i wish AI art was more of a toy - something weird and silly to just play around with, as opposed to... what it's turned into. i remember the early days when people were just using it to generate horrifying-looking dogs, or laugh at what a computer thinks a flower looks like. the more advanced it becomes the less interesting i find it.

Shelterwood: a follow-up and apology

someone reached out to me after publishing my Shelterwood crowdfunding post with some very valid stuff that I want to address. they mistakenly sent it non-anonymously (something I confirmed with them before just responding to the Ask), so in the spirit of keeping things unidentifiable around here I am going to screenshot the entire message (so you can know I'm not selectively cutting anything out) and then I'll respond to it in chunks:

A Genuine Apology

so let's start with the first chunk of text:

I'm going to be straight with you: while there were absolutely some points you made about the Shelterwood crowdfund that I agreed with, like how unreasonable the goal seemed for a show produced by a novice showrunner, something's really sticking out here. That thing is that Stephen Indrisano and Nigel McKeon are both young, white, non-binary novice showrunners who secured some high-billing talent and picked unreasonably high crowdfunding goals, but you treated one of them with a lot of grace and understanding... and then turned around and not only accused the other of essentially being the problem with the current state of podcasting, but also called them cis in the process despite having acknowledged their pronouns earlier in your write-up. That was... certainly something. It's almost like you had a specific point you wanted to make, so you just sort of conveniently forget that Stephen is non-binary to make it. That or you don't actually think Stephen is non-binary and were engaging in some passive-aggressive gatekeeping, which also sucks, just in a different way.

this is 100% something I fucked up on, I will readily admit that. my accidental erasure of Stephen's identity as a non-binary person is not okay, intentional or not.

I wrote the initial post gradually over the course of just over a week, top to bottom, and then did a quick skim of it at the end to make sure things were still up-to-date in accordance with any updates to the campaign itself. a result of this is that between when I started the post (where I included Stephen's pronouns of "he/they)" and when I was writing some of the later parts I had forgotten this. I think part of the reason is that the campaign is not really about Stephen, so it isn't like there are consistent references to him as an individual. in the few places there are, such as the intro section of the main text and the FAQ, "he" is used exclusively, which I think mistakenly put that in my mind as Stephen having a male gender identity because I hadn't seen a self-identification as being non-binary on their website or Twitter. but someone deciding to use a specific set of pronouns in the text of something like this (to avoid confusion or for any other reason) does NOT invalidate their use of other pronouns elsewhere. similarly you don't have to outwardly proclaim your gender identity for it to be respected and not assumed as cis.

I am genuinely very sorry about this, it was a mistake and I am in the process of editing the original post to reflect Stephen's proper gender identity.

now then.

let's talk about the difference between Nigel (Among the Stacks) and Stephen and the way I approached them, because you're right that there was a difference.

I think a key way that these two projects differ is that one of them was very clearly made by someone who didn't know what they were doing and was in over their head. Among the Stacks was a clear trainwreck from the moment they started revealing how bloated the cast and crew were. I had many conversations with other creators during that early time where we were all wondering how this thing could function with so many cooks in the kitchen, and how you could have a coherent story with that many characters. it was clearly a product of someone new and over-excited who didn't have a real idea of how to do what they were dreaming of.

in contrast, Shelterwood seems to be genuinely well-thought out and approached like it was created by someone who has done their research and been part of the community for a while. it has a full concept with a clearly outlined size and goals and is a very realistic sounding first project. if it weren't for the goal and the rewards we wouldn't be talking about it at all. as a pitch it is perfectly reasonable.

I went a bit easier on Nigel because just from looking a lot of us could tell that Among the Stacks was going to end in disaster. we didn't know when or how, just that there was no way a project like that could actually succeed. I also knew from interactions between Nigel and other people that she was not very good at taking critique or hearing other people out on stuff that they didn't agree with. I went into that post with the intention of being harsh but fair, because I wanted Nigel to hear what I had to say and LISTEN. not just brush it off as "someone is jealous of my amazing idea and so they are being mean". I was still a bit mean in that post at some parts, I will admit that. my tone can swing a bit far on the sarcastic side, especially the longer I spend on a given post digging into things.

Shelterwood is full of people who should know better, something that it makes a point to brag about. it isn't just one person's dream project that they don't know how to wrangle, Stephen is clearly a proficient showrunner to have pulled all of this together (and I do genuinely find the show's concept to be interesting, even if I didn't really communicate that in the post as much as I could have). Stephen has ALSO been around the block a few times in regards to working on audio dramas, whether or not they have helmed their own. this means that from the start my expectations for them were higher.

my goal was not to accuse Stephen of being "the problem", but I think that this campaign is INDICATIVE of a lot of the "the problems" going on right now with audio drama crowdfunding.

I did seriously think about pulling the last section into a completely separate post, but what I wrote applies to the context of this campaign and so I felt it was important to have that connection. if I had been able to fully communicate my thoughts on it before now, say for the Arden campaign, it would have been part of that post. but it took me a lot of time to get those words down in a way that actually communicated what I think the problem is.

I know having it as part of the Shelterwood post has an implication, and the implication is correct that this campaign is PART of the problem, but it isn't the whole problem.

It's also very weird that you lumped Shelterwood, Arden, Among the Stacks and Afflicted in with The Magnus Protocol, which was on an entirely different level. They're not comparable. Not a single one of those first four shows actually made their crowdfund goals. In Afflicted's case, the all or nothing state of the crowdfund means 100% of that money was returned to backers. The Among the Stacks crowdfund was cancelled. Which means that for 50% of your given examples, literally none of that money ended up tied up in those shows rather than being contributed to other, smaller shows. This is not comparable with The Magnus Protocol crowdfund situation, and I think you know that.

it's 100% true that The Magnus Protocol is on a whole other level than these other campaigns, I said as much in my write-up. it is not comparable and I wasn't attempting to compare nearly $1 million USD to $26,000.

what I was attempting (and may have failed) to do was to point out that what Rusty Quill did was change the playing field for the worse. when looking at those two numbers you can much more easily make attempts to justify the high goals being asked for here, because in comparison that's downright reasonable to what they raised.

as a note: TMP had a funding goal of £15,000 (approx. $19,500 USD). so they weren't actually asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars to make 3 seasons of a show. in fact, what they asked for is less than the campaigns I'm trying to call out here. that Kickstarter has a lot of things that were suspect about it and felt slimey and exploitative, but the asking price was not really one of them.

however.

just because they didn't ASK for that much money doesn't mean they didn't know it would happen (maybe not to that extent, but still). this still had the same impact, which from what I can tell is making some people think that audio drama crowdfunding is for making a profit.

as for the next point about none of the shows except for TMA 2 hitting their goals:

the amount they are walking away with isn't really the point.

at the end of the day, it's about the fact that the more stuff like this happens, the more it is NORMALIZED. and these kinds of goals getting normalized is harmful.

as an example, in the world of video games there is something called "microtransactions". for anyone who doesn't know, these are additional, small purchases you make in a game that you often have already paid upwards of $60-70 USD for. in the beginning, they were marketed as "just cosmetic" and not going to impact gameplay. and so people didn't fight back too hard when EVERY game started implementing them. but of course, what that did was move the bar. it normalized people paying extra money on top of their purchase for something that used to be included for free with a game. and so the companies started pushing the needle further. and further.

now, this isn't a direct parallel for a lot of reasons, but when greed is being put forward as normal again and again (even when it continues to result in failure) it starts to cement it as something "normal". something to be expected.

