Puella Magi Adfligo Systema
- Thread starter Firnagzen
- Start date
-
- Tags
- puella magi adfligo systema puella magi madoka magica be gay do crimes (gay) female protagonist bad decisions dating mami tomoe (tomoe mami) diabolical laughter friendship is the best ship handholding identity crises microwaving tea gets you put in the bad place names are important the body is the fursona of the soul this is not the baked goods thread we don't talk about rionna what could possibly go wrong? who in the world is azure sanfrancisco?
Onmur
Archangel of Nutella.
This is, I think an important part of what we need to do.
Explain why we are doing this, what do we feel that leads us to such lengths.
Part of what makes Sayaka angry is that our actions don't make sense to her, not when seen through her lens. Yes, she knows we want to help everybody, but why are so hung up about Oriko?
Of course, this is partly already a part of many votes, explaining Oriko's motives, but we need to express how that all makes us feel. It's Sabrina her friends care about, not about a hazy hypothetical justice system or about Oriko.
So we need to explain why we're doing this to them, what we feel, not just what we know and believe.
Also, comment, I feel Firn was kind this update, from my reading, he had us go to a middle of the road route in between 'explain theoretical justice systems before O&K' and 'be straightforward and honest and go into talking about O&K'.
So we did start talking hypotheticals, and that helped inform Sayaka's mindset, we (with Sayaka's help) honestly tackled the main topic before, well...
I think (and had thought) this would've been a lot worse had we tried to frame the discussion entirely in hypothetical terms and moved onto O&K only afterwards, so... I think this approach Firn took helped gives us some benefits from both approaches, a nice middle ground.
'Nice' is relative, by the way.
Last edited:
Onmur
Archangel of Nutella.
- Location
- Texas
That's just even more evidence that it's a good idea!
Ooooh. We could secretly make grief-clones of Oriko and Kirika, split them up, and have Homura murder the clones in front of the respective partners, so they know what it feels like. Then we can bring the actual partners out, unharmed, and be all "Surprise! I hope you've learned a valuable lesson!"
It's a perfect plan, unless it causes Kirika to go berserk and murder everyone.
Last edited:
OctarineShrike
Avatar of Mandos
That's borderline insightful but considering these iterations of O&K haven't it would be a travesty to do it.
Demosthenes
PhotoFop
- Location
- 'Murica
we pulling a Doctor Who/Chrono?
Higure
Witch of Faith
- Location
- The Golden Land
Which is exactly what I'm saying. Siding with Oriko and pushing Homura on something as trivial as the Kures' house arrest is needlessly straining her trust in us.
OctarineShrike
Avatar of Mandos
From a justice standpoint it's a travesty though if it goes on indefinitely because of her issues with past iterations of them. Will probably need to kill Walpurgisnacht for Homura to be suggestible enough to actually consider a finite sentence though.
Last edited:
mCooperative
meanderingCephalopod
- Location
- Back in Mitakihara after like 1000 years.
... the scary part is I think that's actually a fairly good point. I mean, it doesn't solve the myriad of other issues that come along with this idea, and the number of things it doesn't solve, but if our only issue left was Oriko's death prophecy, and we care not for the rest of things, you know this might actually have worked.
...
Also, telling Oriko to frolic.
On another note:
While I entirely agree with the fact we need to apologise if it looked like we were trying to manipulate them, because that's not okay and it was an error on our part if it came across like we were- I was under the impression we weren't trying to manipulate them? Or even lead them around?
This is something that has never been exactly delineated to me- where is the place where trying to discuss a topic or an argument becomes manipulation? Recently there was in another place an incident where it seemed that answering a question specifically asking for a personal assessment of a state of affairs with an honest note about the emotional response to the events in question seemed like manipulation because it was a strong emotional response and because we knew how the person asking the question would probably respond to an frank description of that response. But talking about it clinically to avoid giving them the impression anything was upsetting would be avoiding the question and also be manipulating their response by deliberately giving the impression theres nothing wrong? And here, it seems like the impression is that beginning with the wider implications of a related topic and trying to not let it our feelings about a particular case into that part of the conversation, so we can address it without letting emotional gut reactions stall the whole topic, is also manipulative, so we should have just led with a lot of statements about how it is making us feel and citing those motivations about why we are bringing this up, as opposed to the more detached concerns? But isn't that manipulation capitalizing on their emotional investment in our emotions?
