posts i think about frequently - things i found insightful, usually to the point that i have mentioned it to someone around me in real life or that i find living rent free in my brain
short story - microfiction and stories that i thought were good
writing advice - writing advice i thought was good
memes / text screenshots / tweet screenshots - memes i found funny
reblog chain / tumblr heritage post - reblog chains and other tumblr native nonsense (usually that i thought was funny)
ai / ai art - i like new technology and i think this stuff is cool to learn about. if you dont like it you can filter or go read another blog
I was listening to the RWBY soundtrack earlier today and it got me thinking about the Beacon Dance in Volume 2. Specifically as it relates to romantic relationships between the various characters.
The obvious one is Jaune and Pyrrha. Up to this point, Jaune has been focused on Weiss, even though Weiss has made it clear she's not interested - meanwhile, Pyrrha is interested but Jaune has not caught on to that. The dance marks the point where Jaune accepts that Weiss isn't interested in him and also starts to realize that Pyrrha is. The song that plays during the JNPR group dance - Shine - is pretty clearly about that if you listen to the whole thing (and you should, it's good).
Except it might not just be about Jaune and Pyrrha.
Removing some of the details from that, Jaune at this point has a romantic false lead that he's mostly focusing on, and a romantic true lead (not a term I've encountered before but I need to call it something) that he's initially unaware is even interested in him.
Blake's situation is far from the same as Jaune's. For starters, while Weiss made her lack of interest in Jaune pretty clear, Blake's false lead - Sun, and I do think it's fair to call him that since it looks like Bumbleby was already in the works by this point - genuinely was into her at that point, and while Jaune dances with Pyrrha and not Weiss, Blake dances with both Sun and Yang. But like with Jaune, there's still a false lead and a true lead, and Sun gets more of Blake's focus than Yang at this point - Yang dances with Blake first, but Blake arrives as Sun's date and for most of the rest of the dance, Sun's the one she's dancing with. And I think it's fair to say that at this point Blake might not realize Yang's interested in her.
And while Shine does mainly seem to be about Arkos, it wouldn't take much to apply it to Bumbleby at this point in the show either. If we make Jaune the subject of Shine, then the singer is Pyrrha, but if we instead make it about Blake, the singer would be Yang.
(Also, something I only realized while writing this - both Pyrrha and Yang have something bad happen to them during the Fall of Beacon, followed by a separation from Jaune and Blake respectively. Pyrrha gets killed, which leaves Jaune mourning her. Yang's arm gets cut off, and Blake runs away.)
And now comes the part that, if you know me and/or have read the tags on this, you probably saw coming, though everything after this gets more speculative so I'll put it below a readmore:
What happens when you apply this to Weiss?
Because Weiss is also focusing on a romantic false lead at this point - Neptune. In fact, when you place her next to Blake and Jaune - Jaune only spends the dance with his romantic true lead, Blake spends part of the dance with each of her romantic leads, and Weiss is alone until she's approached by Neptune, her romantic false lead.
And unless I'm wrong about... basically everything I said after the word "except"... this comparison would suggest that Weiss has a romantic true lead present at the dance too... so who is it?
Well, if interpreting Jaune as the subject of Shine points to Pyrrha as the singer, and interpreting Blake as the subject points to Yang, then let's look at some of the lyrics with the assumption that the "you" is Weiss. Specifically, let's look at this verse:
I've been watching you, helping you
Wishing that you'd see
That the girl you've been waiting so long for could be me
Now - I've never been in love
But I think this is it;
It might seem like a schoolgirl crush
But I have to admit
So, we're talking about a girl here. A girl who has been watching and helping Weiss, probably for a while.
Who's been the most eager to help Weiss out? Who gets shown watching Weiss twice in this same episode, the second time right before this dance scene?
If Weiss were the subject of Shine, Ruby would be the singer.
(Also, at the Fall of Beacon, Ruby witnesses Pyrrha's death and then spends multiple days in a coma after her Silver Eyes go off for the first time, while Weiss gets dragged back to Atlas by her father, so Ruby fits that comparison with Pyrrha and Yang)
Honestly, I would say that the biggest obstacles to this interpretation are 1. even though I do think Ruby has feelings for Weiss at this point, I'm not sure she'd be able to actually identify those feelings like this just yet, and 2. some of the other lyrics don't seem to fit Ruby, or at least Volume 2 Ruby, quite as well.
