakens the original point #oh you're saying everyone should rb this? well now it looks like the ppl rbing actually just do it out of some feeling #of social obligation. not because they really want to but because they want to fulfill the arbitrary standards you just made up for being #a good person #and don't get me wrong most certainly are most people rb these posts still out of agreement with the original statement #but it's still annoying as fuck and also you'd think ppl would know by now that people don't generally like being told what to do #so my hypothesis is (and i won't do any research to prove or disprove it (i might be very wrong and most people don't mind obviously)) bjt #but my hypothesis is that people who originally agree with the post but have a strong desire of being free in their choices #won't actually end up rbing bc it's just not that free of a choice anymore bc you just had to make it 'obligatory' but we all know #nothing is obligatory on a stupid webbed site like this so they scroll past while people who maybe would have scrolled past now feel #like they might actually be a bad person if they don't do as it says but without actually caring about the content. which diminishes #the positivity the post originally was supposed to spread bc how do you tell ppl actually mean it now when they rb these things #anyway. am i ranting about something completely asinine phenomenon on tumblr.com? yes. #would it be better to not dedicate my time and energy into making a 'hate' post? absolutely. but that will never stop me from doing so #(also works for things like 'you guys HAVE to do xyz [for your (mental) health/etc]'. literally the best advice phrased like this #is counterproductive. post something that doesn't sound like you're judging everyone who does otherwise and maybe ppl will be more inclined #to believe whatever your point or statement is) #ok I'll stop #shut up amy

[woolydemon]

I am cursed with the burden of liking so many things but not having energy to make art for all the things I like 😭

#i want to make legos art i want to make art for niche video games i want to draw all the cartoons that inspire me #but i cant 😔 #i have a hard time making art i think is post worthy quality on a consistent basis </3 #legit don't know how ppl can post so much girl i would Die #also im p occupied with school rn so i rlly shouldnt be spending time on non mandatory projects #and making art of stuff thats more niche or not what i have an audience for?? idk theres the risk of it flopping #while i know stuff like that doesnt diminish the value of my work it still stings man. esp when its hard for me to make stuff anyway #its like. why go through the effort if i know ppl wont care yknow #though i have gotten better at just not giving a shit anymore i still will make posts/rb abt stuff that everybody just ignores #but i dont care bc i need to have weird music and videos and images on my blog. I'll die without them. its my lifeblood #hopefully i can channel that energy more into posting abt leas popular things. maybe even original stuff- #lol sike there's basically nothing in the world that will make me confident in posting my ocs lmaooo #sorry i just dont think too highly on my abilities to develop my original content #so i just keep them all to myself to avoid the possibility of showing them to other ppl and they just straight up hate it ajdgfkfjhf #rando thoughtz

[fideidefenswhore]

Jane stans are literally the most unpleasant people I've had the misfortune to trip over on Tumblr. The sanctimony and double standards defy belief. Seriously, can they keep to a coherent thought process?

It's the strawman arguments for me.

#actually i find them more annoying on instagram but. lels #are there JS stans on tiktok? #i know there are mary i and c/oa stans and they're usually the same people so. mayhap #anon #it's particularly for me the double standard afforded in the benefit of the doubt #you can't argue that anne circa 1527 didn't know that if she and henry were successful that it would result #in the status of her predecessor and future stepdaughter being diminished #but what you can say is that it's unlikely she knew as a certainty then that it would result in their separation #for the rest of their lives...although once that happens there is no record of her having done or said anything against it #so then we go to the events of 1536 and it's that jane only believed it would result in an annulment and the same status change #but once she knew what it was actually going to result in? all we know of her is that she received news of the arrest #and then presumably asked to receive news of the condemnation and execution of her predecessor #she did not do or say dick about it . #'no one did or expressed doubts' well; cranmer did. it seems others that weren't in the lexicon of power persay did (much murmuring) #but yes; it's true that no one else did. #however jane was the direct beneficiary. that she did or said nothing against what was being done thus means more #just like it does with AB . #for all intents and purposes all we know is she accepted that equably. #&...... #we're talking about trauma and humiliation versus trauma and humiliation and murder #the pretense of why is jane the least favorite... i don't believe they're that dumb #how is it that dislike of the latter is only emotional bias but dislike of the former is grounded simply in reason and morality ? #and then they expect us to believe them...?

