yo im reading thru post coma experiences from people on quora cuz i was wondering how accurate my favorite post-apocalyptic fiction was and it wasn’t all that realistic 😔 (very far from reality)

anyways Dominion’s End by Yu Wo check it out its so goooood

english translation

vietnamese translation

sorry the original requires you to buy the book i think i honestly dunno how to read trad chinese yet so

og title: 終疆 by 御我

Fate and Phantasms #20: Cú Chulainn (Prototype)

Welcome back to Fate and Phantasms, where we’re bringing every servant in Fate Grand Order to life in D&D 5e! Today we’re building Ireland’s Child of Light (again)! We have three goals for this build:

Rune Magic: Cu needs some magic mojo. Not as much as Cascu, but enough for a little spice.

Warp Spasm: You don’t think of them as anger issues, more like anger solutions.

Hound of Culann: You’re still training the puppies of that dog you killed, which is all the justification I need to give you cool stuff that is barely touched on in-game.

As usual, a spreadsheet for the build can be found here, and an explanation is below the cut!

Race and Background

Since you’re the same person, your background is going to be pretty similar to original flavor Cu (shocker, I know). You are a Fallen Aasimar thanks to your Godfather, giving you +2 Charisma, +1 Strength, 60′ of Darkvision, Necrotic and Radiant resistance, Healing Hands (Touch to give your level in HP), and the Light Cantrip, which uses your Charisma. You’re a Soldier, giving you proficiency in Athletics and Intimidation. We said this the first time around, but while you’re technically a knight in name, you kind of just go around whaling on whoever pisses you off the most, so that background doesn’t really fit you.

Stats

We’re using the standard array for consistency, feel free to roll if you want to, but keep multiclassing in mind. Put Strength first, chucking a spear straight through someone’s rib cage is pretty labor intensive. Then Dexterity; you’re supposed to have a higher dex than your other self, but that would give you an odd strength score, and odd numbers make me sad. Wisdom is next for multiclassing, followed by Intelligence. Chalk the latter up to having less time for drinking. Put your next score in Constitution because we don’t want to dump that, and finally dump Charisma. You’re still a teenager, which means you’re pretty awkward. Don’t worry, you’ll grow out of it. Probably.

Class Levels

1. Ranger 1: As a Revised Ranger you have proficiency in Strength and Dexterity saves as well as three skills from that list. Pick Animal Handling to make raising those puppies easier, and Survival and Perception for hunting prowess. 

You get a Favored Enemy, pick beasts because this time it’s not a funny coincidence, you’re actually good at hunting animals. You get a +2 bonus to damage when attacking your favored enemy, and have advantage on checks to track and recall information about beasts. You also learn one extra language, but since beasts don’t have one feel free to pick what you want.

You’re also a Natural Explorer, letting you ignore difficult terrain, have advantage on initiative checks, have advantage on attacks against creatures who have not gone yet, ignore difficult terrain while travelling, avoid getting lost, stay alert while traveling and doing something else at the same time, move stealthily at normal traveling pace while by yourself, gather twice as much food, and track creatures with greater skill.

2. Ranger 2: You get a Fighting Style, grab Defense for the extra AC. You’re clearly wearing armor this time around, which is precisely why monk is out of the question. You also gain Spellcasting, using wisdom as your ability. Grab Hunter’s Mark for more damage and Longstrider for more movement.

3. Ranger 3: You gain a Primeval Awareness, letting you convey simple ideas to animals, figure out their short term needs, and sense your favored enemies within a 5 mile radius. That last part probably isn’t super useful for you, considering 9 times out of 10 the answer is just going to be “there’s a lot of them”.

You also have a Necrotic Shroud, courtesy of being half-god. At this level, you can use your action to transform yourself, forcing every creature within 10′ to make a charisma save vs. a DC of 8 + your proficiency + your Charisma modifier or become frightened until the end of your next turn. This transformation lasts a minute or until you end it, and during it you can deal extra necrotic damage equal to your level once per turn. You can only use this once per long rest.

Third level rangers get a subclass, and your’s is the Beastmaster. You get yourself a wolf pup at this level, which uses your proficiency for its attacks and skills, and also adds that to its damage and AC. It has proficiency in all saves and two skills (for simplicity’s sake I went with what it already has in its stat block, Perception and Stealth), and also receives ability score improvements when you do. It also gains an extra hit die, and the HP increase that comes with it when you level up. In combat the wolf has its own turn, with its actions decided by you. Who needs extra attacks, when you can just have extra characters? You do. Don’t worry, we’re getting both by the end of this.

For your spell this level, grab Cure Wounds in case you have any issues taming your buddy early on.

4. Ranger 4: Use your ASI to improve both your Strength and you wolf’s more more damage and accuracy. I know it’s a bit underwhelming compared to last level, but I’m glad every level doesn’t need that much text.