But then again, just because a character isn't able to pinpoint how they're feeling doesn't mean a song from their POV can't do it for them, and it's certainly possible that some of what we see Ruby struggling with in later Volumes was already present this early on, even setting aside Ozpin's speech from The Badge And Burden, in which case the other lyrics would fit fairly well ("From the outside it looked so bright/But nothing felt right... to me"). You could also say this is future!Ruby singing to future!Weiss, or some other workaround. From a Doylist perspective, CRWBY do like to plan ahead so it's certainly possible they already had some idea for these developments
That, or I'm reading way too much into this. I know what I prefer to think
(Also, if we make Sun or Neptune the subject of Shine and interpret "the girl you've been waiting so long for" a bit less literally, we get Sea Monkeys)
Beyond just the incuriosity which a lot of D&D 5e players express often loudly ("Why would I need to learn about other games? D&D already does everything perfectly!") there's very much this learned helplessness that often rears its head during discussions about D&D's hegemonic position in the hobby: even people who realize that D&D is the elephant in the room and that WotC's position as the stewards of the hobby is probably not an unambiguously good thing people will fall into this pattern of learned helplessness. I already learned D&D and learning another game is too hard, how am I supposed to find these other games, and sometimes also basically saying that actually D&D players are the most oppressed of the TTRPG players because those other gamers are actually cool and know shit so they are actually the ones who hold all the power, when you think about it D&D is actually a plucky underdog fighting against those mean indie designers. I think I've lost the thread again.
You're so right. I think the example of this that most annoys me is how they'll confidently assert that something isn't possible when not only is it possible, it is.
Like, you'll be talking to a USAmerican about high speed rail, and they'll nod and say that tragically it could never work in a country as big as theirs. And you'll tell them that, actually, you're currently typing this message while on the high speed rail from Shanghai to Beijing, and China is basically the same size as the US. And then they'll shake their head and sigh like you just told them you still believe in Santa.
And this is basically what it's like trying to convince 5e players that you can have good mechanics for, like, social interaction or mysteries.
Also, there seem to be a lot of DnD players who talk a lot about how they hate WoTC, but still only play DnD, do absolutely nothing to challenge WoTC’s de facto monopoly, and fully accept most if not all of DnD’s assumptions about how games work as universally true.
at some point in your life you will be boiling fruit, water, sugar, and lemon juice in a pot to make a syrup or jam. the instructions will tell you to simmer for a certain amt of time. your timer will go off and you will look at the pot and go, "hm, this doesn't look thick enough. maybe i'll let it go for another 10 minutes." this is the devil speaking. it's only so liquid right now because it is at boiling point. it will thicken when it cools down. learn from the follies of my youth and do not let this happen to you
at some point in your life you will be making a sauce or a stew in which you need to add cornstarch to thicken it. and you will prepare a slurry of starch in cold water and think "this looks like way too little starch to thicken this amount of liquid." this is the devil speaking. cornstarch instantly polymerizes at 95°C and if you add too much it will turn into an impossibly thick goop.
at some point in your life you will be making some sort of cream based dessert that requires gelatin to thicken it. and you will soak some gelatin sheets in water and think "this is too few gelatin sheets for this amount of cream." this is the devil speaking. it will thicken in the fridge and if you add too much you will end up with milk jelly
at some point in your life you will be baking cookies. you will take the sheet out after twelve minutes as the recipe instructs and the cookies will still be glistening and soft. "these don't seem cooked enough," you will think to yourself, "i should place them back into the oven until their edges are nice and golden." this is the devil talking. this is how you get dry, overdone cookies. the cookies will continue to bake on the warm sheet for several more minutes and then harden up after sitting on a rack for a while. trust the process. trust the process.
I've had a couple of people ask for a digestible version of the whole "the real problem with Dungeons & Dragons is false advertising, not anything that's present in its text" thing I keep alluding to, so here's the bullet point version of that argument:
Dungeons & Dragons is owned by Hasbro. Yes, the same Hasbro that owns Monopoly and My Little Pony.
Hasbro wants D&D to be the only tabletop RPG that anyone plays.
In order to accomplish this, Hasbro needs D&D to be a universal entry-level game.
D&D is not a universal entry-level game.
All game rules are opinionated about how the game ought to be played, and as tabletop RPGs go, D&D's rules are more opinionated than most. This is not a flaw, but it's not what Hasbro needs.