[seavoice]

tbh I loved joedeclan cdth AMAZINGFF but then in MI and GW it felt so like. Meh

i did really really love them in mi too, but i get what you mean :( cdth jordeclan was SO good but then it did taper out a bit in mi, and gw there was like. nothing. two scenes? one of them from ronan's pov. it was just so empty of them. so random and rushed. :(

the worst thing is i don't even think this is unique to jordeclan in this series. carmenessy starts and stops so randomly, carliana...less said the better, even adam/ronan didn't do anything great for me apart from that chapter 49 scene which went hard! (i know maggie said this series could stand on its own, but i genuinely don't see how pynch would work in this series at aLL if the reader wasn't familiar with trc). also in a similar vein, this is going to sound COLD but truly felt the dreamer trilogy dropped the ball on relationships in general--in a certain way it does work, because it's about the crushing weight of isolation and i feel that loneliness permeating through each character's story was very raw and powerful at times, but there was way too much of "tell don't show" towards the end where we didn't follow through on these themes of isolation and loneliness to their natural conclusion and instead just ended up with everybody being hunky-dory...SIGH

#i remember thinking my mi rating was going to depend a LOT on how the series and ended and with the benefit (?) of hindsight can i say. #greywaren felt like a nothing book AND sort of diminished my love for mi in a pretty big way. because it feels like a massive detour #now in SO many ways #asks #imnotrealimsleeping

[hardtchill]

one of my favorite things in this world is probably cp scoring when sonnet is trying to defend her lmaoooo

Lmaoo same. It's pretty great when the defender with Peter Pan syndrome gives you material to use for when her crazy stans come knocking again. I have called Sonnett a forever rookie who shouldn't be on the National team for like 2 years now, i would like to thank Pressi for giving me the video material that proves it 😂

#ask #nwsl #christen press #emily sonnett #no but really #nothing to diminish Angel girl's talent but Sonnett literally was a training dummy during that goal #if someone like Christen charges at you - you don't just stand there #you either force her outside or defend one side of the goal so your goalie can cover the other - she just didn't do anything

[yioh]

man i have soooooo many thoughts abt the sasaki to miyano authors rules on reposting their manga panels 🥲

#because like .. at the end if that’s what the artist wants then there’s no way you can go against it because they Made the manga you Have to #respect their wishes because it’s their work and that’s obvious #but also . idk it diminishes all the excitement abt the manga #like you can no longer talk abt specific scenes or expressions or cute panels etc #this is what kinda made me lose interest in this authors works ngl it just .. doesn’t hit the same #but that is the artists wish so nothing can be done #like i get altering panels even by colouring and stuff but not being allowed to repost (without the official hashtag ofc) is rly sad. 😭 #and i’m not talking like the entire chapter ofc but rly just little panels etc to help when you’re talking abt a specific scene #i do that sm with witch hat and jjk lol and it really elevates my excitement and love ?? and i love when other ppl talk back to me abt those #scenes #i think it’s also jarring because i’ve never seen other authors post abt this many specific rules but ig it’s common in japanese fandom but #we’re just not exposed to it #it’s like when you read a book and you wanna post abt certain quotes and lines #like how else do you reference that exact thing yknow other than showing it when it’s manga panels 😭

[bigskydreaming]

I’ve barely paid attention to YJ this season as I largely fell out of love with it last season and mostly just want to stay caught up (though I still missed like, half of this season lmfao, I’m so good at things like staying caught up, How DO I do it).....

But I’m both LOL at the corner YJ’s managed to write themselves into and a little bit Crankypants myself.

Like first off, I think its absolutely hilarious that the way YJ approached this season, with each of the mains having their own individual arc of episodes, and leaving Dick’s arc to close the season out......they uh, kiiiiiiinda shot themselves in the foot with three long-running plotlines.

See, this season is all about Conner being missing and presumed dead, and this final arc is about Dick leading the investigation/hunt to find him and bring him back once and for all, right?

Which would be fine except that storyline makes it very hard for fans to forget that like.....there’s another presumed dead character who while having ties to multiple other characters, definitely has a special spot in Dick’s relationships and thus storylines....and that fans have been waiting and EXPECTING to eventually come back, for years now:

Wally West.

And of course, on top of that there’s the added problem that there’s ANOTHER presumed dead character who while having ties to multiple other characters blah blah blah special spot in Dick’s relationships and thus storylines, yada yada yada....fans have been waiting and EXPECTING to eventually come back, for years now:

Jason Todd.