5. Ranger 5: You and your wolf now have a Coordinated Attack. When you attack and your wolf is nearby, they can use their reaction to attack as well. It doesn’t have to be the same target either, so feel free to divide and conquer.

For your spell this turn, grab Pass Without Trace to make you an even better hunter.

6. Fighter 1: Moving to our next class, fighters get another Fighting Style. Grab Dueling for an extra two damage while using your spear single-handed. You also get a Second Wind, letting you use an bonus action to heal 1d10 + Fighter level HP.

Because Revised Ranger hasn’t been balanced for multiclassing yet, there isn’t a hard and fast rule about whether or not taking other class levels will give your companion more HP. You should have a talk with your DM about it, but since the RAW don’t specify Ranger levels we’re going to say the wolf gets the health. They’d be pretty anemic otherwise.

7. Fighter 2: You gain an action surge, letting you add an extra action to your turn once per short rest. This doesn’t give your wolf another reaction though, so they won’t get another attack with you.

8. Fighter 3: We already have one UA class, so why not two? (Not any more, Rune Knight’s in Tasha’s) Grab Rune Knight as your next subclass. Is it insulting to lump norse mythology and celtic mythology together just because they use runes? Almost definitely. But we needed runes, and here they are. (Also untrue; Scathach taught Cu norse runes. This is surprisingly in character) As a rune knight, you can carve runes into weapons, armor, or handheld objects(once per rune per day) to give them special effects while the object is being carried or worn, and can be invoked by the wearer once per short rest for further benefits. Any saving throws made thanks to runes have a DC of 8 + your proficiency + your Intelligence modifier. 

You start with two runes, so grab the Frost and Cloud runes. The former gives advantage on animal handling and intimidation checks while worn, and the wearer can invoke the rune as a bonus action to increase their strength and constitution saves by 2 for 10 minutes. The cloud rune gives advantage to sleight of hand and deception checks, and you can react to invoke the rune when someone within 30′ of you is being attacked, redirecting the attack to someone else within 30′ of you, regardless of the attacks normal range.

Finally, you gain Giant Might, making you a large creature for one minute as a bonus action. This gives you advantage on Strength checks and saves, and you deal an extra 1d6 damage when making a weapon attack once per turn. You can use this a number of times per long rest equal to your proficiency modifier.

9. Fighter 4: You get another ASI, use yours to buff your Constitution and your wolf’s to buff their Strength.

10. Ranger 6: You gain a Greater Favored Enemy. Unlike the last one, there isn’t really a best canon pick, so pick whichever of the following suits the campaign better: Aberrations, Celestials, Constructs, Dragons, Elemental, Fiends, or Giants. You get a +4 bonus to damaging the enemy you choose, another language, and you have advantage against saving throws caused by those enemies.

11. Barbarian 1: Because you didn’t have enough super modes yet, you now have the ability to Rage, using a bonus action to get advantage on Strength checks and saves, deal an extra 2 damage with melee attacks, and resist bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. Rages last for one minute, or until you’ve gone a full round without attacking or being attacked.

You also have Unarmored Defense, making your base AC 10 + your dex mod + you con mod. This might not come in handy that much since your armor can hold your runes, but it’s nice to have something to fall back on.

12. Barbarian 2: You might not have Gae Bolg yet, but you can get close to it with a Reckless Attack, giving yourself advantage on attacks now in exchange for enemies having advantage on you until your next turn. You also have Danger Sense, giving you advantage on Dexterity saves caused by effects you can see.

13. Barbarian 3: You become a Totem Warrior and Spirit Seeker, letting you use Beast Sense and Speak with Animals as rituals. You also gain a Wolf Totem, giving allies advantage on attacks when they’re aiming at something within 5′ of you. Now the whole party can get in on the fun you and your wolf buddy have been having this whole time!

14. Barbarian 4: Use this ASI to improve you and your wolf’s Constitution for more health all around.

15. Fighter 5: You gain an Extra Attack (I told you we’d get around to that).

16. Fighter 6: Use another ASI to improve your Intelligence for better runes, and round out your wolf’s Intelligence and Dexterity.

17. Fighter 7: You learn how to make a Runic Shield, letting you use your reaction to force an attacker to reroll their attack if they’re targeting someone within 60′ of you. You can use this a number of times per long rest equal to your proficiency modifier.

You also gain a third rune. The Fire rune doubles proficiency on tool checks, and you can invoke this rune on an attack to shackle the target. They must make a Strength save or become restrained, taking 2d6 fire damage at the start of their turns. They can repeat the save at the end of their turn to try and escape.

18. Fighter 8: Use your last ASI to improve your Intelligence for better rune magic, and your wolf’s Constitution for more health.

19. Barbarian 5: You get an Extra Attack, which is worthless to you, and Fast Movement, adding 10′ to your speed as long as you aren’t wearing heavy armor.

