Remove ads

Dragon Ball: After the End

Voting is open
Reader mode
fictionfan said:
The Saiyans for reasons that don't make sense to me do not own the whole economy. But I expect that the all have at least some extra income. No one wants any Saiyan to be desperate if it can be avoided.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We know there are saiyans who grow or manufacture food and market it directly to other saiyans (i.e. the House that is funded entirely by sales of pudding). Given modern agricultural productivity this is doable; one saiyan family can grow enough food to support other saiyan families.

The main reason the saiyans don't own the whole economy is probably because they actively divest themselves of assets in order to avoid attention. If they were all multimillionaires because of carefully invested wealth, it would greatly increase the risk of some Garenhulder paparazzi-equivalent managing to take a photograph of a saiyan outside their Masque.

So they'd maintain enough financial assets to support themselves in personal comfort without fraud or the kind of high-risk high-return financial manipulation that attracts attention... But not enough to be relevant on the scale of "I have my own palace."

Gore17 said:
Question: do the Lords tax the Houses? Because previously Berra has paid for expensive stuff, and I'm not sure a teacher and mechanic could afford to feed 5 Ssiyans.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Saiyans eat considerably less while Masqued.

Blonddude42 said:
Can anyone explain how the ignore button works (or can point me somewhere to educate myself)? I tend to catch up on the thread late at night, and with Lady Bitch being a major topic as of late I don't want to get triggered while tired brain lacks impulse control and do something stupid. Reading defenses of her (no matter how justified*) really kills my enjoyment of an awesome quest, and beyond this topic I never have major issues with the other participants of this quest. I'd rather not have to only pop in for the updates until this topic has gotten buried again, but that's all I can really do when I don't know how the ignore button works.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What's your limit here? What constitutes a "defense of Dandeer?" Is "she's terrible but not maximum-insane-incapable-of-being-reasoned-with-even-in-theory" actually a 'defense?'

I mean, unless the thread becomes a pure contest to say the nastiest possible things about Dandeer there will always be someone writing something that could be interpreted as "a defense of Dandeer." Even if it's only "whoa, sure she's a horrible child-abusing loony, but she's not MORE deserving of summary execution than the guy who blew up hundreds of planets. As deserving as that guy, at worst!"

There is only one kind of conversation where everyone agrees to only ever move in one direction, and where trying to say "no, the Overton window of the discussion has shifted too far" is unacceptable.

Namely, the kind of conversation that eventually falls off a cliff into crazyland.

...

I don't want to hurt anyone in this thread, but I am honestly not sure how to avoid hurting people if "hate Dandeer LESS than other people and aspire to talking her down rather than just arbitrarily murdering her" constitutes "hurting people."

Because it seems like some people in this thread hate Dandeer a LOT. Like, more than I hate people in real life who've actually hurt me personally, have been doing so for decades, and whom I fully expect to continue doing so until the day they die. Hating Dandeer more than those other people hate Dandeer would be impossible for me.

So again, what constitutes a hurtful "defense of Dandeer?" What statements can I make, that do not specifically advocate hurting Dandeer or refusing to speak to her, that will not constitute such a defense? Is there a permissible stance for me to take, other than "we should take every possible opportunity to hurt her, even at cost to ourselves, and never speak to her because she is the epitome of un-persuadable insanity?"

I don't mean to be hostile here. I'm just... honestly not sure how to air opinions like "Dandeer's actions show signs of having been intended to do X, but not of having been intended to do Y" without triggering you
 
Last edited:
Gore17 said:
Question: do the Lords tax the Houses? Because previously Berra has paid for expensive stuff, and I'm not sure a teacher and mechanic could afford to feed 5 Ssiyans.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They do. Can't have a government -- even one as traditionally lax as Clan Goku's -- without money.
fictionfan said:
The Saiyans for reasons that don't make sense to me do not own the whole economy. But I expect that the all have at least some extra income. No one wants any Saiyan to be desperate if it can be avoided.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One reason: economies are not possessions and cannot be owned.

The active reason, however, is that funneling billions out of the Garenhuld economy while directing it all to suit their own whims would be hilariously conspicuous.
 
PoptartProdigy said:
They do. Can't have a government -- even one as traditionally lax as Clan Goku's -- without money.

One reason: economies are not possessions and cannot be owned.

The active reason, however, is that funneling billions out of the Garenhuld economy while directing it all to suit their own whims would be hilariously conspicuous.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Question: So it's established that overall skill increases with training of individual skills, and also gives bonuses to skills in that category we have yet to learn. Is it theoretically possible to get to Elite in Kakara's specialty of Ki Talents? What would be the possible effects of such a thing?
 
PoptartProdigy said:
One reason: economies are not possessions and cannot be owned.

