Tbh? I don't like Paul. I don't want Paul. I understand that Paul serves an important narrative function and that Paul is the best possible ending for Camilla and Palamedes given their situation, personalities, and relationship. However what I really want is for Camilla and Palamedes to attend the ATN wedding as two individual humans and for Pal to be a lightweight who loses his tie in the garden fountain after three drinks and for Camilla to do exactly one shot with the group, keep Gideon from ripping the sleeves off her dress shirt, and absolutely kill it at lawn games during cocktail hour. Since this scenario is a wild tonal mismatch for the series and also Palamedes was already dead, this was unlikely to ever happen. However Paul is the final nail in the coffin for the theoretical existence of this scene and I can't help but resent them for that
2K notes
·
View notes
"essek stays away post-canon because he doesn't want to endanger the nein while he's on the run" absolutely valid, but also i raise you: essek knows about the one (1) time the nein were in charge of protecting an important mage and she survived approximately one week before getting violently murdered while they were — direct quote — "havin' bacon"
2K notes
·
View notes
I love one man/overlord of hell/depressed cringefail dad
498 notes
·
View notes
i do think peak comedy is a steve who is absolutely aware of the effect he has on people, but has never felt that way towards anyone else-- the closest he got was with nancy and robin, because he loved them both in different ways, and sometimes he felt like he was going to go insane if he didn't talk to them or touch them right now, but it was never like he had seen other people act about him. robin and nancy made him a better person. they didn't drive him to ridiculous levels of violence and obsession. maybe people in hawkins were just fucking weird.
and then he meets eddie, falls in love with eddie, and he's like... yeah, okay. alright. no, i get it. if anything happened to this guy i would steal the nuclear launch codes.
2K notes
·
View notes
Missa knows souls.
He’s a reaper-of course he does. He may not be much of one at the moment, but that’s one thing that has never, can never, leave him.
Missa knows souls, and even though it’s been years since he’s had to use the talent, the knowledge sticks with him. They underestimate him on this island (not a lot, granted, but mortal bodies are hard to control and he’s more than a little out of practice) and he’s known Roier for long enough that whatever has taken root inside of his friend’s body can’t fool him.
When Missa sees him for the first time since the island’s reset, he thinks he’s seeing things at first; the stress of starting over must have gotten to him because he has to be imagining what he’s seeing. It’s only after he’s spent a little time with Roier that he realizes that his first instinct was right: he may be looking at Roier’s body, but he’s no longer speaking with his soul.
He’s careful not to let the knowledge slip out, playing up the jokes and banter with the imposter like he normally would, but inside his mind is reeling. There’s no one he can tell who would believe him, except maybe Phil, but Missa doesn’t want to involve him in this. His partner may be a reaper in his own right, Angel of Death as he is, but he’s got enough on his winged shoulders without Missa’s problems adding to them.
He gets his chance eventually, with a slipped comment to Cellbit. He frames it as just another joke in a bantering argument, but there’s a little too much sincerity in the way he focuses on Cellbit as he speaks that lets the other man realize the truth of his words:
“There’s something wrong with Roier.”
And by the widening of Cellbit’s eyes as he speaks, Missa knows his message has been received. After all, above anything else, Missa knows souls.
356 notes
·
View notes
Feminization/sissification/gender transformation but not in a purely humiliating way.
More like in a "I want to make you feel so soft and pretty and fragile and taken care of. You've denied yourself this for too long, and now you need someone to take control and do it for you" kind of way.
284 notes
·
View notes
big fan of the fandom being pretty solidly 50/50 on either “Nico is actually really bad at MythoMagic” versus “Nico is secretly possibly the world’s best MythoMagic player but he was stuck in a casino for 70 years so once he gets the opportunity to actually enter the professional competitive field it is Over For Everyone”
642 notes
·
View notes
The funny thing about Snotlout in the shows is that as one of the dragon riders he's seen as less competent.
(Altough the people in comparison are Hiccup with the last night fury in existence, the overcompetent at everything Astrid, and Fishlegs with his high knowledge of everything. So It is pretty stupid to compare them like that especially when Snotlout is flying on a freaking flaming death machine that is one of the biggest dragons as well.)
BUT the moment he is fighting against other people without Hookfang he is usually kicking ass (exceptions are like Alvin or Ryker themself) like nothing else. Be it hand on hand, with traps or improvised weapons, next to Astrid he's definitely the best fighter of the group.
No hate against Hookfang, cause I love Hookfang and Snotlout as a duo, but a lot of times they dismiss Snotlout just cause he's not as good or naturally talented at training dragons as the others (again, flying a literal monstrous nightmare). So maybe they should've just give him more time to shine without him in front of others. Cause whenever he did get this moments to shine it was usually without anyone or just one person watching.
98 notes
·
View notes
Btw if you come on holidays and stay at an AirBnb instead of an actual registered hotel I hate you personally. Not "I hate the gentrification and touristic massification and the way we can't live in our homes and are forced to move away because of tourism" in an abstract way- No, not just that. I hate you.
320 notes
·
View notes
Some…. enthusiastic support from our (yet to be introduced) regulars
@tmntaucompetition
(Drawn by @coyotecam Al and Ed belong to me too-)
69 notes
·
View notes
man, i was having doubts about romancing wyll as astarion (mostly bc karlach is also RIGHT THERE) but then i had astarion confess he was a vampire spawn and wyll's answer made me laugh so much. does this mean he knew the whole time in my tavs' playthrus as well? literal monster hunter immediately clocked that tav was traveling with a vampire spawn and just went, "eh, he's cute though so i'll let it slide." that's perfect. romance activated.