20. Barbarian 6: Use your final level to gain an Elk Aspect, doubling your travel speed.

Pros: Having two bodies on the field is pretty useful, not only is your wolf an extra two attacks per turn, it can also be a help action, or running away with an enemy wizard’s spellbook while you fight them. You’re also pretty good as a noncombat support role, giving your runes to other party members to improve their strengths. I mean, doubling the thieves’ tools proficiency of a rogue who probably already doubled it on their own? Nice. Finally, you have a pretty strong super mode available. All your transformations stack, so you can be a large, scary monster that can deal an extra 1d6+24 damage per turn, with a bunch of resistances to make things harder for your enemies.

Cons: If you can’t talk your DM into fudging the rules even further than UA already takes it, your wolf is going to be pretty anemic. You also don’t have much in the way of magical or ranged attacks, so magic enemies will probably give you plenty of trouble. Using your full Warp Spasm is also going to take a while. You need two bonus actions and a normal action, meaning you’re going to waste a full turn beefing yourself up before you can even use it. Finally, your turn is going to be super crowded. You have bonus action transformations, reaction runes and defense buffs to worry about, and an entire other turn and character to work with too. I guess you should enjoy burning the candle at both ends while you’re young enough to do so.

I saw your ask talking about the torture apologia in thriller through assassins and I was wondering cause I have a character who from a very, very young age was taught to be that assassin and was punished with pain/lack of food/isolation for the smallest demeanours, I'm not sure if it counts as torture exactly due to the political aspect of torture as a whole, but would she more likely think this was normal and gradually learn it wasn't or would she need to be exposed to the idea that it wasn't?

(Assassin anon) if she does learn it herself as opposed to being exposed to it, what age is this likely to happen? I also just want to clarify, I don't want her staying with the group doing it cause I know torture doesn't gain loyalty at all, I just want to make sure the way she grows into the knowledge that what's happening to her isn't normal is done correctly and as realistically as I can

Legallyspeaking this would be abuse not torture. But make no mistake whatyou’re describing is child abuse and it is incredibly harmful.

Itwould have a drastic effect on the character, effects which wouldmake the character much less effective as an assassin.

I-know this isn’t exactly what you asked, and I will answer yourquestion. But I get so many story ideas pitched here that assume thiskind of set up is harmless. I don’t think you’re making thatassumption but I feel I wouldn’t be doing my job properly if Ididn’t talk about the damage this kind of abuse would cause.

Asidefrom anything else I think it’s important to be clear on the kindof damage these scenarios would cause. Because as an author it’sreally easy to acknowledge something is harmful but misjudge whatkinds of injuries or long term problems it can cause.

Childabuse, especially the kinds you’ve chosen for this story, causes alot of long term physical and psychological problems. And they’reproblems that would have a knock on effect on the character’sabilities as an assassin.

Starvationat a young age can stunt growth. It can result in weaker bones. Itleads to a lot more illness in childhood. A pattern of regularstarvation at a young age can lead to significant weight gain laterin life (which I’m including because depending on the setting itcould effect an assassin’s ability to blend in).

Italso reduces a child’s ability to learn. It reduces concentrationand motivation, produces depressive symptoms and agitation.

Dependingon how severe the starvation is and how regular the periods ofstarvation are it could lead to a permanent drop in intelligence-brain damage. It can also lead to mental health problems like anxietyand depression.

Starvationis incredibly dangerous for anyone, but it’s particularly dangerousfor children.

Solitaryconfinement, or isolation, is also particularly damaging forchildren.

There’sless research on solitary confinement in children. Most of theresearch is in adults. But everything we do know strongly suggeststhat the effects on children, especiallyyounger children, are much more severe.

It’snot clear exactly what causes the physical symptoms of solitaryconfinement. Some of them could be down to poor cell conditions. Eyeproblems could be down to poor cell conditions. Lack of energy andinsomnia seem to be possible regardless. All of these could causelong term problems for an assassin.

Fora child in particular the chances of long term problems socialisingare particularly high. Solitary causes significant problemssocialising in adults and in children, who are still learning how tosocialise, it can produce life long isolation because they neverlearn to socialise.

Thatin turn has knock on effects making depression, self harm and lowself esteem incredibly likely in the long term.

That’sin addition to the other mental health problems that solitaryconfinement causes. And repeated bouts of solitary confinement wouldexacerbate those previous symptoms. So you’ve got a situation wherethe character’s mental health problems would just keep piling up.Because each of the punishments would cause serious mental healthproblems and solitary would make each of those worse.

AndI think that brings us back to the question, thank you for bearingwith me through that. :)

HonestlyI think this depends on the way you’ve set up the story. Dependingon how much contact the character has with people outside theassassin-organisation she could work out that this isn’t ‘normal’or she might need to be outright told.

Itcould also vary depending on how other children being trained aretreated.

Childrenare very good at spotting unfair treatment even if they’re notalways very good at expressing why it’s unfair. But that doesinvolve being able to see that other people are treated differently.

