Hm, looks like Might Alone and Neon Genesis are tied. The latter expends a concerning amount of BP, which we're still 1.8 short of despite the multiplier as of last night. What happens if we go into debt, with all the accompanying debuffs, forcing us to refuse the secret boss? Birdsie could delay the update to allow for additional generation, but that both relies on his largesse and further slows pacing - already a problem for Neon Genesis, since we'll have to vote on the Supreme Decision and XP spending if it wins. Wouldn't it be simpler to save that 5 BP difference for the secret boss' (likely considerable) rewards?
 
[X] Plan Neon Genesis Conditional
-[X] If our BP is insufficient, take Plan: To Might Alone…
-[X] If taking Might Alone, get Might of the Slayer instead of Master of Systems.

[X] Plan Neon Genesis

[X] Plan Slayers Might
-[X] Take the original Might Alone with Might of the Slayer

There, since our BP gen has been brought up so frequently, a conditional. We've done this before for our plans, and this removes the possibility of us dying from picking neon genesis.

Edit: also putting a conditional to get the actual fun part of might alone.
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan Neon Genesis
-[X] If our BP is insufficient, take Plan: To Might Alone…
-[X] If taking Might Alone, get Might of the Slayer instead of Master of Systems.

There, since our BP gen has been brought up so frequently, a conditional. We've done this before for our plans, and this removes the possibility of us dying from picking neon genesis.

Edit: also putting a conditional to get the actual fun part of might alone.

You'll need to include an XP spending plan for that conditional, as the current one definitely won't work with Might of the Slayer. You probably won't be able to get both Dex and Agi Milestones while retaining STR 150 and Promised Knight 10, so that Koji will end up considerably less effective in most combats.

Also, you'll need to rename your Plan to distinguish it, since I don't agree with that conditional.
 
After thinking about it, I'm swapping over to solely [X] Plan: To Might Alone... + [X] Plan: Unit 02

Narratively speaking, I do feel like now is perhaps the only appropriate time to get Furo and Mordlied's memories, and we won't have a better opportunity to see their history/backstory than the literal culmination of their story arc. Even if we somehow get access to it later, which seems unlikely - why would Koji spend time on that as opposed to hunting PKers? - it won't be as impactful because Koji will be dealing with the conflicts of that later arc instead.

We won and got a great result - now we should celebrate the fruits of that victory. I would like to see what Mordlied's full plan was, how he knew Koji's character sheet, Furo's interactions with a bewildered Void King, crazy Escapist conspiracy theories about how Koji and Mordlied were in on it all along - all this stuff ties into the actual events of this arc and will be lost if we don't get Furo.

The narrative payoff of this arc will be severely blunted if we miss all this information and have to go through an additional Supreme Decision build vote (more arguing about psychological downsides, great!) before any more story updates, slowing the pacing even more. To say nothing of the utility and versatility we'd get from access to Mordlied's horde, magic and Furo's indestructible form.

Hm, looks like Might Alone and Neon Genesis are tied. The latter expends a concerning amount of BP, which we're still 1.8 short of despite the multiplier as of last night. What happens if we go into debt, with all the accompanying debuffs, forcing us to refuse the secret boss? Birdsie could delay the update to allow for additional generation, but that both relies on his largesse and further slows pacing - already a problem for Neon Genesis, since we'll have to vote on the Supreme Decision and XP spending if it wins. Wouldn't it be simpler to save that 5 BP difference for the secret boss' (likely considerable) rewards?

BP generation has slowed, I think we've only gotten one effortpost since 25.20. The update could be as soon as tomorrow night (depending on what 'Monday' means), so this is fairly risky, yeah.

Plus, if you asked Miala whether she'd rather be empowered by bringing back Furo or becoming the guardian of an eldritch horror-being, it's likely she'd pick the former.
 
If Unit 02 had one more vote and Rihaku swung his mighty vote collective solely to it, it actually has a chance despite coming in late.

I feel like this is a false hope to me, but at least there is a theoretical chance.

Edit: Actually, let me just do it like this. With one less Madman vote, it would be equal now if Rihaku swung around.

[X] Plan Neon Genesis
[X] Plan: Unit 02
 
Last edited:
Since approval voting isn't penalized in Immersion, I might as well take advantage! That these two have similar color schemes is simply a happy coincidence.

[X] Plan: To Might Alone...
[X] Plan: Unit 0
2


There's not a lot to say here that hasn't already been covered. The details regarding the upcoming boss remain unknown, but Unit 02's Dreadful exhaustion mitigation is likely invaluable. If you prioritize the best possible performance against it or are concerned about the consequences of failure (per Birdsie we can opt out, but accepting carries risks commensurate with the rewards), it's a safe and strong option. And as the saying goes, power in the present means more later - especially with scaling time dilation. Furo's better narratively and Forevermore is preferable to turtling in an accelerated dream realm, in my opinion. But despite not being Mad Scientists, neither build lacks for potential.
 
Damnit, Unit 02 is behind again, even theoretically...

Edit: And we're unlikely to be offered Viccisitude attribute again, aren't we?
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan Neon Genesis
[X] Plan: Unit 02

Approval voting is a spectacular luxury.
 