88 notes
·
View notes
I promised myself I wouldn't get mired in the weird moral chaos that is bg3's fandom, but I have a legitimate question: for a lot of fans, is this the first time playing with Choose Your Own Adventure stories?
The writing seems to be classic CYOA in the epilogues, at least with the evil post-game companions I've experienced. If you roleplay someone happy with your choices, the game generally reflects that those choices were satisfying in the exact way you'd expect. If you roleplay someone who regrets your choices or has doubts, it usually reflects that you should regret those choices. Either way, the "reader" is given a predictable response in order to fulfill their desired narrative.
Don't believe me? Go through the epilogue and try to play a character who both likes and hates every companion or where they ended up. Some changes are subtle while others are more dramatic. A few quick examples, all from a single save:
Playing a character who hates Halsin, though you romanced him, your conversation is short, civil only because Halsin is too mature to rise to your insults, and stilted. He's a distant companion that you've pushed away successfully.
Playing a character who loves Halsin and romanced him, the conversation between you is extraordinarily long and sweet, and you are written as dear to each other. It includes, potentially: sharing stories and teasing him about his more salacious ones, talking about his love of children (and them loving the bear), learning how he's settled into his new life, hearing about him finally finding happiness, being welcomed into his community, welcoming him to share in drinks, and even joyfully adopting an owlbear. This image is just the very beginning of it.
Playing a character who disapproves of Shar but encourages Shadowheart to follow Shar anyway, you get a zealot's lecture about how you're being naive, thinking that Shar's exploiting people, likely confirming your feeling that she's a lost-cause cultist now. The happiness in the conversation is one-sided (from Shadowheart).
Playing a character who is fine with Shar and encourages Shadowheart to follow Shar, you get a short, sincere thank you, and she immediately starts trying to bond with you. The tone of the conversation remains upbeat as she expresses how pleased she is with the church despite its difficulties and how she'd do everything again in a heartbeat.
Playing a character who doesn't like being an immortal consort, but ascended Astarion and agreed to it anyway, gives you an Anne Rice-like fight between bitter eternal lovers. You also get some petulant dragging of your friends.
Playing a character who loves being an immortal consort and ascended Astarion gets you the dark fantasy of all-powerful monsters in love, gleefully ruling and exploiting the world (along with your friends and probably each other) together.
These are all valid endings to the exact same story with very different implications for the future. It's easy to muddy the potential narratives if you try to hold all the unique, mutually exclusive dialog options together.
Remember, at the end of the day, this is written as a linear experience. Everyone's epilogue choices are self-contained in their own story, even if it's possible to reload and choose a different final page. Have fun fishing for unhappy endings if the drama gives the flavor you enjoy, or seek out happy endings if you want to feel fulfilled by your choices. Just know that not everyone will experience or want to experience the same ending for an otherwise identical set of choices in game. That's the cool part of getting to choose your own adventure.
51 notes
·
View notes
neal caffrey and peter burke are nate and sophie in a different font and here’s why- *gunshots*
182 notes
·
View notes
Hi! I came across your post answering an ask ahout your most ✨controversial takes✨ on the world of dogs from back in April.
I read that you thought the AKC should not allow "professional handlers", and saw that you also seemed to distinguish these from breeders and owners. I've never given it much thought, but I think I would've assumed a handler was just another word for "owner" on my own.
What's the difference between these things, and why do you take your stance against handlers?
(I can infer what a breeder is as opposed to the others lmao, so I guess I'm asking about owner vs handler vs "professional" handler)
In dog conformation the dogs are handled by a handler when they go into the ring. This handler does not have to be the owner and in many instances is not. Professional handlers are just what they seem: people that handle dogs at dog shows for a living. A good handler knows how to make the dog look good, not just from a grooming standpoint, but when moving around a ring. Hiring a pro handler outsources this knowledge, time needed, and skill to somebody else.
There are several problems with this for me:
1.) dog shows, especially at the upper levels, are highly politicized. Hiring the ~right~ handler could give your dog the upper hand from a dog of equal or better value handled by somebody “lesser”. It keeps you and your dogs in the in-crowd.
2.) A dog that shows or “campaigns” a lot becomes known to judges, has more opportunities etc. When dogs are shown by professional handlers the owner/breeder is not always going with them and dogs can be on the road with their handlers going to show after show for months and even years at a time. This is not something the average purebred dog owner can afford.
3.) professional handlers are NOT cheap and conformation dog shows aren’t either. Having the monetary means to hire a well respected pro handler is not feasible for most people. This sets the people who already have the means to compete in dog shows and campaign their dogs year round leagues above people who cannot afford this. This further pinches top dog shows into a 1% that is near impossible to break into for new people, people from marginalized backgrounds, young people, etc.
4.) because of the competitive nature of modern dog shows and it becoming a “sport” instead of an evaluation of the quality of breeding stock you get people willing to look the other way on corrective grooming, poor temperaments, non correct structure to have “their people” win, to have their friends win, to have the people they are connected to win. Dog shows are not an even playing ground and very much an unspoken club of who is “in” and “out”. The culture and ability of hiring pros to take your dog around the country, to groom your dog, to show your dog ensures it stays this way.
In my opinion dogs should be lightly bathed and put into the rings with their owners/breeders/co-owners. Nothing more. This would imo, better level the playing ground and provide more equity in the purebred dog world.
43 notes
·
View notes