Ifthe character isable to see what normal life looks like from a young age then shewould probably realise early on that she’s being treated badly.Anecdotally I’ve read a few accounts from people who were abused aschildren recalling that it was when they started going to school,socialising with other children their own age without their parentsaround, that they realised their experience wasn’t ‘normal’.

Fromeverything you’ve said I doubt this character is going to amainstream school. Is there an equivalent, regular opportunity forher to social with people outside the assassin-group at a young age?

Dependingon how you’re picturing the training regime and raising of thesechildren she might be able to reach the same realisation based onother children within the group. If the children are raisedcommunally as a group and are all treated equally badly then I don’tthink that would be possible. But if it’s more akin to them eachbeing put with a particular teacher/parent figure and each child’straining regime is controlled by one or two adults with significantvariations- Then I think you could easily have the character realisethat most of the others aren’t starved, those children aren’tlocked up alone, a few children aren’t even beaten.

Ineither of these scenarios I think it wouldn’t be unreasonable tohave the character realising things are different for her at 4-5years old.

Ifshe’s kept isolated from the outside world and the other childrenare treated just as badly then I think it could take significantlylonger for her the realise her experience isn’t normal.

Theeasiest way to bring about that realisation would probably be as partof any training to ‘blend in’ with larger society. When hertraining gets to a point where she needsto know how to sham ‘correct’ social behaviour or at leastobserve her targets then she’s going to encounter relationshipsthat aren’t abusive.

Itwould probably take a pattern of repeated observation for her torealise that her experience is the aberration. But the exact age thisis likely to take place at would depend on how you’re picturing hertraining regime and the kind of age these assassins are allowed outinto the wider world.

Now,I’m not entirely sure if this has addressed your question, becausethere seems to be an element of spontaneous realisation with nooutside input versus overt exposure. I’m not sure those aremutually exclusive.

Idon’t think she could function as an assassin completely isolatedfrom outside society. Which means that the question isn’t whethershe’s exposed to other ways of living but when.

Idon’t think that someone truly and completely isolated from otherways of living would realise that abuse wasn’t normal. I thinkthey’d know it was wrong and unfair and harmful but those aren’tthe same thing. And that doesn’t seem to be what’s going on here.

SoI think you’ve got some room to decide what age the character comesto this realisation based on what age she’s exposed to- wellnon-abusive relationships. And I think the realisation can be aspontaneous thing that grows in response to that exposure.

Havinga character bluntly tell her that her relationships were all abusive-based on anecdotes and personal experience I’d say this is aterrible way to try and reach someone in that situation. It mostcommonly seems to produce a knee-jerk defence of the relationships.

Itcouldlead to her eventually accepting that these relationships areabusive, years later. But in the short term, most people are morelikely to knuckle down, to get defensive, to deny. Even if sherecognises that the relationship is bad. It’s a sort of ‘it’sbad but it’s not that’.

Tohave a blunt declaration like this reach her I think you’d need todo a lot of groundwork to establish the character is already most ofthe way to reaching that realisation herself.

Dependingon the broader situation and exposure to outside cultures/familyunits you really could pick almost any age. I think the youngest agesyou could reasonably use is 4-5 years old. While she could stillreach the realisation as an adult I think the further into adulthoodshe is, the more entrenched in the assassin-group she is the lesslikely she is to leave.

Becauseleaving these kinds of situations means rejecting her entire socialcircle. It means isolation. It means the rejection of routine andeverything she’s come to rely on. Which is difficult at any age butas an adult in her 30s, 40s etc I think she’s more likely tobelieve she’d be incapable of establishing relationships outside ofher group. That’s not true, but the longer she remains isolatedfrom relationships outside the group the more likely it is thatshe’ll believe she’s incapable of starting over.

Especiallybecause these sorts of isolated groups tend to try and teach membersthat they won’t be accepted elsewhere, it’s part of how they keeppeople in the group.

Youmight also find it useful to look up interviews with people who leftcults. I have a few saved that might help as a starting point. Thisone was an American ‘homeschool’ community.Thisone is a South Korean cult and the interviewee lost contact with herfamily because of the cult.

Beyondthat, you might want to have a look at Scripttraumasurvivors posts onchild abuse.

ReclaimingDreams and the war child site generally could be relevant.There’salso a practical guide to reintegrating child soldiers into societythat could be useful to you here.

Ihope that helps. :)

Availableon Wordpress.

Disclaimer

Cas in 13x14: Whatever it Takes

Okay, here we go. First off, let me just say how well-done that episode was. I was bouncing off the walls last night with commentary and general flailing (I’m pretty sure I drove my casual-viewer watching buddy crazy) and I couldn’t wait to organize and elaborate on the notes I took into a coherent post. Coherent is the key word here, because I’m looking back at my notes and seeing some of them are not quite as insightful and well thought out as they were at 10:30 at night (For example: “Dean but not, you know.” Huh? What does that even mean, Maeve?) 