The active reason, however, is that funneling billions out of the Garenhuld economy while directing it all to suit their own whims would be hilariously conspicuous.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fairly sure he meant ''why arent they all the worlds richest, skimming only a little to support their hidden society.''
 
Simon_Jester said:
Saiyans eat considerably less while Masqued.

What's your limit here? What constitutes a "defense of Dandeer?" Is "she's terrible but not maximum-insane-incapable-of-being-reasoned-with-even-in-theory" actually a 'defense?'

I mean, unless the thread becomes a pure contest to say the nastiest possible things about Dandeer there will always be someone writing something that could be interpreted as "a defense of Dandeer." Even if it's only "whoa, sure she's a horrible child-abusing loony, but she's not MORE deserving of summary execution than the guy who blew up hundreds of planets. As deserving as that guy, at worst!"

There is only one kind of conversation where everyone agrees to only ever move in one direction, and where trying to say "no, the Overton window of the discussion has shifted too far" is unacceptable.

Namely, the kind of conversation that eventually falls off a cliff into crazyland.

...

I don't want to hurt anyone in this thread, but I am honestly not sure how to avoid hurting people if "hate Dandeer LESS than other people and aspire to talking her down rather than just arbitrarily murdering her" constitutes "hurting people."

Because it seems like some people in this thread hate Dandeer a LOT. Like, more than I hate people in real life who've actually hurt me personally, have been doing so for decades, and whom I fully expect to continue doing so until the day they die. Hating Dandeer more than those other people hate Dandeer would be impossible for me.

So again, what constitutes a hurtful "defense of Dandeer?" What statements can I make, that do not specifically advocate hurting Dandeer or refusing to speak to her, that will not constitute such a defense? Is there a permissible stance for me to take, other than "we should take every possible opportunity to hurt her, even at cost to ourselves, and never speak to her because she is the epitome of un-persuadable insanity?"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

While I disagree that speaking with Dandeer is the right option (mostly because I feel its a futile endeavor) that's not the real problem. The real problem stems from where the debate ultimately will go no matter what -- The Sealing.

The Sealing is the most reprehensible and terrible act of I have ever seen in any media. While reading about the Holocaust and other atrocities are worse in a general sense of magnitude by virtue of being real and affecting so many, they start seeming like statistics and lack a soul deep gut punch every time I think about them (and I've seen Auschwitz in person). The Sealing offends me on a level that I didn't even know I could be offended on. It is anathema to me. I lack words to describe how much it disgusts me.

...

I'm just gonna cut myself off before I start ranting. What I'm trying to get across is that any argument involving Dandeer that uses The Sealing as support and doesn't take a stance of blatant opposition to her creates a divide that I fundamentally cannot cross and poisons the whole argument. For want of a better phrase, I cannot physically (psychologically?) separate Dandeer from The Sealing, so unless that part manages to remain buried, I can't bring myself to not hate anything that doesn't take a stance of opposition to her..


Does that make any sense, or do I need to try phrasing that better?
 
Gore17 said:
Fairly sure he meant ''why arent they all the worlds richest, skimming only a little to support their hidden society.''
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because rich people are conspicuous. You can't be wealthy unless people know you're wealthy, even if the only people who know are your accountants and the local equivalent of the IRS.

Rich people who don't actively work to expand and maintain their wealth tend to lose it to those who do. Rich people who do that kind of work end up having to work very hard at it and attract a lot of attention.

If three hundred thousand of the richest, most influential beings in the world were secretly aliens, that secret would be very hard to keep. Sooner or later, the maid would start wondering about all the tail-fur they kept finding under the cushions, or a paparazzi would take a picture of someone without their Masque on, or some government agency would infer the existence of a racketeering conspiracy even if they couldn't identify its source.

Blonddude42 said:
While I disagree that speaking with Dandeer is the right option (mostly because I feel its a futile endeavor) that's not the real problem. The real problem stems from where the debate ultimately will go no matter what -- The Sealing.

The Sealing is the most reprehensible and terrible act of I have ever seen in any media. While reading about the Holocaust and other atrocities are worse in a general sense of magnitude by virtue of being real and affecting so many, they start seeming like statistics and lack a soul deep gut punch every time I think about them (and I've seen Auschwitz in person). The Sealing offends me on a level that I didn't even know I could be offended on. It is anathema to me. I lack words to describe how much it disgusts me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Okay... see, from my point of view this presents a problem, because I'm honestly trying not to hurt your feelings, but I can't say in full intellectual honesty that Dandeer sealing away Jaffur is in any meaningful sense of the word worse than, say, Frieza exterminating the Namekians.

Would it have been okay for Jaffur to blow up thousands of innocent people to escape being Sealed? Like, totally morally forgivable? As I remember, during our attempt to help Jaffur escape, we punched out Dandeer and teleported her away from the Hall. Now that was some very solidly justified violence.