See what I’m getting at? No matter what they do, UNLESS Young Justice closes out this season with ALL THREE characters returning now in the last four episodes of the season, all during Dick’s arc.....YJ’s gonna inevitably leave some fans pissed off or disappointed because like, they wanted their fave or their desired reunion.

And like, what are the odds that the show is actually going to close out the exact same plotline, THREE TIMES OVER, all at the same time, within the same span of episodes?

We might get two of the three, but all three? Not likely.

But the sheer breadth of similarities between the storylines, the obvious parallels and overlap, makes it kinda unrealistic for fans not to hope that that’s where they’re going with things.

There’s also the added element that each of the individual arcs this season have progressed the overall story about Conner AS well as giving each of the mains each arc has centered around like, their own individual plot. Zatanna’s arc had stuff about her and her father, and her growth as a mentor herself. Rocket’s arc was about her relationships, particularly with her son. Artemis’ arc had a strong focus on her relationship with Cheshire, etc, etc.

So it doesn’t help that so far, in the first episode of Dick’s arc, the focus has JUST been on the Conner storyline and bringing everyone else together under the banner of closing out that greater season-arc, with Dick in the leadership position and heading the charge.....

But without any real nod towards Dick’s own individual storylines. So one episode into his individual arc, and there’s already a lack of focus on him as an individual....meaning there’s that much more work for the rest of the episodes to do, IF they’re to actually give Dick his own focus and storyline outside of just his role in the season-long arc.

And that means....likely leaning into or building on legwork the show’s already done elsewhere throughout its entirety, falling back on pre-existing dynamics or storylines already established for Dick....like his feelings about Wally or Jason and what their losses did to him, the toll they took, and thus how their returns would impact him and/or the lengths he would go to see them returned.

But again....doing it with BOTH characters, at the same time? Not likely. So whatever way you look at it, its like YJ has primed fans to HOPE for, and even EXPECT, a resolution to one of those long-running storylines, the deaths of either Wally West or Jason Todd.....with a real unlikelihood that they have any intention of delivering on BOTH, at the same time.

And that’s a very interesting....choice, I gotta say.

#also Im not like MAD mad about it #but I did sigh and go why must people constantly lower themselves to my expectations in this regard instead #of pleasantly surprising me: #that line about Dick being all oh Im rusty on hacking because I barely ever do it anymore because Barbara's better at it than me #like...WHY WAS THAT NECESSARY? LITERALLY WHO ASKED? #you've gone to great lengths to establish this character as a pro hacker since he was FOURTEEN #you don't NEED to justify his abilities as a hacker or programmer anymore #you've already done it! multiple times over! audiences know and expect that Dick is good at hacking! #so why do you like.....feel the need to diminish the abilities you ALREADY GAVE HIM to throw out a nod to another character who isn't even #in the episode #when not only is there no rule saying two characters can't both be good hackers. is too much. can only be one #like....would anybody even actually have thought to question Barbara's hacking abilities after having already seen her as Oracle #if the scene just....hadn't felt a need to bring her into the conversation at all by way of a comparison that didnt need to happen? #no. no they would not. because Dick being a good hacker has NOTHING to do with Barbara and isnt a reflection on her character #whatsoever. just....letting him be good at this thing he's been a pro at since SEASON ONE to such a degree #that nobody on the show has EVER bothered to question his capabilities as a hacker even in seasons where #BARBARA IS LITERALLY RIGHT NEXT TO HIM WHILE HE'S COMPETENTLY HACK-HACKING AWAY LIKE #THE SEASONED PRO HE IS #like? its FINE. you can do that. Barbara is not diminished by him not throwing a bone to her character about how she's such a #better hacker than he is as an explanation for why he might not be able to do the hacking thing he then proceeds to do because...gasp #he's good at the thing! #it was such an annoying and expected thing for them to do that I rolled my eyes when it happened and it somewhat diminished #my entertainment through an otherwise entertaining episode #and that genuinely has NOTHING to do with Barbara herself #and just...everything to do with the reminders of Nightwing's own comic book right now #and how DC seems committed to this THING they have going #where Dick can't ever just be....good at stuff #without him or other characters making pointed statements about how so and so is better #LIKE LITERALLY WHO ASKED? SUPERMAN IS THE BEST AT FLYING DO ALL OTHER FLYING CHARACTERS SAY #OH HE'S THE GUY TO GO TO IF YOU'VE GOT ANYTHING INVOLVING FLIGHT GOING ON?