Anyways.

Familiar Themes, New Context

So, Cas x Self Worth has been an important theme for a few seasons now --- and it has been well established that much of Cas’s self-worth stems from mission and his failures and successes on this front. While we have seen an exponential amount of growth from him when it comes to this (see resolution of depression arc as well as literal and metaphorical renewal,) 13x14 re-established Cas’s yearn for mission and purpose as well as the positive and negative implications this has for his character. I would like to point to the very title of this episode: “Good Intentions.” I know this title immediately brought Cas to mind for me as well as raise some red flags, because ‘good intentions’ never end up well, especially in Cas’s case. This is not to say he made some incredibly detrimental, immoral, irreversible mistake this episode --- because he didn’t, imo --- I simply point this out because it is key to interpreting his decisions and also helps to bring other examples of Cas’s good-intentioned actions to mind.

Now I will not deny some of Cas’s behavior and attitude reminded me of an earlier, more righteous and stoic version of the angel, but I was more struck by the the stark differences between Cas then and Cas now. In almost every other instance of “Cas on a mission,” he has removed himself emotionally from the situation (to the best of his ability.) He acts out of necessity, and does so with strategy and logic, and even when his actions aren’t solely objective he manages to make them appear so. While there have always been exceptions to this rule, I was blown away at how blatantly and unapologetically 13x14 threw away the Cas rulebook --- putting Cas’s actions and words in direct conflict, and taking a soldier who is usually cool and calculating and showing him as emotional and reactive. This conflict was so evident, in fact, my casual-viewing friend asked me what was up with Cas, and I didn’t have an easy answer:  I was just as blown away as she was. Cas has been growing increasingly emotional these past few seasons, but I had not yet seen it in this context; I had gotten used to the depressed, docile Cas, and it wasn’t until this season and the re-emergence of the BAMF I remembered so well that I really grasped all at once how much Cas has morphed as a character.

And that’s not to say I haven’t noticed the exponential changes in his character over the last few seasons, because, well, they were exponential. I didn’t think he could still surprise me.

He did.

Go figure.

Conflicting Narratives

I cannot tell you how important this strategy is to telling Cas’s story --- the audience is familiar with several iterations of Castiel, so paralleling his current actions/behavior with those of an older version of Cas is perhaps the most effective way of showing character development. And holy mother of hell has he done some development. First off, I’ll explain what I found so striking about Cas this episode. We were essentially told two different stories: Cas from the Winchester’s point of view, and Cas from his own point of view. Take, for example, this exchange:

Dean: How are you holdin' up, Cas?

Castiel: I'm fine.

Dean: No, I just mean with, you know, everything you've been through. And I know you really wanna find Lucifer.

Castiel: No, it's not that. It's about --- well, it is that, but it's also I --- Dean, I was --- I was dead.

Dean: Temporarily.

Castiel: And I have to believe that I was brought back for a reason.

(Cas goes into his responsibility for Jack and preparation for war with Michael.)

Once again, Cas’s search for purpose and how it ties into his self-worth. This episode is full of examples of Cas’s eagerness to get something done which he voices most enthusiastically to Sam and Dean, and while his zeal was refreshing it did not surprise me, nor did in seem to surprise the boys. It wasn’t until the visual narrative took a sharp turn that I really zeroed in on Cas, and you may know the scene I’m referring to: when he rushed down to help Dean after he was magically choked, and we got seven solid seconds (yes, I counted) of Cas staring bloody murder at Donatello before they cut away.

Here’s where it gets interesting. When discussing what to do about Donatello Cas’s argument is presented as strictly rational, all of his points relating only to what will further them to their goal. But he’s angry, and he decides to take things into his own hands.

(After discussing Donatello)

Cas: Fine. (Cas leaves the room.)

Dean: Cas---

Sam: Hey, what are you doing?

Cas: What I have to.

As soon as Cas is away from the Winchesters, something changes. His determination stays steady, but his motive comes into question--- this is more than just taking the mission into his own hands, this is reactive and aberrant. His rhetoric shifts away from logic and strategy to one much more emotional. Something hit a nerve.

Cas: I'm sorry, but I'm not going to let you, or anyone, hurt the people I love. Not again.

(cue me, yelling at full volume into the abyss.)

Voila! Conflicting narratives! We have Cas, presenting himself as strategic and logical to the Winchesters, and we have a view of Cas behind the scenes that tells a whole different story--- somebody with a rash, all-too-human reaction to seeing someone he loves being hurt. Cas approaches protecting his family with the same ferocity he does any other mission, the difference being he is driven by human emotion, and not angelic duty, which begs the question: which rules his decision-making process? These scenes can answer that in part. While it can be argued Cas’s actions could have just been a means to an end (the end being finding out the ingredients to the spell,) this course of action was undeniably reckless, and probably unnecessarily dangerous. We know Cas was strong enough to overpower Donatello and I am certain could have found another way to get to this information, not to mention whatever he did to Donatello could have easily killed him as well. Not to say he isn’t impulsive, because he is --- but this impulse was borne out of love and anger and vengeance, a motivator much more associated with Dean. In my opinion, Cas was not intent on leaving Donatello with any capacity to function, mind-probe or not. It was seeing Dean get hurt that stirred Cas up, and it was the prospect of either Dean or Sam being hurt again that motivated him to take immediate action.