Does this just mean that it's always maniputlation and trying to lead people around when you take a course of action where you've thought through how other people are going to react to what you are saying or doing, and so is all formulation of coherent argument or argument ordered to clearly understand a train of thought, and the only truly honest communication is blathering on incessantly like I'm doing right now and not thinking about how people will reply, or even understand what you're trying to explain?
I... sorry, this probably isn't the best place to actually dump all these questions, just, I guess they feel topical when we're piloting a quest character who by that definition has every interaction attempted minmaxed by analysis, and who is nevertheless trying to be open and honest?
... meh, sorry, this isn't actually meant to sound devil's passive aggressive advocate or something, though I think it might? I'm just... really unsure about a lot of the social conventions or definitions like this, and I guess how people think about the topic and how it comes across would kind of affect how I vote or what I argue?
... will delete this if it comes across as more inflammatory than I intended...
There was an awful lot of assurances that went nowhere in this one. I felt like I was re-reading the same line a dozen times over, just stated differently each time.
Just spit it out Sabrina.
Actually, that's really common in this quest. This one was just especially irritating because we effectively got nowhere during it.
How about, instead of bothering with assurances, Sabrina just presents a solid, logical argument that shouldn't need assurance... then assure everyone anyway, but after the logic has been made. Not during.
Just spit it out Sabrina.
Actually, that's really common in this quest. This one was just especially irritating because we effectively got nowhere during it.
How about, instead of bothering with assurances, Sabrina just presents a solid, logical argument that shouldn't need assurance... then assure everyone anyway, but after the logic has been made. Not during.
Last edited:
OctarineShrike
Avatar of Mandos
Like this?
"If it goes on indefinitely and we aren't prepared to do it to every arsonist we are capricious tyrants. 50 to 75 percent of the point of Imprisonment is already achieved for them. They also have the potential to be extremely useful if we let them. Also if they go stir crazy enough from it that their gems blacken and I'm not around they will die and the DP is a terrible punishment for Arson."
"If it goes on indefinitely and we aren't prepared to do it to every arsonist we are capricious tyrants. 50 to 75 percent of the point of Imprisonment is already achieved for them. They also have the potential to be extremely useful if we let them. Also if they go stir crazy enough from it that their gems blacken and I'm not around they will die and the DP is a terrible punishment for Arson."
Last edited:
Vebyast
Nascent Transhuman
You know what? Fancy-talk is getting us killed. Every time we try something we just dig ourselves deeper. Sayaka wants us to talk to her straight? She wants us to respect her opinions? Fine, we'll infodump to her, give her all of the information and let her deal with it. Homura wants to know that we're not compromised or some shit? Fine, we'll infodump to her, show her how we reached our conclusions. They asked for it, they get it.
[x] Request timestop. Sayaka wants to decide when Oriko has been sufficiently punished? She gets to decide.
[x] Lay out every fact you have.
-[x] Oriko's history, framed as possible outcomes that did not come to pass because you decided to make changes.
-[x] All of your hypotheses about Oriko's psychology, how she was trying to commit honorable suicide, and how you're pretty sure the house arrest was the best it could do after you captured her.
-[x] The hole you've dug for yourself by not letting Homura execute her on the spot, why you need to resolve this before it tears the Mitakihara group apart and ruins everything.
-[x] All of the possible courses of action you have for dealing with Oriko and mitigating this catastrophe. Exile, relocation, chaperones, whatever.
[x] Leave nothing out. If it takes six hours, if Firnagzen has to write the quest's first material timeskip, so be it, we have timestop and I am tired of fucking this up because the format of the quest limits us to thirty fucking seconds of conversation at a time.
[x] So, Sayaka. What do you want to do?
[x] Request timestop. Sayaka wants to decide when Oriko has been sufficiently punished? She gets to decide.
[x] Lay out every fact you have.
-[x] Oriko's history, framed as possible outcomes that did not come to pass because you decided to make changes.
-[x] All of your hypotheses about Oriko's psychology, how she was trying to commit honorable suicide, and how you're pretty sure the house arrest was the best it could do after you captured her.
-[x] The hole you've dug for yourself by not letting Homura execute her on the spot, why you need to resolve this before it tears the Mitakihara group apart and ruins everything.