But when we talk about "most reprehensible and terrible..." I have to ask, how MUCH violence would have been justified, to prevent the Sealing as a 'greater evil?' Killing someone? Killing several someones? A whole village of someones? Depopulating a small country? Blowing up the planet?

I'm just gonna cut myself off before I start ranting. What I'm trying to get across is that any argument involving Dandeer that uses The Sealing as support and doesn't take a stance of blatant opposition to her creates a divide that I fundamentally cannot cross and poisons the whole argument. For want of a better phrase, I cannot physically (psychologically?) separate Dandeer from The Sealing, so unless that part manages to remain buried, I can't bring myself to not hate anything that doesn't take a stance of opposition to her..

Does that make any sense, or do I need to try phrasing that better?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, I understand it. But what exactly constitutes "uses the Sealing as support" in your mind? I mean, if I say "the Sealing was intended to do X, and not Y," and I don't write the obligatory extra paragraph about how Dandeer deserves to die in a thousand fires and be resurrected by dragonballs we got the Namekians to make us so we can do it all over again... Is that a "pro-Dandeer" post?

Do I have to worry that I'm accidentally hurting people if I make a good-faith effort to advance a fact-based statement, because hypothetically someone who hates Dandeer and reads this statement might walk away hating Dandeer less? Is a statement that could hypothetically reduce the total amount of Dandeer-hatred a threat to you in and of itself?

...On an unrelated note...

You might want to bear in mind, It's not like Poptart ever promised us they wouldn't do anything even worse than the Sealing. If we accept that the Sealing is more reprehensible and terrible than the Holocaust, it's fairly likely that the same demented and evil mind that could imagine such a horrible thing could, and will, also imagine other horrible things. Or something involving the Sealing of more than two people.

So don't assume this is the worst thing that will happen in the story.
 
PoptartProdigy said:
They do. Can't have a government -- even one as traditionally lax as Clan Goku's -- without money.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So the Seers are currently being paid by the government? Or do they have an option to get tax deductions for visions?

Incidentally if we teach Jaron ki sense he is going to figure out that his mom and a bunch of people around his house are ki users very quickly.
 
Last edited:
Simon_Jester said:
Okay... see, from my point of view this presents a problem, because I'm honestly trying not to hurt your feelings, but I can't say in full intellectual honesty that Dandeer sealing away Jaffur is in any meaningful sense of the word worse than, say, Frieza exterminating the Namekians.

Would it have been okay for Jaffur to blow up thousands of innocent people to escape being Sealed? Like, totally morally forgivable? As I remember, during our attempt to help Jaffur escape, we punched out Dandeer and teleported her away from the Hall. Now that was some very solidly justified violence.

But when we talk about "most reprehensible and terrible..." I have to ask, how MUCH violence would have been justified, to prevent the Sealing as a 'greater evil?' Killing someone? Killing several someones? A whole village of someones? Depopulating a small country? Blowing up the planet?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I am far from the kind of person you want to ask your "how much violence" question. Partially because of the bastardization of moral calculus I tend to employ for these kinds of things. It's also a different question to ask how much is morally forgivable rather than justifiable. I can stomach a lot of generally unpleasant things, but forgiving is a different story. Though, to answer the justified question as best I can -- too much to ever forgive.

Simon_Jester said:
I mean, I understand it. But what exactly constitutes "uses the Sealing as support" in your mind? I mean, if I say "the Sealing was intended to do X, and not Y," and I don't write the obligatory extra paragraph about how Dandeer deserves to die in a thousand fires and be resurrected by dragonballs we got the Namekians to make us so we can do it all over again... Is that a "pro-Dandeer" post?

Do I have to worry that I'm accidentally hurting people if I make a good-faith effort to advance a fact-based statement, because hypothetically someone who hates Dandeer and reads this statement might walk away hating Dandeer less? Is a statement that could hypothetically reduce the total amount of Dandeer-hatred a threat to you in and of itself?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Of what I remember of your "While we know the sealing did X, and generally understand it was supposed to do Y" the general concept behind that is fine. What wasn't fine about it was phrasing in it that read to me that "Y" was fine. While it is obvious that what the sealing was supposed to do is many orders of magnitude better than what actually happened, saying it was a good thing* links it back to the Sealing is BAD therefore this is BAD logic I can't really stop. Mostly because that argument goes back to how you define what makes a person, which is always a messy argument with people talking past each other.

As for what constitutes Pro-Dandeer statements, my view is wider than an impartial observer's from what could be described as a "if you're not with us you're against us" mentality I guess. A statement that claims we were in the wrong in an interaction with Dandeer will usually trigger that response. Being pro anyone but Kakara is fine usually, except when it connects to The Sealing. Or rather, on the wrong side of The Sealing. Pro-Dandeer tends to end up that way, especially with my wider view of it.