Why It’s Important

So, what does that mean for Cas? In my friend’s words, Cas is morphing. We know how far Cas can be willing to go for a cause, but much of Cas’s new cause comes irrefutably from a place of deep emotion --- while most of his missions have been rooted in protecting the Winchesters (whether or not he would admit it,) this is a somewhat new territory. We saw a few examples of reckless decisions made in devotion to the Winchesters last season, i.e. killing Billy, but the circumstance is what is important here. Cas is restored to his old, confident, smitey self, and yet it has not compromised his own humanity; in many ways, it has made it more obvious. Cas is no longer vulnerable and is still more human than ever, and that was on full display for us in “Good Intentions.”

But why is Cas putting up the front? Why is he presenting his actions to the Winchesters only in the context of logic and mission? The closing scene, in which Sam and Dean confront him about what he did to Donatello, Cas says he “did what soldiers do.” He writes off his actions as just hurrying along the process. He doesn’t address the emotional aspect of what he did, but the episode makes it clear to the viewer, much more clearly than they have done in recent memory, that there is much more going on in Cas’s mind and heart than he clued the Winchesters into.

Cas has come to terms with his love for the Winchesters (something can be said for him grappling with different emotions toward each brother, but I’m not going into that right now,) and he has much more emotional intelligence than he did last time he was at full power and consumed with mission, so I think misunderstanding of and unfamiliarity with human emotion will play much less of a role than it did in season 6.

I believe Cas is embarking on a character arc that will determine just how far he will go to protect his family.

(By family, of course, I mean Sam, Dean, Jack, and Mary.) And that has many implications. This subversion of early Cas will certainly give light to character growth as well as help resolve parts of his character (we are in the autumn of the show, after all.) It also has the potential to create problems. As we saw this week, Cas acted on impulse and subsequently put himself in danger (albeit not out of suicidal desperation, thank gosh,) as well as the friction he caused by side-stepping the Winchesters. I myself am most intrigued by the two different stories Cas is telling, and what that means for him personally (is it easier for him to rationalize his actions to others in the context of a mission? Is there another reason?)

I’ll leave this open for discussion, because I am more than eager to hear people’s thoughts on this.

But all in all this was an incredible Cas episode, as well as an important one. I’m excited to see where they go from here.