the larger problem here is that these are unsustainable amounts of money to be trying to get out of the community.

which connects to this next section:

Speaking of The Magnus Protocol, there's also an assumption being made here that someone deprived of the option of helping one of these shows reach their crowdfund goal is automatically going to donate to another show... and I need you to remember that The Magnus Protocol's final tally was something stupid like 4000% of their original goal. Lower crowdfunding goals don't stop people from contributing once that goal has been reached. People just keep donating to that project. None of those people were donating to make sure the thing got made- they were donating because they liked The Magnus Archives, and the hard to swallow pill here is that that doesn't mean they would've contributed to other crowdfunds otherwise. I have my own issues with The Magnus Protocol thing. But the statement that that crowdfund snatched money out of the pockets of smaller shows by having an unreasonably high goal just straight-up does not hold water. That's nothing. It's 4000% less than nothing. You're allowed to be mad that that campaign got such a ridiculous amount of funding when so many smaller shows are struggling. You don't need to couch it in pseudo-logic to justify feeling that way. We're all mad about it. It's okay.

this is definitely a good call-out, this person is right that someone not donating to one campaign does not mean that money will go to another. in a lot of cases, the only reason someone sees a campaign is because it is being promoted by the things they already like (in The Magnus Protocol's case that obviously being The Magnus Archives), and that means they probably aren't going to be choosing between every campaign that is out there and deciding where their $5 is going to go. they might just as easily pocket it and buy a nice coffee the next day.

and that absolutely sucks, because it would be nice for the love that some people have towards specific shows to be something that extends to the whole medium.

but I do think there's something to be said for feeling like even a small donation is making an impact. I would feel kind of bad to only be able to give $20 towards a $10k+ goal, it isn't even a drop in the bucket towards what is needed and if I care enough to donate to something I do want it to succeed. but that same $20 to a campaign only asking for $3000? that's a lot more tangible of an impact. enough so that I could feel good about splitting that $20 between two projects maybe.

that isn't 100% the point of what you were saying, I know that. the reality is that not everyone in this community has a general investment in the success of others.

I think where that becomes the biggest problem is when some people only seem to have an investment in themselves, and no one else. that's where these things become problems, when the larger needs of the community are ignored for the sake of a few who repeatedly succeed.

I'm kind of bleeding a bit into my response to the next part, so here that chunk is:

And do I agree that we as a community need to start talking about what is and is not realistic when it comes to crowdfunding? Yeah, absolutely. You have a point there. That's a valuable and timely observation and I'm glad somebody said it. Unfortunately, the value of that point was absolutely buried by the extremely obvious fact that this time, in this case, something about this project is personal for you. I don't know what it is specifically, but I do feel the need to ask: You are aware that Tal Minear is involved in the show as a graphic designer and minor actor, right? They have nothing to do with the crowdfund or the rest of production. Their name being attached doesn't mean they're secretly running the show. This is not Tal's show. They'd be credited as a producer if they were that involved. So why do you feel the need to keep bringing them up? Anyway, it's extremely difficult to take your analysis in good faith when it's so transparently motivated by some sort of personal distaste for somebody/the people in the project, and that's a shame, because some of the things you're saying have value.

I certainly didn't shy away from pointing a bit of a finger at Tal Minear for promoting this ideology, among others. their clear involvement in this project makes me immediately more suspicious, because Re: Dracula was a self-admitted cash grab. and that stain on their character is not going to go away for me.

it's less that it's "personal" for me, and more that this is a figure in the community that I have repeatedly seen presented as an expert that MUST be listened to. including by themself. ESPECIALLY when it comes to the matter of crowdfunding.

now, if I were friends with someone like that AND they were involved with my project that was about to have a campaign, would I not lean on that resource? even just for advice on how to put it together and what needs to be included. Tal just wrote a small little article for Descript that has some very generic crowdfunding tips, so they are arguably the most knowledgeable person involved in the campaign to go to for advice and feedback.

I know for a fact that Tal has given crowdfunding advice unsolicited to people running campaigns, usually in the form of asking why crew is not being paid appropriately (a valid question in most cases where actors tend to get a huge portion of the budget). so I can't imagine a world where they didn't give at least a little input to a friend for a show that they are actively involved in.

I don't think they are running anything behind the scenes, no, Tal is not part of some audio drama Illuminati. but I do recognize the high esteem to which they are held by MANY community members.

my goal was to call out the culture that has grown around audio drama crowdfunding, and the ways that I've seen it hurting most people who attempt to do it. I have noticed that Tal is a big part of what has normalized that.

as for the ways in which I brought them up, yeah I like to be a bit snide and I probably laid it on a bit thick. it's easy to get carried away in these things, especially towards someone that I am admittedly not a huge fan of.

that is the extent to which it could be considered "personal" for me, but I understand if you don't believe that or if that still had too much of an impact on taking the rest of what I said seriously. that is your choice and I respect it, it's just very difficult for me to separate out their involvement given what I know outside of this.

You're just completely undercutting that value by surrounding it with so much pointless nitpicking and snideness. What happened to "#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean"? You claim to be acting in the interest and defense of the community, but as the creator of a small podcast that nets me absolutely zero profit, I'm not feeling it. This feels like it's about you, not the rest of us.

this is absolutely fair.

I am just one person at the end of the day. I've talked to others, discussed the situation surrounding this campaign and others like it with them, but I am the one typing it down and inserting my voice and my take on it.

as such, I am not going to be a perfect mouthpiece for everyone's thoughts about this stuff.

I WANT to be one that is largely beneficial, however.

sometimes I lean a bit heavy into the snideness for the sake of keeping things interesting; these write-ups are LONG and as a writer I recognize you have to do something to keep people engaged so they actually absorb what you are saying.

is that the right approach? probably not for everyone, but it is part of a reflection of my own voice that it comes out like this.

"#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean" is something I wrote, something that I still want to keep in mind but sometimes I fail at that. in this case, I found it hard to stick to.

repeatedly seeing campaigns like this is disheartening to me, it wears me out. there is an amount of what a lot of people might see as "bitterness", but it's not really about any specific project or person.

I think my massive fucking rant at the end of that post about capitalism ruining audio dramas with the need to make money unsustainably says a lot about how I feel about the current financial state of the world. a lot of that "bitterness" is from this deep rage towards to the system, directed outwards where it can be. maybe the flow of it was a bit strong on this one, but it is still an accurate reflection of the way that I see things.

note, an accurate reflection to ME. it's okay if it isn't accurate to you, that's part of why the conversations need to happen.

part of why I do the math breakdowns for the budget is to help myself try and get a grasp on what those numbers mean. the human brain is not really formatted to understand large quantities of things, especially something that is usually intangible in those high amounts like money. I also do it because I want to give someone the opportunity to say "actually, you're wrong because this does add up. you are just missing part of the picture."

I know the way I approached this might come off as defensive, that's not my intention. I decided to break it down like this so that no one would think I'm trying to skip over feedback or ignore certain points that make me look bad.

everything that this person said to me is a valid response to what I wrote, including the things I pushed back on.