It occurs to me that, in some interpretations, 'Bring Justice to the untouchable' means 'hurt everyone, the more innocent the better'. How, you ask? simple. If you're the strongest person in the world and decide who lives and dies, then people who you don't think need to die are 'untouchable', because nobody can hurt them, and everyone else is very touchable, because you can make that so. Once this becomes an established state of affairs, all the bad people are irrelevant and no longer need to be justiced because they aren't untouchable. Only people you don't want to kill need to be justiced, and the more you don't want to kill them the more untouchable they are. And the untouchable must receive justice. this doesn't go quite as far as 'kill them' necessarily, because if they've only done one tiny bad thing ever death isn't 'just', I think, maybe (I can't be sure. I don't do SupMan durgs), but it still becomes very stupid.
 
It occurs to me that, in some interpretations, 'Bring Justice to the untouchable' means 'hurt everyone, the more innocent the better'. How, you ask? simple. If you're the strongest person in the world and decide who lives and dies, then people who you don't think need to die are 'untouchable', because nobody can hurt them, and everyone else is very touchable, because you can make that so. Once this becomes an established state of affairs, all the bad people are irrelevant and no longer need to be justiced because they aren't untouchable. Only people you don't want to kill need to be justiced, and the more you don't want to kill them the more untouchable they are. And the untouchable must receive justice. this doesn't go quite as far as 'kill them' necessarily, because if they've only done one tiny bad thing ever death isn't 'just', I think, maybe (I can't be sure. I don't do SupMan durgs), but it still becomes very stupid.
I don't think so.

Innocents do not become untouchable, only untouched, as the highest power (Justice in this case?) COULD destroy them, just doesnt.

Untouched =/= Untouchable.
 
Innocents do not become untouchable, only untouched, as the highest power (Justice in this case?) COULD destroy them, just doesnt.
that depends on how you define ability and untouchable. I infer that Justice's 'untouchable' descriptor means 'untouchable to not-Justice', because otherwise Justice would literally never have succeeded at what it's trying to do, and wouldn't be able to bring justice to the 'untouchable' of other worlds because they wouldn't have anything untouchable which Justice can bring to justice; I also consider something [the singleton is making sure does not happen and would not, without the influence of Justice, ever choose to allow] as [impossible]- there is no Justice-aside scenario where that event happens. So if Koji, strongly influenced by Justice but not literally the incarnation of justice, takes over all of Aincrad(including beating Kayaba or whatever), and makes sure bad things only happen to bad people and not good people, then bad things happening to good people because impossible and good people become untouchable, but for the followup influence of Justice.
 
because otherwise Justice would literally never have succeeded at what it's trying to do, and wouldn't be able to bring justice to the 'untouchable' of other worlds because they wouldn't have anything untouchable which Justice can bring to justice;
Uh, why exactly do you think this?

They are untouchable relative to others of their own world.

I think this train of thought is going through some strange mental hoops.
 
Last edited:
They are untouchable relative to others of their own world.
Then you end up with the same conclusion as before, just for the scenario of 'Koji takes over a world he's not from'... like Aincrad. Any Aincrad Native hypothetical worldruler!Koji doesn't want to be hurt is untouchable to everyone of their own world, ergo...
 
Then you end up with the same conclusion as before, just for the scenario of 'Koji takes over a world he's not from'... like Aincrad. Any Aincrad Native hypothetical worldruler!Koji doesn't want to be hurt is untouchable to everyone of their own world, ergo...
But why would Justice fall into some sort of strange logic trap (where I don't even think the logic is valid but for arguments sake.)?

You can just not count Justice's own actions and their results into whether something is untouchable, which makes much more sense.

Edit: For example, the quote is "Bring Justice to..." not "Topple the Untouchable" or something.

If the Untouchables somehow naturally acted justly, or Justice doesn't require punishment as there is nothing to punish...then thats that?
 
Last edited:
But why would Justice fall into some sort of strange logic trap (where I don't even think the logic is valid but for arguments sake.)?
because Justice isn't trying to capture a segment of human values, it's fulfilling an Oath of "to bring Justice to the Untouchable". Its actions don't have to make sense from our perspective in the same way that human art doesn't have to make sense from the perspective of hypothetical aliens which see a different visual spectrum. it's not something that optimises to accomplish an endstate where 'there are as few untouchable beings which have not recieved Justice as possible' or even to 'perform actions which reduce the number of untouchable beings which have not recieved Justice as much and as quickly as possible', it's trying to [Bring Justice to the Untouchable].
If you're trying to [Bring Justice to the Untouchable], it's not a problem if you make new Untouchable beings and then have to bring justice to them. That's just more Bringing Justice to the Untouchable. It's a process, not a goal.

You can just not count Justice's own actions and their results into whether something is untouchable, which makes much more sense.
Justice explicitly includes itself as a potential target for Justice, if memory serves.

If the Untouchables somehow naturally acted justly, or Justice doesn't require punishment as there is nothing to punish...then thats that?
This is true. The untouchable good people who have done exactly 0 things wrong ever don't need to have Justice brought to them. the ones which have done exactly 1 minor wrong thing ever do, however, need some amount of Justice brought to them- maybe not death, maybe yes death, I'm not [Justice] so I don't know how much punishment it thinks is proportional. But even not killing, it's a silly situation, because the ones who do a lot of wrong aren't untouchable and then don't have to get punished at all.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top