Very serious barbie redraw compliation with @koilarist and I

Louise never heard about puppy love, cause they don't know that term in France 💔

---------------------------------------------

Lyrics are from Louise by TV Girl ! I was listening to it yesterday and that specific line on the second page screamed Alastor I just had to draw something about it

EVENTUALLY YES HEHE i haven't got much left to draw for it 👀 ill be sure to post about it when it's done!!

girl experiences gender euphoria and is immediately slammed by grief

for @litttlittt <3. this was supposed to be a portrait of caroline hill, but litta mentioned tim looking like janet when dressed as caroline and identity issues and angst and things spiraled

something about tim not knowing if he's his mother's child or bruce's or neither's.

figuring out the looks:

i wanted janet to have that poofy 70s hair

in a mood (ID in alt)

i wanna do the competitors fusion thing with flash but who would it fuse with..hmmm

CRUEL SUMMER The Eras Tour — Melbourne, Australia (Night 2) | February 17, 2024

dehumanizes your aliens

In the wake of FCG' fate I've been thinking about death in ttrpgs, and how it kind of exists on three levels:

There’s the gameplay level, where it only makes sense for a combat-heavy, pc-based game to have a tool for resurrection because the characters are going to die a lot and players get attached to them and their plotlines.

Then there’s the narrative level, where you sort of need permanent death on occasion so as not to lose all tension and realism. On this level, sometimes the player will let their character remain dead because they find it more interesting despite there being options of resurrection, or maybe the dice simply won’t allow the resurrection to succeed.

Then, of course, there’s the in-universe level, which is the one that really twists my mind. This is a world where actual resurrection of the actual dead is entirely obtainable, often without any ill effects (I mean, they'll be traumatized, but unless you ask a necromancer to do the resurrection they won’t come back as a zombie or vampire or otherwise wrong). It’s so normal that many adventurers will have gone through it multiple times. Like, imagine actually living in a world where all that keeps you from getting a missing loved one back is the funds to buy a diamond and hire a cleric. As viewers we felt that of course Pike should bring Laudna, a complete stranger, back when asked, but how often does she get this question? How many parents have come and begged her to return their child to them? How many lovers lost but still within reach? When and how does she decide who she saves and who she doesn’t?

From this perspective, I feel like every other adventurer should have the motive/backstory of 'I lost a loved one and am working to obtain the level of power/wealth to get them back'. But of course this is a game, and resurrection is just a game mechanic meant to be practically useful.

Anyway. A story-based actual play kind of has to find a way to balance these three levels. From a narrative perspective letting FCG remain dead makes sense, respects their sacrifice, and ends their arc on a highlight. From a gameplay level it is possible to bring them back but a lot more complicated than a simple revivify. But on an in-universe level, when do you decide if you should let someone remain dead or not? Is the party selfish if they don’t choose to pursue his resurrection the way they did for Laudna? Do they even know, as characters, that it’s technically possible to save someone who's been blown to smithereens? Back in campaign 2, the moment the m9 gained access to higher level resurrection they went to get Molly back (and only failed because his body had been taken back by Lucien). At the end of c1, half the party were in denial about Vax and still looking for ways to save him, because they had always been able to before (and had the game continued longer it wouldn’t have surprised me had they found a way). Deanna was brought back decades after her death (and was kind of fucked up because of it). Bringing someone back could be saving them, showing them just how loved and appreciated they are. Or it could be saving you, forcing someone back from rest and peace into a world that's kept moving without them because you can’t handle the guilt of knowing you let them stay gone when you didn’t have to. How do you know? How would you ever know?

Do you guys think Cardan's tail wags when Jude kisses him or is that just me?

see i can never get over 999knw because why does orv establish right after he's introduced that:

he believes his mistake is what killed the 999th turn's yoo joonghyuk

he thinks maybe he should've died before they even met

and now he's aware of the current turn, where these two things are true:

yoo joonghyuk is alive

kim namwoon is dead

imagine believing you're at fault for everything that went wrong and thinking maybe you’d be better off dead

and then ending up in another timeline that essentially confirms it. you were right! you should have died back then. don't you think so too, captain?

Do y'all also think about how Cardan went from telling Jude she was destined to and deserving of death to being like Jude dies over my dead body? Or are you normal?

Me when Capcom made me fight two blind grandmas with chainsaws and then a centipede priest back to back:

Take care.

I like the reading that the Romani did actually try to post Jonathan's letters, that they were caught by Dracula, and he then lied about their duplicity to Jonathan. It's clearly not the read that Bram intended, but he's dead, and I'm not. (Yes, that was a Death of the Author joke)

Anyway, let's take this a logical step further! In a mirroring of what he did with the three roommates, what if this was another "test" both for Jonathan and the Romani.

He knows he's going to have to start having people around again soon to help with the arrangements for the trip, but (if you ascribe to the idea that he hadn't initially planned to let Jonathan live after his initial use was done) he hadn't accounted for his captive to still be running about the castle.

He's already seen proof that Gothic Heroine Jonathan Harker has the power to turn even the most cowed peasants to his side, as seen by the townsfolk and the carriage folk already, so now he's got to nip this in the bud because Jonathan needs to think he is isolated, needs to view him as his only form of safety.

So, Dracula carefully keeps watch, and lo and behold, the Romani DO attempt to help Jonathan. Well, it's a good thing he anticipated this.

So, he interrupts the delivery of the letters, maybe pushes the idea that he's omniscient of all that goes on in Castle Dracula cause who's going to call him out and people are less likely to attempt anything if they are under constant surveillance, maybe maims or kills a few people to really push the consequences of helping again.

Okay, that's one part done. Now, for Jonathan, he can once more enforce the idea that Jonathan can only turn to him for protection, increase his feelings of isolation, and destroy his trust. He can happily torment him as he sees fit, and everyone is too shaken by their disastrous first attempt to try again.

Anyway, long story short, interpreting the text as "maybe the Romani people are good and aren't a racist caricature" actually gives a more interesting reading. Also, it allows them to parralel Jonathan's plight as people who are forced due to circumstances to obey Dracula, as he is the least likely to kill them right this second.

NEW ROMANTICS The Eras Tour — Los Angeles, California (Night 6) | August 9, 2023

+ bonus: A happy happy Taylor ♡