I am very grateful that they reached out to me, and I want to continue the conversation. ESPECIALLY if they feel that I did not hear them here.

my responses are just that. a response. they are not a claim of being right or these reactions being unjustified. we are all only in our own heads, and the conclusions we come to are usually based in rationality. my mind is open to being changed, I want to see as full a picture as possible.

if you disagree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you agree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you aren't sure, that is also fine.

we're talking about something complex and nuanced and just because I'm the one bringing these things up doesn't mean I have the RIGHT opinion or that I am the person who SHOULD be saying it.

there is a reason that I am anonymous here, and it's mostly because the conversation is more important than who is speaking.

as always, my inbox and Asks are open.

feedback welcome, I mean that.

Yes, hi, what's happening to reddit? I usually check some fandom news there but everything is private/blocked now? I have an account and not even that allows me to enter?

Reddit is changing their policy so they every thousand api requests they charge money. This means that third party apps, moderation tools, and other various things just won’t work anymore, since these things rack up thousands of requests very quickly, they’d just be unsustainable to run.

This cost would be average out to a dollar per month per person using third party applications, like an alternative app, text to speech, moderation tools, etc. Reddit has millions and million of users, most of which would be affected.

For example, Apollo for Reddit, a popular third party alternative to the Reddit app (which I used myself, seriously the Reddit app is abysmal) would cost $20MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR TO RUN. Given the app is developed by one guy, that legitimately puts him out of business.

Moderation would get even worse than it already is, as moderation tools use the api to effectively moderate, but now it’s at a cost.

The reason why this change is happening, is because the API can be used to collect data for AI, and, to quote the CEO, “the Reddit corpus of data is really valuable” and he doesn't want to “need to give all of that value to some of the largest companies in the world for free.”

So, once again, AI and capitalism is ruining things for everyone else.

This is a change that is created solely to make money without thinking for a second about the millions of people it would effect. This lead to 7000 of the most popular subreddits blacking out for 48 hours in protest, and I’m pretty sure it crashed the whole site. The voice of the people has definitely been heard, now it’s just time to see if it’s done anything.

Edit: I got something wrong! Thanks to all who corrected me! No thanks to the anon who was an asshole about it lmao

It’s not that Reddit is charging that’s the problem, it’s that it’s charging way too much, is way too short of a deadline to change it, and spez is just an asshole lying about the Apollo dev. Still a shit situation! Just not exactly for the reasons I said. Look into the reblogs for people who know more!!

That said, the D&D 3.5 Paladin was bad. It was badly designed, it had bad rules, and in conjunction with the other notoriously bad rule, alignment, it could cause havoc.

Now personally, I never had ANY problems with it in my tabletop games. I played paladins and loved it, and I loved it when other people played paladins, and it was great. But that's because, collectively as a group, we took ONE look at that terrible rule where the paladin's code of conduct prevents them from associating with Evil characters or "someone who consistently offends her moral code", and immediately went, "that's stupid, we ain't doing that, it would ruin the game".

We also didn't love the concept of alignment as a cosmic force, and didn't care for Usually Evil Goblins and Always Evil anything. And when a class's signature ability fully depends on whether creatures are capital E Evil, well that affects storytelling, doesn't it? But we all saw it the same way, and we were happily able to change it without any disagreements. In the end we had a Paladin… similar to 5e now that I think of it: completely ignore the Code's association clause, tailor the Code to personal stance or a specific Order, Detect only fiends and undead and the like, Smite anything you want, Fall only if you really fuck up, and never presume that just because you haven't Fallen yet everything you've ever done is justified and correct and anyone who disagrees with you is objectively wrong.

Basically, there were 2 options in 3.5. You either houseruled and/or handwaved things, and in matters of alignment interpretations erred on the side of "what makes the game go",

OR, you played with Rules As Written, and filled the forums with questions like "should the paladin fall?" (one such thread per week, conservatively), "we got into a fight over the Paladin, what to do?", "is it Evil to pick pockets? because we have a Paladin in the party", "the Assassin uses poison, shouldn't that offend my moral code?", and shit like that. Just... pointless strife, all the time. Again, never happened to me, but I was appalled to read about it, over and over and over.

People got intense with 3.5 Paladins (both pro and against) because it was BADLY DESIGNED and had BAD RULES. Its mechanics forced narrative choices on the entire table, and the only way to make it frictionless was having a party where no one wishes to explore a character's bad side ever, no one does things that aren't bad but WotC branded Evil™ in this or that splatbook, and everyone magically agrees all the time on "what is right and what is wrong" and "what is Lawful and what is Chaotic", which is simply impossible. The most subjective thing in the world (ethics!) was presented as an objective cosmic force, and how you interpreted it would determine how much damage the Paladin deals in combat, and whether the Paladin could keep associating with the party, and if the Paladin is still a Paladin. And all that in a game, let's not forget, whose basic, fundamental premise is "kill things and take their stuff". I'm sorry, this is tremendously stupid. It's the WORST design.

I know that for some people it worked as written, and good for them, but for the many many people it didn't work, well it's obvious why.

Actually fucking nuts. Capitalism ruins everything.

Push back against this. Be loud. Use #OpenDnD liberally.

Staying in 5e and ignoring 6e/"OneDnD" is not an option. I'll try to summarize below the cut, but I'm not an expert, so please seek out resources that aren't me for full info. This link is a good start. This is the full deep-dive I read up on a few days ago. Listening to the community is also worthwhile to understand from the voices of those affected most. To be more involved in the discussion yourself, a lawyer has set up a Discord server for the community to gather and converse in regarding this issue.

Again, for full context and information from more knowledgeable sources than me (including actual professionals), please go to the links I included above. If you don't have the time/patience/spoons to read those articles, scroll a twitter feed, or poke around a Discord server though, here are the things that made the most potent impression on me and why you should care about this issue.

As mentioned, staying in 5e and ignoring 6e/"OneDnD" is not an option. While OGL1.1 was made for 6e, the extensive parts of the document that have been leaked make it clear that with OGL1.1 going into effect, OGL1.0a (which has been the OGL for the past decade) will no longer be functional. 3rd party creators must choose to either sign the OGL1.1 and comply with it's insanely restrictive and predatory terms, or face legal repercussions for publishing the content they have made their livelihoods off of the past decade.

Per the leaked document, all 3rd party creators must register themselves and their creations with WotC. - 3rd party creators making over $50,000 USD per year must also report their earnings to WotC. - 3rd party creators making over $750,000 USD gross per year must also pay WotC a 25% royalty. This means it is not 750k in profits, it is 750k before any expenses that they are taking the royalties from. Anyone whose profit margin was 25% or less would be financially invalidated by this royalty, and can even end up losing money. Furthermore, the nature of Kickstarters for example is that there is no upper ceiling on earnings, so a KS for a 3rd party sourcebook will suddenly be facing a massive expense they may not have planned for if their campaign exceeds the 750k mark, potentially destroying their ability to deliver on the rewards when they otherwise could have. While currently only a small number of creators are known to make over 750k/year (gross, not net), that does not mean this will not affect you. It creates a very dire argument for why 3rd party creators should not even make the effort in the first place, especially with crowdfunding where too much success can suddenly ruin them.

Remember how those who make over 50k have to report their earnings? Well, the 750k threshold is one WotC says they have the right to change at any time in OGL1.1. This means they can see what people are making when creators are forced to report their earnings over 50k, and use that data to lower the threshold of income for their royalty fee, and they can do this at any time, however much they want. Per OGL1.1, they are telling you that they can decide on a whim that actually, anyone making over $5,000 USD gross a year has to pay the 25% royalty.