PG&E Has a Survival Plan, and Newsom Has Plan B: A Takeover

Ferocious wildfires have inflicted several years of death and destruction on California. But they have also presented the state with an opportunity to radically overhaul the company prominently implicated in the fires, Pacific Gas & Electric.The most powerful proponent of far-reaching changes, Gov. Gavin Newsom, is threatening a state takeover if the giant utility fails to reshape itself to his liking. With a key deadline approaching in PG&E’s bankruptcy case, the question is whether he is prepared to follow through — and what consequences could follow.The state is technically on the sidelines in the San Francisco bankruptcy proceeding where PG&E is pressing forward with its own restructuring plan. The company achieved a breakthrough recently in uniting shareholders and creditors behind the plan, which it says would satisfy the claims of wildfire victims as well.But PG&E has to emerge from bankruptcy by June 30 — on terms acceptable to the governor — in order to take part in a new $20 billion state fund designed to shield large utilities from large wildfire claims. Without that protection, PG&E’s restructuring plan would fall apart and its viability would be in question.To Mr. Newsom, the company’s plan does not do enough to ensure its financial stability, its operational competence or its corporate integrity. “What I don’t want is a utility that comes out of bankruptcy limping,” he said recently.It is not clear whether he actually wants to take over PG&E — a long-troubled company that could take years to fix — and make it a ward of the state. His threats could be a negotiating tactic, and the company has moved a little closer to his objectives.Mr. Newsom said his administration had been conferring daily with PG&E to resolve issues including the governor’s authority in shaping the company’s board and measures to guarantee long-term financial stability. At the same time, he and allies have taken steps that suggest they are serious about a takeover.The Democratic governor and about a dozen lawmakers have been meeting regularly to plot strategy. And state officials have worked to assure labor unions — a critical political bloc — that a takeover would not jeopardize jobs and benefits.“We have not just rhetorically discussed a break-the-glass scenario, a Plan B, but we have laid out in detailed terms what that would look like, and we’re working with legislative leaders to advance it in real time,” Mr. Newsom said last week.On Monday, State Senator Scott Wiener, a Bay Area Democrat, announced legislation to enable the state to take control of PG&E, which provides electricity and gas service to about 16 million people in the northern and central parts of California.Over a five-year period, the measure would allow the state to revoke PG&E’s franchise agreement, stripping the power company of its utility customers and its core revenue source; to direct a state Power Authority to buy the utility’s electric and gas assets with money that ratepayers would repay over several decades; and to create a seven-member board appointed by local governments in each district.“I personally believe PG&E has forfeited the privilege to operate as an investor-owned utility,” Mr. Wiener said. “This is a company that is unraveling.”Exactly how such a solution would play out is unclear. Mr. Wiener’s bill, for example, would allow municipalities to break off pieces of PG&E to form their own utilities. Mr. Newsom has spoken of keeping the company whole.Putting PG&E under the ownership of the state or its customers would lower its borrowing costs and free up money now spent on stock dividends, according to supporters of such plans. But a takeover would be costly, and it could face legal challenges from the company’s shareholders.A long battle could in turn delay payments to wildfire victims, many of whom have been waiting more than two years for compensation. And politicians would risk voters’ wrath over management decisions — like the pre-emptive blackouts of millions of customers carried out last year in the name of fire prevention.“I don’t think taking over PG&E without a plan is necessarily a good idea,” said Bruce Cain, a political-science professor at Stanford University. “It’s a thankless job for a politician to take this over. Most politicians run away.”PG&E sought bankruptcy protection a year ago — its second Chapter 11 filing in two decades — with $30 billion in liabilities related to wildfires ignited by the utility’s poorly maintained electrical system. One of the blazes, the Camp Fire, killed 85 people in 2018 and destroyed the town of Paradise.Local 1245 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which represents 12,000 PG&E employees, said this week that it opposed a state takeover. The union has cited complex legal, political and operational challenges, including the development and maintenance of a safe electric grid at a time when climate change has heightened wildfire hazards.“It’s not an optimal solution for anybody,” said Tom Dalzell, the union’s business manager. “You’re assuming a lot of exposure, and there’s going to be fires.”It is also not clear that the public would support such a drastic move. In a recent survey for The Los Angeles Times by the Berkeley IGS Poll at the University of California, just 17 percent of voters said they favored a state takeover of PG&E, while an additional 20 percent supported nonprofit city and county cooperatives.“Certainly the governor can exert his power to effect changes at PG&E,” said Mark DiCamillo, who oversees the polling organization. “A state takeover, that’s a stretch that would be a huge change in public policy. It’s pretty much a long shot.”The latest version of PG&E’s own proposal includes a shake-up of its board and a safety plan to help prevent wildfires caused by its electrical equipment, both meant to address Mr. Newsom’s concerns.The utility has reached settlement agreements that include a $13.5 billion fund for wildfire victims, $1 billion to compensate local governments for wildfire expenses and a deal with bondholders, approved Tuesday by the federal bankruptcy judge, Dennis Montali.PG&E’s proposal has inspired a growing sense of confidence among investors, prompting the company’s stock price to surge to around $17 from a 12-month low of $3.55.The shares are soaring in part because investors have placed their faith in a regulatory framework that allows utilities to raise rates so that they can earn a set profit margin each year. Over the past decade, PG&E has fallen short of its authorized profit, known as return on equity. PG&E’s supporters say that the last decade was an aberration, marred by disasters and poor management, and that new executives, an overhauled board and an improved safety performance will enable the company to earn its authorized return.But some question whether the financial strategy is sound.“The numbers do not add up, unless the money that ratepayers pay increases,” said Loretta Lynch, a former president of the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates PG&E and other shareholder-owned utilities.“There’s no way for PG&E to pay off all of the people without raising rates,” she added. “The shareholders aren’t taking a haircut. That’s why Wall Street is excited about this deal, because they don’t have to pay for it.”PG&E said its reorganization plan met the state requirement that the effect on ratepayers be “neutral on average.”The financial performance of PG&E will also affect wildfire victims. Under the bankruptcy plan, half their payment would come in PG&E shares. If the company struggles, the shares could fall in value, reducing the amount the victims ultimately receive. (The shares could rally, however, and give the victims a windfall.)And PG&E’s plan would leave the company with more debt than it had before it filed for bankruptcy protection, in theory making it more vulnerable to financial stress.To address that risk, PG&E could sell more stock and take on less debt as part of its reorganization, an approach favored under a rival plan that no longer has backers in the bankruptcy proceeding.PG&E is proposing that its parent company, PG&E Corporation, issue billions of dollars in debt. The cost of this borrowing would have to be paid with earnings from Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the entity that provides customers with gas and power, in theory leaving it with less money to improve its network.PG&E is also seeking to use a tax windfall from its wildfire-related losses to back $7 billion in new debt, an offering known as securitization bonds. A share of rate revenue is designated for taxes — payments the company will be spared for some time — and PG&E wants to use that revenue to finance the bonds. Mr. Newsom has criticized these financial moves, saying they could impair the company’s ability to raise additional money for safety improvements.Energy policy has been a political crucible for California in the past — most notably in the crisis that followed the bungled deregulation of the state’s electricity market two decades ago, unleashing events that ended in the recall of Gov. Gray Davis in 2003.Michael Sweet, who has known Mr. Newsom for decades, feels the current governor is up to the challenge. Mr. Sweet, a San Francisco lawyer whose firm represents a few creditors in PG&E’s bankruptcy, said that on Mr. Newsom’s watch, the utility might finally face a reckoning.“If PG&E and Wall Street are not giving his concern a significant amount of credence, they’re underestimating him,” Mr. Sweet said, citing Mr. Newsom’s forceful advocacy for legalizing marijuana and gay marriage early in his political career. “He’s not afraid to go out on a limb.” Read the full article

