kirkwallguy:

also in an era where games like bg3 are patching its characters to be less mean so they can be more fuckable, or games like veilguard are ignoring the series’ previous nuance in favour of a feelgood found family narrative, i will ALWAYS support a game’s right to let its characters be unpleasant to each other and argue about politics

cryptotheism:

cryptotheism:

And the wisest monk said “young one, you reject the unenlightened ways of Hazbin Hotel, but not three years ago, I recall you posting twink Wheatley in great enthusiasm. You must not hate what you discard on the path to enlightenment. All of our old selves are within us, and we must imagine them lezzing out.”

“Funny” said the wisest monk “That cringe is whatever your gay ass was super into like three years ago.”

“But master!” Said the young monk, “Did you not also post One Piece AMVs three years ago?”

“Luffy is badass.” Said the master, “He has never been cringe.”

freshtokill:

agentlove:

one of my absolute favorite phenomena in tumblr/twitter/ao3 creative circles with characters that are even slightly nonhuman is the way they’ll get ascribed random-ass animal traits even if they make no sense - see every sort of vaguely-eldritch character that gets given pointy ears and hooves and a tail and surprise, they also purr! - and this obviously extends to things people find hot to the point where it goes beyond a trait of xyz animal and just becomes a part of the Nebulous Concept Of A Nonhuman Character so you get shit like this

image
image

decepti-thots:

bananonbinary:

bananonbinary:

weird take about fiction: sometimes, actions that would be abusive in real life, hit different in a story. and sometimes i see people react very very strongly to those actions, and i totally get it, because like, that can be extremely triggering and ymmv on whether its handled well or not, but it always makes me a bit. hm.

like, i think the most obvious one is slapping/hitting. in real life, there is basically no situation where that is acceptable, unless you’re actively defending yourself/someone else. but fiction is inherently larger than life, its about how it feels, subjectively, over what actually happens, literally. sometimes a character who has never before been violent will hit someone, and it’s intended as like, an indicator of how fucked up everything is. that shit is going down. or, a character will trash a room, throwing things and destroying everything in their path. and then its never mentioned again, everything just continues as if they HADNT destroyed their own and other people’s property in a frankly terrifying display, because it was just a cathartic moment to represent the storm of emotions the person was feeling. and when i see people like ‘this character is an abuser, the story needs to address this,’ i think maybe its actually okay for fictional characters to do shitty things and not have it framed as shitty, by the story itself or even on any sort of meta level, with the intended audience reaction. sometimes the point is just to resonate with your emotions, not to dissect the literal sequence of events.

like obviously ive been on the 'you can portray whatever you want in fiction, its all a pretend game’ train forever. but i think the important thing to me here is that, you can also defend bad things in fiction. not just 'they did everything wrong and i love that,’ but even 'they were 100% justified when they did [thing that would be extremely bad irl].’ cause its like, ok, they did do that, but like it was the only way to tell the story well. dont worry about it.

all this is true and to it i would add in certain genres, elements of that genre are exaggerated in the way that musicals use non-diagetic singing; when the emotion crests, a character sings in a musical, is the famous way to explain why characters tend to burst into song there. except in, say, a martial arts movie for example, instead the characters fight, because that is the thing which is the narrative focus and emotional core of the genre.

in real life, when you get really mad at someone, it is universally unacceptable to settle that heated argument via roundhouse kicking them in the head, of course. but we understand that the universe of a martial arts movie is heightened specifically in relation to its use of one-on-one fighting and to not treat it as directly analogous to what it means to physically fight someone in real life, much as we understand 'how do they all know the words?’ is not a good way to think about a musical. you understand the rules of the fictional universe treat these actions differently to both real life and also to stories in other genres much of the time, right? you know that fights in martial arts movies follow different rules because they are not just literal fights, but emotional storytelling devices that represent something else as well. it not only hits different compared to real life, but also to, say, a rom-com!

txttletale:

it is of course fine to be a d&d 5e player but if you start pedantically bringing up 5e’s specific distinction between warlocks wizards and sorcerers to people talking about literally any other fantasy media–or worse, real world folklore–you need to be sent to the nobilis gulags for a minimum of 6 years

decamarks:

This motherfucker joined the DUMB with a white supremacist username and coincidentally got the user ID #1225, which pissed me off so much that I banned him while he was still filling out his profile with racist shit and turned his corpse into Christmas

image