D&DBeyond / OneDnD are working towards creating a VTT to host OneDnD/6e. While Roll20 is licensed by WotC if I'm not mistaken, virtually no other VTT is. Platforms like Foundry VTT (my personal favorite and most beloved VTT) will not be able to host the D&D system on them under OGL1.1. What does that mean? Hard to say. But it will objectively become much harder to play D&D outside of WotC-approved spaces in the near future, and that is by design. They want to monopolize how this game is played, and that means making it difficult, inconvenient, or even illegal to play the game outside of their personal playground.

Under OGL1.1, WotC claims full and complete ownership over any and all 3rd party content created for D&D, and the rights to use it however, whenever, and wherever they want without paying you royalties. You made this? Hasbro made this.

I've only ever played 5e. But this link I put up above was very informative about prior editions and the drama surrounding them. 3e had an OGL, and the community began to flourish with 3rd party content. WotC didn't like that people who weren't them were making money off a passion for D&D, and they regretted the OGL--but that OGL was irrevocable, and could not be cancelled, removed, or in any way undone. So they put together 3.5e. They promised 3.5e would be backwards compatible, and all your resources for 3e would still work for it. So people jumped to 3.5e, only to find all their 3e content was now worthless, because that hadn't been true. And 3.5e, of course, did away with that open and welcoming OGL from 3e. Sound familiar? "OneDnD" is touted to be backwards compatible. And yet also comes with crushing restrictions in their OGL1.1 that make it impossible for the D&D community to exist as it has been. It is transparently clear that for WotC/Hasbro, an ideal world would be one where all the money people have spent on flourishing this community over the last decade would have gone exclusively into their pockets. D&D makes hundreds of millions every year, but it's "under monetized" according to their new CEO. It doesn't matter if "Honor Among Thieves" flops at the box office, WotC has already green-lit the production of multiple D&D movies. It's not about fanservice, it's about fan exploitation. Because they can't fucking stand that the game they made can be played obsessively and passionately for decades with only the one-time purchases of the DMG and PHB. And instead of fixing the apparent "under-monetization" problem by publishing more official content, they choose to poach 3rd party creators. The very lifeblood that has caused D&D's success. Because capitalist greed is a soulless poison to whatever it fixes its attention on.

The only way the community has any shot in hell to fight this is if the pushback is intense and loud. WotC has released statements mentioning an openness to listening to the community and revising their choices based on feedback; whether that proves to be lip service or not remains to be seen, but either way: the only thing they seem to care about is money. Fine, let your money do the talking, then. Wholeheartedly support the boycott. Proclaim your support of it loudly. Let Hasbro know that their attempts to milk more profits out of this franchise will be the very thing that kills it if they don't ease the fuck back and allow OGL1.0a to persist. They apparently didn't learn shit when this happened in 3e/3.5e. They can either wise up now before they fuck up beyond repair, or they can be fully destroyed by their own greed. Time will tell.

Edit:

Good catch, thanks! You're right, I must have had some wires crossed when writing that bit. They couldn't revoke it, but they did publish new content for 3.5e that made 3.0e content feel worthless; this is not something I personally lived through, but is based on the reporting from this second article I linked. Likewise, that article explains how 4e did not have an OGL and was consequentially a bit of a wasteland, presumably prompting WotC to bring the OGL back for 5e. Which flourished. And now we're here.

Edit II:

I'm Super not the best source of information for this because I'm absolutely all over the place, but 2 things.

Please check out OpenDnD.games for full, proper info and a place to give your signature in support of the community's pushback.

Something else I failed to mention above: OGL1.1 has a "poison pill" clause. Anyone who signs it permanently forfeits their right to publish under prior versions of the OGL, even if they are unable to take down those prior versions. DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING FOR OGL1.1. Even if the community pushback yields results, you may have trapped yourself. "Predatory" does not even begin to cover it.

Every now and then I see the Capitalism Ruined Tieflings post float past and my brain just goes "Skill Issue."

For context, this is a popular post that states that in D&D's second and third editions, Tieflings had a huge variety of appearances and then in 4e they were homogenised into generic devil-people because Hasbro was calling the shots and demanded that Tieflings all look relatively the same because that way it was easier to sell minis of them, and now Tieflings are ruined forever because you can't make one with greasy skin that smells like farts.

But here's the thing: You can absolutely still just do that.

"But the book says-"

Fuck the book! This hobby is 50% improv and the highest authority you'll ever have to deal with is most likely going to be your friend Jim, when it comes to pure roleplay things, there is literally nothing stopping you. The D&D Police aren't going to kick down your door and haul you off to RPG Jail for the crime of not playing a Tiefling like they're described in the PHB, because there is no D&D Police.

The PHB is great for telling you what you get mechanically (or the "crunch") and can be entirely ignored for everything in terms of lore (or the "fluff").

I've been playing 5e for something like seven or eight years now, and during that time, across all those groups, we've used vanishingly small amounts of official lore, one official setting, and precisely zero Hasbro miniatures (largely because all of those games have been online).

If I had gone to any of those DMs, both the good and bad ones, and said "I wanna use the Planescape Tiefling tables for my character's appearance", I don't think any of them would've said no. Now, that's not something I personally would ever do (I'm not leaving my character's design up to the RNG that hates me), but I don't doubt that the option would exist if I wanted it.

Additionally, people have always broken from the official limitations of the books with these things, and a few really obvious ways.

Per the books, Tieflings have the full range of human skin tones, plus varying shades of red. Now, how many people actually keep to that limitation? I've seen blue, purple, orange, green, yellow, bone white, grey, black, pink, etcetera. Even the Planescape table only gives you red, green, and blue, random 5e players going "What if it was purple!" and disregarding the PHB is fully and openly accepted.

Hell, two of the most prominent Tiefling characters in the current era of D&D are Jester and Molly from CritRole's second campaign, who are blue and purple respectively. "Tieflings are just red" says Hasbro, and "No they aren't" says literally everybody else. Even Hasbro themselves don't care too much about it, there's an official Lego D&D Tiefling minifigure coming out this year, and they're orange, not red, when Hasbro could easily have demanded that Lego make them red.

Additionally, the book says Tiefling eyes are a single, solid colour, with no visible iris, pupil, or sclera. Yeah that one gets ignored a whole lot too. In fact, that one gets ignored more than it gets followed. I've made at least ten of these fuckers and one of them followed that rule, and only did so after her Sorcerer bloodline activated, and nobody, DM or player, has ever called me out on it.

The book says nothing about them having weird legs, I've still seen plenty with varying forms of digitigrade gait, whether it's with hooves or something else at the end of them.

If you want to make your Planescape Tieflings, then you absolutely still can. And if your DM says no, then they're probably just still in their Rules Stickler phase. Give 'em a little time and they'll loosen up, it happened to most people in this hobby.

That's the great thing about playing D&D. Most of the time, you really can just do whatever the hell you like as long as it doesn't futz with the mechanical side of things (and sometimes you can do it with that too).

Capitalism didn't ruin Tieflings. Sure, you can argue that it tried, but the only thing letting it succeed is a lack of imagination and an unwillingness to go "Hey, can I just do X instead" on the part of the players.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go make a character that's mechanically a Tiefling and lore-wise a completely different species, because nothing can stop me doing that.

Met police found to be institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic (Vikram Dodd, The Guardian, March 21 2023)

“The Metropolitan police is broken and rotten, suffering collapsing public trust and is guilty of institutional racism, misogyny and homophobia, an official report has said.