D&D is also on the high end of complexity as far as tabletop RPGs go, and it's complex in a way that strongly rewards system mastery, so it's pretty far from "entry level".
Hasbro could produce a version of D&D that's at the very least less opinionated and more entry-level than it presently is, but they don't want to, because they've determined that certain rules features which run counter to both of those goals are critical to D&D's brand identity.
They also don't want to produce multiple versions of D&D tailored for different audiences, because they want every single D&D group to be a potential purchaser of every single D&D product; they'd be effectively competing with themselves for their own customer base if the published game was actually modular in any meaningful way.
So how does Hasbro square that circle?
Simple: they lie. They insist that D&D is in fact a universal entry-level game in spite of all evidence to the contrary, and back their advertising up with sponsored thinkpieces and podcasts and such to "prove" it.
Further, they've spent decades fostering a culture of play which conceals the gap between the game they're advertising and the game they're selling by ascribing any appearance that D&D isn't a universal entry-level game to the incompetence or malice of individual GMs.
The game the rules want to produce disagrees with the game the group wants to play? Nonsense – even the rankest beginner should be able to produce any experience of play using any set of rules, and if your GM can't, they're a Bad GM.
The game is hard to learn? No, it isn't – your GM is merely gatekeeping you. This wouldn't be a problem with a Good GM.
The upshot is that the published rules are more or less irrelevant with respect to achieving the desired experience of play, because they're operating within a culture of play which dumps 100% of the work of making that desired experience of play happen on the GM.
Indeed, much of what modern D&D presents as GMing best practices are really methods of working around the fact that the rules you're using disagree with you about what kind of game you're playing.
(It's not a coincidence that D&D's entrenched culture of play also insists that it's normal for GMs to be miserably overworked and treats GM burnout as a big funny joke, then turns around and loudly wonders why there's a constant GM shortage.)
The trick is, because you're still at least notionally using the rules of D&D, the fruits of all that GM labour are perceived as the product of "playing D&D", not of the GM's hard work.
In essence, Hasbro's business model for Dungeons & Dragons is selling you your own GM's labour with a D&D sticker on it.
It's a very neat trick, if you can pull it off.
Now, at this point some readers may be asking: well, sure, but not all GMs are doormats. What about "killer" GMs who do gatekeep and railroad their players and otherwise act like complete tyrants? I hear horror stories about them all the time.
That's the second trick: these are not opposites. The GM as human Xbox and the GM as tyrant of the table both represent the GM doing all the actual work of making the game happen. The latter isn't the outcome that Hasbro wants, but it's a logical conclusion of the position they want the GM to be in.
The first time your Faerie Lover traces a pleasure sigil on your skin, it just feels like they're caressing your hip in little swirls... But then they whisper something and the entire shape gets warm and then, abruptly, makes you so sensitive that the next stroke pushes you over the edge, crying out as pleasure sears through you, more intense than you've ever felt before, leaving you brain dead and gasping, barely aware of their amused laughter as they bring you to the brink and force you over it again. And again.
The sigils are meant for use between fae, who can handle such intense sensations - but your Lover doesn't care that your human body is nearly breaking beneath the strain. And by the time they leave you the next morning, neither do you.
I can tell my evil advisor has been feeling down lately so I've been pretending to take big sips from his cursed chalice and then roaming the palace grounds groaning and clutching my abdomen. Lowkey I know it's deceptive but I can tell it's really cheering him up. I heard him evilly cackle for the first time in weeks. WIBTA if I keep doing this
UPDATE: I think I may have gone too far on this. I was making a whole production of being stupefied and enfeebled after he brought me my morning pistachio frappe. I had my manservant bring me to my chambers so I could cough weakly in my bed with the sunshine falling weakly across my pallid face because I know he really likes that but he didn't even smile and I heard him whispering "I didn't even poison that one" to his dark serpent. Now he hasn't even whispered maliciously into my ear all day and the servants say they saw him alone in his chambers bouncing his scrying orb into the wall. Should I come clean and apologise or do I try to make it seem like someone else poisoned me? It might cheer him up to have an imaginary rival to plot against
LLM psychosis is simply the democratisation of being surrounded by yes-men and unctuous toadies, an experience previously only accessible to dictators and kings and cult leaders and venture capitalists