10 Year US Treasury Yields Are Headed to 0%?

This is not a forecast. This is not a bold prediction. This is not something that we hope happens. This is an observation of what is unfolding in the markets right in front of us. The 10 year Treasury peaked at 3.25% on November 7, 2018 and has fallen relentlessly to 1.93% on July 3, 2019. Today, 32% of the global government bond market and 24% of the global aggregate bond market have negative yields. We should consider it a warning that this is the path the market is on unless there is an adequate policy response.

What is surprising is that the dramatic decline in yields has happened against a backdrop which would have suggested otherwise. The last move by the Federal Reserve was to raise interest rates on December 19, 2018. The Fed is also in the process of running down its balance sheet by up to $35B per month. Assets in US money market funds have increased steadily over the last 9 months to nearly $3.3T, the highest level since the Great Financial Crisis when the Fed provided an unlimited guarantee to these funds. Equities, gold and crypto currencies have all risen to recent cycle highs. Further, the US economy could be characterized as ‘OK’. So, what is driving the flows into US government bonds, and where is the money coming from? More importantly, if all of these factors turn, where do yields go from current levels?

Quite simply, the money is pouring into the US bond market from overseas. As the volume of negative yielding debt grows across Europe and Japan, investors are seeking a safe haven that has a positive yield. US investors have neither embraced the decline nor pushed back on it. As trade tensions escalate, the probability of recession rises. There is also the very real risk that inflation expectations have become unanchored and central banks are gradually becoming powerless. New York Federal Reserve President John Williams, in his July 18 remarks to the Central Bank Research Association, brilliantly articulated this risk by saying that “investors are increasingly viewing these low inflation readings not as an aberration, but rather a new normal”.

While there has already been a dramatic decline in US yields, an accelerated move lower is potentially in the offing. If, as expected, the Federal Reserve begins a rate cutting cycle at the end of this month, money will be shaken out of money market funds into bond funds in an effort to lock up a higher yield. That is a vast pool of money that could come into US bonds. A second large pool would come from a return to central bank balance sheet expansion. The Fed is expected to end its balance sheet run off in September just as the European Central Bank returns to Quantitative Ease. A third pool of money could come from de-risking.  The escalation in tariffs has surely raised the probability of recession. From current levels, the combination of central bank action and de-risking would accelerate the journey of US bond yields toward zero. This is not healthy for savers who rely on a fixed income or for insurance companies and pension funds that have discounted liabilities to meet.

There needs to be a policy response that is swift and dramatic enough to stop this descent in its tracks and reignite growth and inflation expectations. A starting point is with the central banks and the Federal Reserve in particular. They must respond at month end with ‘shock and awe’ to regain control. A mere 25 basis points insurance cut by the Fed will be dismissed by the markets, and investors will pile into intermediate and long duration bonds. Whether they cut by 25 bps or 50 bps, the Fed must make it clear that they mean business and will do whatever it takes from that point onward to raise inflation expectations. The European Central Bank must also respond. ECB President Mario Draghi should lay out the path for rate cuts further into negative territory and a return to Quantitative Ease before he hands over the reins to incoming president Lagarde.

While the central bank policy response is likely to happen, it is important to remember that monetary accommodation alone is not enough to avoid recession this late in an economic expansion. Otherwise, we would never have recessions. Will it buy enough time for a policy response to happen elsewhere? While there could be a de-escalation in tariffs, the direction of travel in the last 18 months has been consistently opposite. It would also be nice to see some co-ordinated fiscal stimulus. But which government has the courage and ability to embark on a deficit spending program?

The central banks must take the lead, and it must start this month. They must bring front end real yields so low, so fast that the yield curve steepens. That will cause investors to question the wisdom of holding longer maturity bonds in the face of coordinated central banking so committed to reflation. Anything short of that risks the 10year US Treasury remaining on the well-worn path, forged by Japan and Germany, toward zero.

The post 10 Year US Treasury Yields Are Headed to 0%? appeared first on http://blog.jpmorganinstitutional.com/.

from Surety Bond Brokers? Business https://blog.jpmorganinstitutional.com/2019/07/10-year-us-treasury-yields-are-headed-to-0/