The report by Louise Casey, commissioned by the Met after one of its officers abducted Sarah Everard, taking her from from a London street in March 2021, before raping and murdering her, is one of the most damning of a major British institution .

The 363-page report details disturbing stories of sexual assaults, usually covered up or downplayed, with 12% of women in the Met saying they had been harassed or attacked at work, and one-third experiencing sexism.

Lady Casey said that the lifeblood of British policing was haemorrhaging and her report warned that “public consent is broken” with just 50% of the public expressing confidence, even before revelations about the force’s worst recent scandals. (…)

Casey revealed that one Muslim officer had bacon stuffed in his boots, a Sikh officer had his beard cut, minority ethnic officers were much more likely to be disciplined or leave, and Britain’s biggest force remains disproportionately white, in a capital that is increasingly diverse.

Stop and search and use of force on powers against black people was excessive, found the report for the Met – which stops more people per head of population than any other force.

A catalogue of suffering by women included frequent abuses by senior officers, including one subjecting a female junior to repeated harassment and an indecent act.

She complained and told the inquiry: “It would have probably been better to suffer in silence, but I couldn’t do that. He got away with everything, I was made to look like the liar.”

Casey said the Met was failing on so many levels the crisis is existential, and if not fixed could end in its dismemberment:

“If sufficient progress is not being made at the points of further review, more radical, structural options, such as dividing up the Met into national, specialist and London responsibilities, should be considered to ensure the service to Londoners is prioritised.”

Casey said austerity had deprived the Met of £700m but the cuts made by the force left its protection of children and women as inadequate.

Already crushingly low convictions of rapists were made worse by fridges that housed rape kits being broken, or being so full that evidence was lost, and cases dropped with rapists going free because of police bungles.

Casey claimed in one instance someone ruined a fridge full of evidence by leaving their lunchbox in it.

Casey said the Met had blown repeated chances to reform by official inquiries over the decades and warned the force must not cherrypick the reforms it likes.”

.

Bro I am drunk so I will say. It sucks ass to literally be a published scientist working on new energy technologies and be breathing wildfire smoke in my own city in 2023 because despite DIRE warnings against continuing the way we are when i STARTED in 2018 we still continued with the eternal engine death hell capitalism, because academia and science are slow as fuck because everybody has to clamor for grants and kowtow to the tenure hierarchy instead of being assured a living wage for our VALUABLE FUCKING work, oh and also I became physically disabled the same year I started and received ZERO institutional support because this country hates everyone who is “other” in any of a million different ways and hamstrings us at every opportunity even when we want to HELP SAVE you from certain fiery death!! and also despite my disability i STILL AM qualified to help bc i have more than a DECADE of training in my field--i have a master’s, i graduated summa cum laude, that knowledge is not gone just bc i am in pain for more hours per day!! Pain that certain insurance companies i can NAME profit off of! AND ALSO it sucks that the profit motive is BAKED into the mathematical models I have to use, like everybody just assumes it’s always going to be there with no possible alternative, and EVERY TIME the results are that market forces are NOT FAST ENOUGH to save us, AND ALSO it sucks that the figurehead of the technology I’m researching is a tryhard reddit dipshit who’s determined to ruin everything he touches (and NO i do not work for him--i refused to work with him even when it was unpopular in my field to dislike him, i NEVER have worked with him and i NEVER will) it all just SUCKS

i love lamb meat but its not very popular here (sweden) which makes it expensive and not very common, so heres my master plan to make it more common and less expensive. 1. sell lamb meat for a really cheap price to all pizzerias (during december-january) 2. the pizza people make lamb kebab 3. at the peak of people buying pizza (new years) everyone gets lamb kebab (kebabpizza often being the most sold pizza per year) 4. everyone gets hooked on lamb meat kebab 5. people start eating it and it becomes easier to come by in stores (im living in a world where capitalism doesnt ruin everything) 6. peace and love in the country

disclaimer: this only works in sweden because we love kebab pizza so much. shoutout to italian and middle eastern immigrants

Do you think shipping culture has ruined or changed how some people consume TV shows.? Did it change for you?

That's a really interesting question, anon. I guess it depends on what you define shipping culture as, and whether or not you see it as an isolated component of fan culture or as a part of the tapestry of it.

Personally, I don't see it as isolated, so I don't really think shipping itself has ruined anything per se, but I do think the way it interacts with things like fandom going mainstream, capitalism, bigotry, social media, the erosion of the fourth wall, individualism and entitlement has a lot to answer for, both in terms of broader fan culture, media literacy and the death of the Golden Age of TV.

None of these things exist in a vacuum after all, and as a result, they all feed off and inform each other. Fandom going mainstream for instance is what made it profitable, which in a capitalistic society meant brands and corporations leveraged it to sell stuff, which in turn makes fans feel a greater degree of entitlement over characters and relationships and storylines, because they feel they've made a financial investment and they are now owed something. Pair that with social media eroding the boundary between celebrity and fan, brand and audience, and advertising and conversation, as well as the natural reactivity of social media call-out culture, and everything's out of its box.

To put it more simply, capitalism has turned stories into products and audiences into consumers, which means creative exploration and engagement matters far, far less than units sold.

That’s not to say that there was some golden age of storytelling where viewership didn’t matter – film and TV have always been a business after all – but the shift from the language of movie or show to content is a really telling one for me, and, as offered in many an anecdote by showrunners and critics alike, there’s no way shows like Friends or Seinfeld – shows that took a season or two to find their footing and their audience – would survive today.

I do think shipping's been affected by that cultural shift too. Not to be all ‘back in my day’, but - - y’know, back in my day, haha, it literally didn’t matter if your ship went canon! People multi-shipped! And I mean, I’ve said this before and will forever be the biggest champion of it, but I think gen fic was a lot more popular than it is now. People did don shipper goggles back then too, of course, but I do think there was less entitlement around shipping overall. Again, this is in no small part because corporations have learnt to leverage shipping and fandom broadly to market a show and sell merchandise, and it’s in that relationship where I think the story becomes less important than the product, and to a corporation, sometimes a ship becomes a tool to sell the product.

Look at the new Star Wars trilogy and everything that happened with Reylo, for instance, which is the perfect storm of capitalist intent, artistic de-prioritisation (to put it mildly), social media fan entitlement and pretty diabolical levels of bigotry (also to put it mildly).  

But y’know, even great shows do it to a degree these days – look at how Succession’s leant into Greg x Tom – and in cases like that, it’s not always a net negative. With good writers, they can balance that seesaw between artistic worth and commercial gain, but I don’t think it’s easy, which is why so many shows and movies these days feel like they’re pandering or trying to sell a Funko Pop.