Does that make things any clearer? The words are starting to dance across the page at this point (being up late and sick is a bad combination) so I might have missed something.

*I'm not trying to say that's what you said, rather that's just how I interpret it

Simon_Jester said:
...On an unrelated note...

You might want to bear in mind, It's not like Poptart ever promised us they wouldn't do anything even worse than the Sealing. If we accept that the Sealing is more reprehensible and terrible than the Holocaust, it's fairly likely that the same demented and evil mind that could imagine such a horrible thing could, and will, also imagine other horrible things. Or something involving the Sealing of more than two people.

So don't assume this is the worst thing that will happen in the story.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Worse than The Sealing in the sense it is more damaging, sure. Worse in the sense that it wracks up a higher body count, sure. Worse in the sense that characters we care about die for good, sure.

But thinking that Poptart would have something happen that offends me as thoroughly as The Sealing did? The only thing I feel would fill that role is something like "The Sealing 2: The Electric Boogaloo". That'd probably have me dropping the quest out outright if I don't get at least thread banned first, and putting Poptart on Ignore out of spite afterwards (after I figured out how to)
 
Stop: Infractions are a delusion of the mind
  • Staff Post
    • Andres110 said:
    Your delusion goes deeper than I thought. Not only do you believe in going completely against what we know from our own experiences and the very word of the GM herself, the only other possible path that you believe exists is also completely made up.

    We are not going to walk up to Dandeer, turn Super Saiyan, and start telling her we're going to train her son whether she likes it or not. What the other option actually is is simply to ignore her, to not ask her for permission to train Jaron, and then simply train him. I have no idea what thought process led you to believe this would be anything else. I'll grow worried if that is what you think would "hit all her trauma points, remind her of her abuser, and trigger her PTSD", but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that this is not what you think.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    infractions are a delusion of the mind Please refrain from using 'delusional' as a pejorative; this doesn't merit infraction but it does merit a warning for marginal behaviour. Please refrain from this in the future, as it can quickly become a serious breach of Rule 3.
     
  • Staff Post
    • I wonder what Dandeer's response would be if we told her "Today when I taught Jaron how to fly is the first time I have seen him smile."

    Edit:

    I really would love to bring Jaron into our study group on Jaffur style. Jaffur is likely to give him pointers which should really boost our progress.
     
    Last edited:
    Simon_Jester said:
    Yes, but we have to deal with her anyway. She's got psychiatric problems? Well, that's why she's a boss-level Communications challenge, not a mook-level challenge. We've already whittled away at her certainty on two separate occasions, maybe we can whittle some more.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I doubt we have been the only ones working on her. It seems like just about everyone is against the sealing.
     
    @PoptartProdigy if we try a Research Project like the USSJ-on-hit or the base body merge, will you tell us if it's a complete dead end after we spend an action? OR is there a risk of rolling low enough that we don't know if a thing is possible? Because that would suck.
     
    We need to avoid the mistakes of Berra. He just classifies Yammar as evil and thinks no farther. We must avoid doing the same with Dandeer.

    Edit: Names are stupid.
     
    Last edited:
    "Dandeer, Jaron is a Sorcerer. You should train him."

    Irony. That would be a communication check to get game, set and match.
     
    Lunaryon said:
    Because telling her that her youngest son is a sorcerer is different from telling her that her oldest son is a sorcerer.

    Plus I'm pretty sure that she had no idea that Jaffur is/was a sorcerer.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    ...what? Only we know Jaron and Jaffur are diferent people. She doesn't. If we tell her Jaron is a sorcerer, she'll go nuts trying to amplify the seal to make absolutely sure he doesn't undo it by accident.
     
    Mikeline said:
    ...what? Only we know Jaron and Jaffur are diferent people. She doesn't. If we tell her Jaron is a sorcerer, she'll go nuts trying to amplify the seal to make absolutely sure he doesn't undo it by accident.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    She doesn't think that Jaffur exists anymore. She Sealed him away, so unless something starts to happen that proves that the seal is breaking, she'll probably think of her son as Jaron instead of Jaffur.
     
    Lunaryon said:
    Because telling her that her youngest son is a sorcerer is different from telling her that her oldest son is a sorcerer.

    Plus I'm pretty sure that she had no idea that Jaffur is/was a sorcerer.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Lunaryon said:
    She doesn't think that Jaffur exists anymore. She Sealed him away, so unless something starts to happen that proves that the seal is breaking, she'll probably think of her son as Jaron instead of Jaffur.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    She doesn't think she replaced Jaffur with Jaron, she thinks Jaffur is Jaron. Even if she thinks of him as Jaron, she's still not a complete idiot, and telling her that he's a sorcerer will immediately make her worry about that super important piece of sorcery she doesn't want messed with. And that's even before taking into account the obvious response of "how do you even know that what the hell did you do".
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Voting is open
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top