-[x] All of the possible courses of action you have for dealing with Oriko and mitigating this catastrophe. Exile, relocation, chaperones, whatever.
[x] Leave nothing out. If it takes six hours, if Firnagzen has to write the quest's first material timeskip, so be it, we have timestop and I am tired of fucking this up because the format of the quest limits us to thirty fucking seconds of conversation at a time.
[x] So, Sayaka. What do you want to do?
Last edited:
mCooperative
meanderingCephalopod
- Location
- Back in Mitakihara after like 1000 years.
I feel like the problem with going heavy on logic and then reassuring them, is that we have two people who might straight up stop listening and/or panic and/or enter rage mode if they're not reassured first and during. it's a very brittle situation with people's sense of safety equally brittle I feel, and our argument, however reasoned and logical it may be, will still have segments that set off gut reactions. If we don't deal with those as they come, the sense of anxiety, or possibly just noping out of listening due to misunderstanding what we're saying, will probably build?
Edit: Or we could go with @Vebyast and cut through the tape and carpetbomb. Valid, and I'm honestly considering it. After I have a chance to think a bit after classes end today. More coherent reply to that idea to come.
Edit: Or we could go with @Vebyast and cut through the tape and carpetbomb. Valid, and I'm honestly considering it. After I have a chance to think a bit after classes end today. More coherent reply to that idea to come.
Demosthenes
PhotoFop
- Location
- 'Murica
YES
[X] Vebyast
[X] Vebyast
Onmur
Archangel of Nutella.
[X] Vote tone:
-[X] Apologetic. We're being unfair and pushy.
-[X] Reassuring. Homura and Sayaka come first.
-[X] Caring, it's about how everyone feels.
[X] Look after Homura.
-[X] Ask if she wants to talk privately.
-[X] Ask what she wants to do.
[X] Continue with their permission.
[X] Explain your motives, your feelings.
-[X] There's a lot of people who should've helped Oriko before all this.
--[X] Friends. Family. Parents. They either betrayed her or abandoned her.
-[X] You're the only who cares.
--[X] If you didn't, Oriko would be dead. And then, other too.
-[X] Apologetic. We're being unfair and pushy.
-[X] Reassuring. Homura and Sayaka come first.
-[X] Caring, it's about how everyone feels.
[X] Look after Homura.
-[X] Ask if she wants to talk privately.
-[X] Ask what she wants to do.
[X] Continue with their permission.
[X] Explain your motives, your feelings.
-[X] There's a lot of people who should've helped Oriko before all this.
--[X] Friends. Family. Parents. They either betrayed her or abandoned her.
-[X] You're the only who cares.
--[X] If you didn't, Oriko would be dead. And then, other too.
Last edited:
Vebyast
Nascent Transhuman
This will convince Homura that we've been subverted and Sayaka that we care more about the villain than about the victim - remember, Sayaka has exactly zero context. Sayaka will not hear us out if you present it like this.
AuraTwilight
The Sorcerer of Smiles
- Location
- The Silver City
[x] Vebyast
- Location
- The Surface Of A Hostile Planet
Onmur
Archangel of Nutella.
It's truth that it's not well presented.
I'm glad update rate isn't as fast as it used to be some times. Helps improve on difficult votes like this.
Vebyast
Nascent Transhuman
We've established that PMAS diverges from canon history. If it had followed canon properly we would not be having this issue because the core "Oriko killed Madoka that one time" loop never actually happened, it was one of Oriko's contract-time Visions. This is not Homura's loops. We are explaining Oriko's history and a number of futures that could have come to pass if we and Homura had not interfered.
Try to contribute or stop bitching.
Madou Sutegobana
Autocorrupt has been disabled.
- Location
- Twin Realms Mandala
[X] This isn't about what Oriko and Kirika deserve. This is about showing mercy to defeated enemies, one which is in poor health, exasperated by their confinement.
-[X] It's fine if Sayaka and Homura don't feel very merciful, that is their right, but they don't have to interact with the prisoners regularly. We do however, and so we feel we must at least try to intercede on their behalf.
-[X] It's fine if Sayaka and Homura don't feel very merciful, that is their right, but they don't have to interact with the prisoners regularly. We do however, and so we feel we must at least try to intercede on their behalf.