So in answer to your question, no, I don’t think shipping culture itself is the issue, but I do think what audiences feel they’re entitled to when they turn on their TV has changed, which has in turn impacted the way they watch it, and the way a lot of networks make it too.

closed starter for @forgedqzs​  ―  (  sasha & toni  ) where: fedra school when: 7:35 am

competition has been known to be a very powerful tool. on one hand, it could provide a strong sense of motivation. to do better. to be better. better than anyone else. better than oneself. on the other... it could be quite dangerous. addictive even. it could ruin lives, demolish valuable connections. but wait... what was that about connections? sasha here didn’t really have those. or, at least, not any of great value. what they did have was personal selfish intentions. and well, in that case, competition only fueled sasha’s ego to no end. it brought purpose to their life. hooked them enough for them to keep coming back every day to that damned school, as if sasha wouldn’t have done it otherwise. they loved their job. loved being a trainer. loved handling weapons of any and every kind. loved one-on-one combat sessions. those were quite... intimate. powerful. even hot, if they were completely honest. but then.. there appeared yet another aspect of competition for sasha. and let’s just say... they did not expect that one.

frustration. extreme frustration to the point one could easily rip their hair out. who would’ve thought to hire yet ANOTHER trainer?! all the spots were already taken and the three of them already had everything under control. there was no need for a forth! it was funny, because sasha never felt any kind of threat having the other two trainers around. they were decent, but they were nowhere close their level. it almost bored sasha to an extent. there was no excitement, no inner mission to win something over. there was just... that. training. hardcore training. sure, there were the praises of the teenagers that sasha trained. they always welcomed their positive feedback and compliments. they couldn’t help but love all that attention which only proved to them that they were their favorite trainer and the best one in fedra school. period. but then... SHE had to show up.

this school did not need a model-looking, ego-boosting, confidence-radiating trainer. they certainly did not need that! any of that. why would they do something this lame? am i not good enough for them? all that i have done for them all these years? what is this BULLSHIT. to say that sasha was fuming was an understatement. who did this chick think she was?! based on how she was carrying herself, she was just as self-centered as them. and THAT could only mean one and only thing.... this was THE COMPETITION now. oh, oh, now, that’s where the real business starts.

ever since that toni (whatever her name is) joined the trainers, sasha made it their personal mission to be on top of everything as if it was even possible. they started going to the school an full hour earlier just to “prepare” and have their morning workout session in their office and be all ready for lessons by the time clock hit 8:00 am. there was nothing stopping them from reaching all of those very important goals they came up with in their head. it was crucial to show that foolish girl who the real trainer was. sasha had to set the example for the newbie. there was no other way around it. there was no way in hell they would allow that woman to act as she pleased. it was THEIR school. and it was all the foolish newbie’s fault for not getting it right away.

it was a monday morning. monday freaking morning. sasha HATED mondays. every single one, yet there they were already unlocking their office door precisely at 7:00 am. they simply had to be punctual and professional. as per usual. but now.. oh, now they had to be all those things in CAPITAL letters. there couldn’t be any slip-ups. no mistakes. only perfect professional trainer behavior. setting the example the correct way ― sasha used to say.

that fool’s going to be there any second. they had to be prepared. they will destroy her. easy peasy. they just had to show up at the right time and say the right things. bitch will end up being stunned and will back down. usually that’s how it worked. sasha used their charming, bold and blunt personality to throw others off their feet. this will be no different. like at all.

sasha lifted their hand to check their watch. almost time. almost. GO. grabbing their duffel bag, already in workout gear, sasha left their office now in the process of heading to the main gym hall. they had it booked since previous week as they had plenty of upcoming classes to attend to with their students. the gym was a necessity! but what they failed to notice was that toni must’ve arrived earlier as well and now was about to enter the gym. MY GYM?! MY FUCKING GYM? before they could even swear out loud sasha appeared right in front of toni, shoving the entrance door of the gym close, to prevent the other woman from entering.  ❝  ah, ah, ahhh! the gym’s mine.  ❞  well now it almost sounded like they were angry someone took their toy. that was not how they planned to come across.

❝  see, it’s been booked since last week.  ❞  sasha leaned against the door frame while giving the other a slight shrug as if to say that there was nothing to be done about it anymore.  ❝  aaaand i’m not about to disappoint my students. that’s just not me. at all.  ❞  apparently now they wanted to prove just how responsible they were and how much they cared for their students. which was partially true, but... not to that extent, anyways. it was more of self-interest, but toni didn’t need to know that.  ❝  so... i’m afraid you will have stop by later.  ❞ 

as someone that loves media analysis and criticism, the fact that i have to check every youtube channel's videos to make sure that they are not a) a right wing dude complaining about minorities or b) an out-right fascist is deeply upsetting.

for example, trying to find any rings of power criticism that does not boil everything down to "thing bad because feminism and the Blacks(tm)" is almost impossible.

and the thing is, some of their criticism is valid, like yeah, hollywood is ruining female characters, but not because of feminism or the "woke mob", but because capitalism's only version of strong female characters is the girl boss who don't need no man, because in the eyes of society, the only way a woman can be strong or complex is if they're more masculine than men. They're forgoing writing good characters because mass media companies have a very shallow understanding of what representation really means and because they know that as long as there is an illusion of progressive politics, they're going to be praised by the liberal (as in neoliberal media) media.

media IS getting worse, but again, not because of the "woke agenda of hollywood" (the one that, if we're being real here, doesn't actually exist), but because of the ever-evolving neoliberal economy, the - free market of ideas, if you will - media monopolies are only growing, and Disney, Amazon, HOB and others are pushing creators to put out hundreds of shows per year so they don't become obsolete. at the same time, creating media based on new stories and ideas is becoming less and less profitable by the minute: why should Disney take a risk in this new idea if they can pump out the 100th avengers spin-off or the 70th star wars show that is guaranteed to make a huge profit?

the fact that these people are noticing a drop in quality and instead of investigating and talking about the real roots of the problem in shows like Star Wars Spin-off 100 or Rings of Power (capitalism and the fact that neoliberalism was, is and will always be antithetical to art) they're using it to radicalize young kids is infuriating and makes me murderous.

Comprehensive Biography of Hu Zhen

Hu Zhen, styled Wencai (胡軫字文才), was a military general of Dong Zhuo who was known for his impulsiveness.

The Story

Hu Zhen served as Grand Administrator of Chen by 191. Dong Zhuo appointed him to a high military title, giving him Lü Bu and other petty officers as his subordinates.[1]

In Spring 191,[2] he was ordered to assault Yangren, where Sun Jian was garrisoned. While marching there, Hu Zhen grew frustrated at their perceived slowness and soon made a terrible impression when he announced that,

"Now with this march, I ought to behead a high-ranking officer as to correct our disunity into unity!"

Lü Bu and the others began to fear and also hate Hu Zhen afterwards. Soon, they arrived in Guangcheng, just some miles away from Yangren and its city. The march exhausted just about everything in their army, humans and horses, so they stopped there, also per Dong Zhuo's order. While there, they fed the horses and tried to use the night they had to prepare their troops. However, Lü Bu and the other generals decided to ruin Hu Zhen's night and soon exclaimed that,

"The traitors within Yangren City have already fled! We ought to pursue and search for them! If not, we will lose them!"

The army was forced to march in the night, exhausting them completely, and this persisted throughout the next day. The city was well-prepared, so they could not surprise attack them. By the time night fell again, the whole army was hungry, thirsty, and needing of rest. Soon, they took off their armor in hopes of resting, only for Lü Bu to loudly announce that,

"The traitors within the city have come out here!"

A total rout ensued, not by Sun Jian, but by Lü Bu's hatred of Hu Zhen. The terrified army discarded their weapons and saddles for their lives, and although they were able to regroup by dawn, Sun Jian already fortified the defenses even further, making it near-impossible for Hu Zhen to attack it. Hu Zhen retreated, probably humiliated.[1]

Hu Zhen's defeat terrified Dong Zhuo, who soon relocated the capital from Luoyang to Chang'an.[2]

In Summer 192, Hu Zhen served Wang Yun. Wang Yun ordered him and Xu Rong to defend Xinfeng from Li Jue and others, only for Hu Zhen to surrender his troops to them.[3] He was probably made Colonel who Directs Retainers at this time.[4]

Death

Hu Zhen and You Dun disliked each other, so Hu Zhen slandered You Dun, which was convincing enough to have You Dun executed. A few months later, however, Hu Zhen fell seriously ill, and one of the claimed side-effects of his illness was his eyes falling off its sockets. Hu Zhen blamed You Dun's spirit, saying,

"I admit my guilt! You Youqi will soon come to me as a ghost!"

Soon afterwards, Hu Zhen expired.[4][5] His date of death is not known, but it was probably between 192 and 196, as he appears to have not played a role in the internal war within Li Jue's faction.

References

[1] - 【初堅討董卓，到梁縣之陽人。卓亦遣兵步騎五千迎之，陳郡太守胡軫為大督護，呂布為騎督，其餘步騎將校都督者甚衆。軫字文才，性急，預宣言曰：「今此行也，要當斬一青綬，乃整齊耳。」諸將聞而惡之。軍到廣成，去陽人城數十里。日暮，士馬疲極，當止宿，又本受卓節度宿廣成，秣馬飲食，以夜進兵，投曉攻城。諸將惡憚軫，欲賊敗其事，布等宣言「陽人城中賊已走，當追尋之；不然失之矣」，便夜進軍。城中守備甚設，不可掩襲。於是吏士饑渴，人馬甚疲，且夜至，又無壍壘。釋甲休息，而布又宣言相驚，云「城中賊出來」。軍衆擾亂奔走，皆棄甲，失鞌馬。行十餘里，定無賊，會天明，便還，拾取兵器，欲進攻城。城守已固，穿壍已深，軫等不能攻而還。】《英雄記》

[2] - 【二月...袁術遣將孫堅與董卓將胡軫戰於陽人，軫軍大敗。董卓遂發掘洛陽諸帝陵。夏四月，董卓入長安。】《後漢書•孝獻帝紀》

[3] - 【王允聞之，乃遣卓故將胡軫、徐榮擊之於新豐。榮戰死，軫以眾降。】《後漢書•董卓列傳》

[4] - 【游敦，字幼齊，漢世為羽林中郎將。先與司隸校尉胡軫有隙，遂誣敦殺之。敦死月餘。軫病。目睛遂脫，但言「伏罪，游幼齊將鬼來」，於是遂死。】《還冤記》

[5] - 【游殷，字幼齊，與司隸校尉胡軫有隙，輕誣，構殺之。初，殷為郡功曹，有童子張既者，時未知名，為郡書佐，殷察異之。既過家，具設賓饌，及既至，殷妻笑曰：「君甚悖乎？張德容童昏小兒何異？」殷曰：「卿勿怪，乃方伯之器也。」殷遂與既論霸王之事，饗訖，以楚子托之。軫害殷，月餘得病，目脫，但言「伏罪，游幼齊將鬼來」，於是遂死。諺曰：「生有知人之明，死有鬼靈之驗。」】《三輔決錄》

Saturday 2 August 1834

8

10 25

no kiss tho’ she came to me for about half hour at six this morning lay very quietly fine morning F67° at 8 am - breakfast at 9 – very well satisfied till the bill came – and then I said the being charged 8/. a night for our double bedded room and the 2 servants rooms was ridicule – however the man said I had agreed to pay 19/. per day for all and everything and he had distributed the price so as to come to that – that fact is, I have a good lesson - according to his valuation I now see what dinners and breakfasts ought to be in little town like this - off from les Echelles [Les Échelles] at 1 5 having previously agreed with the postmaster for the horses at 3 at 1/50 and the 4th at 1/. per poste, and paid him - telling the postilion I should only give him 1/50 per poste - alighted at the grotte, on the other side of the tunnel, at 11 39 – walked down the bottom of the old road and back in ½ hour - In descending the 1st natural cave (on the left) is of considerable extent – the curé a little while ago during la grande sécheuse went on ½ hour in it – sometimes on hands and knees  - a little lake at the far end of the cavern – the large cavern just on this side of the inscription of honour of Charles Emmanuel and a little lower down (right) now the water course, was the original road along which people made use of ladders to get up and down the inequalities and from which the neighbouring town was called Les Echelles [Les Échelles], on account of the ladders being left there - The man at the grotte would have accompanied us but he was not well and we could not now go into the cavern on the account of the late rain - but during sécheuse one could go thro’ the cavern and it is very interesting - off again in 33 minutes at 12 12 – a few drops of rain as we drove along from the grotte – on reaching Saint Thiebault de Coux [Saint-Thibaud-de-Couz]  found there was a capital most picturesque new road just opened about 2 months ago direct from Les Echelles [Les Échelles] by Voreppe where 2  good Inns – 6 ½ postes from there to Grenoble – 10 postes to ditto by Chambery – should save 2 postes by turning back - would have done so but for the torment of a little douane on entering France (vid. yesterday) - this road just going to be entered in the livre des postes - at present the postmaster charged the 1st stage postes, but it was not really so much - at the cascade de Coux [Couz] at 1 ¾ and alighted at La Parfaite Union, Chambery at 2 25 – tired – had ½ hour’s nap in my chair – then A- and I out at 3 ½ put into the post office my and A-‘s letter to my aunt Shibden – written last night and dated at Les Echelles [Les Échelles] – would be in Paris in 3 days and paid 6 sols français - put in the p.o. also my letter 2 ½ pages to ‘Lady Duff Gordon, Poste restante, à Munich, Bavière’ dated as today at Chambery - paid 1/. - will be at Munich in 8 days - then went to the nursery garden - saw Frederic Burnier - went about with us very civilly - told him to give the habitat and temps du floraison locally where  and time when gathered of each specimen - sauntered about the town – went to the castle – saw the Sainte Chapelle – fine painted glass windows – loft groined roof – exterior handsome old gothic except the modern Greek front to the castle yard – old ruined empty partly square and partly round tower singular but picturesque - Home at 5 25 – dinner (very good one) at 5 40 - had a Lavaret (salmo lavaretus) excellent sort of fish the fishermen on lake Bourget, at Hautcombe, asked us 4/. a piece for - as large and .:. 1lb. weight the 1st time I remember to have tasted this fish - melon brought with the veal steaks cutlets - sat  long over dessert – till 9 25 wrote all the above of today – a few drops of rain at the grotte and afterwards occasional showers during the rest of the day - F69° now at 9 25 pm - the drive from Chambery to Les Echelles [Les Échelles] is certainly very fine - Chambery a very nice town but one most marchander with everybody - I ought to have done so with my garden botaniste Mr. Frederic Burnier, but I never thought of it at the time - he said they had here 64 journals of ground in nursery - a journal = 4000 French ft. carrés - sometimes (in the spring and autumn and now when much work to do) 250 workpeople - have given up the establishment at Turin- but one at Lyons and Grenoble, the latter newly established -  with her twenty minutes before getting into my own bed

ok now for a brief list of examples of manipulate mansplain malewife characters that are compelling because they suck for a specific reason and how Dazai could have used said motivation logically in canon to be more engaging as a character:

1.) Goro Akechi - pretty-boy genius liar and master manipulator. Their physical resemblance is the reason I actually started watching BSD. Akechi's motivation is extremely clear and so beautifully simple. He wants revenge. And he will go to whatever lengths it takes to get it. In the end, his motivation is to be in charge of his own destiny. To break chains or manipulation, be it from his father, Maruki or God Himself.

Revenge would have been an extremely easy pathway for Dazai. Mimic killed Oda. Mori purposefully got Mimic into Japan to stir up trouble and its heavily hinted that he informed them of curry shop and where the orphans live. If Dazai said: the reason my friend is dead is Mori and the Port Mafia. I will now do everything in my power to destroy/dismantle/ruin them to ease my own grief - that would be such an easy reason to explain away why he abandoned Akutagawa and Chuuya with no contact for four years, as well as add significant tension to all these 'team-ups' as well as willingly 'working with Mori.'

2.) Gen Asigiri - king of being two-faced and manipulation - knows always what to say, how to present himself, and what to capitalize on to get on top. He's an expert in human nature and, by that front, the 'negotiator.' Gen's motivation is also very simple - at first, it was so survive, meaning he gets to be on the winning side where he gets more pleasures from life. The second is simply believing in Senku and the world he wants to bring; using his manipulative qualities over and over again to save his friends and create new allies. But, per Gen, its super simple: his motive? Be on the winning side so he can end up powerful and spoiled. WE, as the audience, can see he also just like... loves and wants to help his friends.

Power and money and being on the winning side are also huge motivators. Again, if Dazai showed an interest of dismantling or at least hurting the Port Mafia somehow, that would also make a lot of sense with his backstory. Caring about his friends or wanting to see a better future are also REALLY easy motivators and probably the one where a lot of people would say 'but that IS his motivator! He cares about the agency!'

...Does he? When exactly has he shown that? If that was the case and if he was driven to look out for these people, it again would add a significant richness to his character. But every time he seemingly does something 'kind' for any of the characters, its a means to an end. He's trying to manipulate them into doing or saying something for him. Pep-talk to Kyoka during the Guild Arc? Sure, you could call it a point of connection and a kindness to reassure her that a 'murderer' can become a good person. But this was all to motivate her to fly said plane into the Moby Dick, thus preventing Moby Dick from destroying Yokohama. How about Ango? How about Chuuya? What about any of the people that love him, that go above and beyond for him when he does what seems like nothing in return? The strongest argument you can make here is for Atsushi.

So lets talk about that. Lets talk about our MC and who Dazai is supposed to be for him.

Dazai is supposed to be the mentor-figure. The all-knowing, experienced guiding hand to help Atsushi grow.

Hm. What other mentor figures do we know with that personality?

3.) Reigen Arataka - Reigen's character act is frankly fantastic and powerful. He is proof that an utterly unserious loserboy scam artist can have a meaningful development and huge impact on the story without losing that core aspect of his personality. Reigen ran lots of scams until he found the paranormal investigator role and, when Mob got involved, you could say that he lied to him, manipulated him and used him to make money and grow a successful business. BUT. Its been quite natural. We see the way Reigen starts to change himself and bad habits because of and for Mob. He runs into danger without a second thought for Mob. In the very end, he confesses, with shame and so so much love for this kid, that he'd been lying to him this whole time. Despite not being able to train him in a 'psychic' way, Reigen looked out for Mob, motivated him, treated him like a person when no one else did, and taught him the things that he wasn't naturally good at - like having self-confidence and talking to girls and being a leader. And he continued as such - with Tome and Serizawa, he continued to use his skills to help others and created a safe haven for people that don't feel like they belong anywhere else.

It would have been so, so easy to demonstrate Dazai slowly starting to care for Atsushi. Training him. Teaching him. Motivating him. Watching out for him. Finding joy and meaning in 'helping out some orphans.' Seeing the world through Atsushi's eyes, his joy, his fear, and becoming more human for it. And yet... the only times we see something vaguely along these lines is: Dazai getting 'captured' by the Port Mafia to see who put out a bounty on him (hm,) Dazai slapping Atsushi out of his hallucination when Q got him (hm........) Dazai ''''comforting'''' Atsushi when he realized the headmaster died (hmmmmmmmm.....). One can argue that instructing Akutagawa to save Atsushi is, outside actually recruiting him into the agency, the biggest thing he's really done FOR Atsushi - but, listen. It took NOTHING from Dazai to do that. He sacrificed SOMEONE ELSE who would do anything for him, someone he seems to not care for at all, to save Atsushi. Cool. That's a point for Akutagawa, not Dazai, because in the end Akutagawa made that choice himself. In all honesty, Akutagawa has a LOT more impact on Atsushi's development than Dazai does.

He does not train Atsushi (thats Kunikida.) He doesn't really teach him anything (thats also Kunikida.) He doesn't change as a person because of how much he cares about Atsushi. (Thats Akutagawa and Kyouka.) In the entire series, Dazai shows minimal, if any, growth or development.

4.) Satoru Gojo - look I'm not trying to kick the hornets nest here. Out of all of the above, Gojo is probably the closest person that one can parallel to Dazai (and not only because they have the same English VA.) Gojo plays the 'classic' shounen mentor role. He's extremely powerful and is highly motivated to protect the jujutsu sorcerer way of life. His motivators include being the strongest (classic) as well as raising a generation of jujutsu sorcerers who are hella powerful. His whole thing is getting the kids in and out of jams. He practically raised Megumi (after killing his dad. but. you know.) and defended Yuuji while personally showing him how to develop and control his power. He also has a dramatic and very engaging backstory (Hidden Inventory you will always be famous.) He has a clear motivation to change the entire system that he is a part of, and dies doing it.

Dazai has no interest in changing the system he is a part of. The tri-party system for protecting the city works just fine for him. As mentioned above, Dazai doesn't do shit to ACTUALLY put himself in danger for the sake of his 'mentees.' It might be because Dazai wears the world's thickest plot armor, but him being ''''captured'''' by the Port Mafia or even being ''''arrested'''' and put in jail would be a lot more meaningful if, you know, Dazai actually had to risk or sacrifice anything. The only time he actually risks himself to save someone physically is with Sigma in the elevator, but even THAT is muddled by Dazai barely knowing Sigma but being aware that the way to beat Fyodor is via Sigma's ability. So its not because he's a good person or that Sigma is important, but because preserving his ability takes priority for this 12-dimension game of chess him and Fyodor seem to be playing.

look. i dont think there's anything wrong with a 'coolest hottest smartest undefeatable genius character who can manipulate literally everyone in the world and is also god's favorite.' But there have to be stakes. There have to be risks. There have to be repercussions. Dazai doesn't even feel like a character - just a plot device to keep the other characters moving.

Now. Listen. Here is how we can fix Dazai. What if he, at some young age, got a hold of The Book and read it. Or even wrote in it. What if that is what makes him so nihilistic and uninterested in existing in his own universe. What if he read about the way he dies (way in the future, preferably brutally and horribly) and it made him obsessed with his own death and trying to make it happen on his own terms, not the unfeeling hands of the universe? And that no matter how hard he tries, no matter what insane scenarios he gets himself into, he cannot die? Because he spends all this time in existential dread, hoping that the Book was some kind of cosmic joke, trying to rebel against it but the outcome is still the same. That would explain how he seems to know everything about everyone and never makes the wrong move. How he can treat everyone around him like nothing and they're still dedicated to him. How he can just be an empty shell and still somehow the most important person in the plot.

Kafka Asagiri. Listen to me. THIS IS HOW WE CAN STILL SAVE BUNGO STRAY DOGS.

What if magic existed in the world today and everything were still kind of terrible? Thanks, capitalism, you can ruin everything!

Read The Butterfly Koi, one chapter per week, by signing up at http://syphoncontinuity.substack.com!