And fundamentally, the reason we've always focused on Witness rather than Remember is because we fundamentally do not trust the Shiplords or believe that they have a good relationship with the truth, even among themselves.
In fairness, this is a very good point.

Nothing about Shiplord society has given us any reason to think they have a good relationship with the truth, and virtually everything we've seen suggests the opposite. These people have had their heads up their asses for literally millions of years, and it's not just a simple "Shiplord" thing because even Gysians seem susceptible to it as long as they're part of Shiplord culture.

They are good at lying to themselves, refusing to deal with problems by changing their own actions, and being utterly self-absorbed to the point of not even noticing when the situation has changed or when they have a unique opportunity to exercise good judgment at a decisive point.

And yes, I'm including the Hearthguard in that part.

So I agree with Waffles here; it has legitimately been important for us to learn the truth, the basic brute facts of what happened, before we figure out how the Shiplords rationalize it all. Because their rationalizations must be incredibly thick.

And a small thing: you say that the only reason the Shiplords discovered the Gysians' development of vacuum implosion weapons in time was because of the total penetration of the Gysians' society. But if that was actually the case, how in the fuck did they react so late that the Gysians completed at least one such weapon and got into a position to deploy it before the Shiplords could even muster a response at all?
It would be an entirely reasonable explanation if the answer turned out to be "the Shiplords had lots of penetration of Gysian networks, but the Gysians were able to do something, somewhere offline without the Shiplords knowing, at least up to a point."

We know that other races have been able to at least contest Shiplord penetration of their networks, such as, uh, that cool species from the Group of Six whose cyborg secret agent was a viewpoint character for an update or two in Practice War, I forget the name. So maybe the Gysians were able to hide their project for a while, but eventually something tipped the Shiplords off.

Also, First Secret drives take considerable time to go places when you measure across galactic distances, so some amount of "the fleet was in transit as soon as we heard, but barely arrived at the last possible moment" may be involved. Like, it took the Shiplords years to get a Regular Fleet to us after Second Sol, and as I recall years more to get a War Fleet to us after Third Sol. And Shiplord ships were not faster in those days, and may have been slower.

And worse still, the obvious lesson from such a failure--be ready to respond to any red flags raised from such intel way faster and more decisively, and maybe warn a species ahead of time that pushing the Secrets too far without proper guidance could end up having catastrophic consequences for themselves and everyone else--seems to have been rejected in favor of "start with mass murder and destruction first, then return and terrify and brutalize them..."
Uh, it must be pointed out that that wasn't the lesson the Shiplords derives from the Gysians, because they didn't start doing that after the events with the Gysians.

We should probably go back to Kicha and ask her straight up, "Okay, give us a good history lesson of how the fuck the Shiplords arrived upon the Tribute Cycle as a solution to anything and why the majority of your society supports it, and why the minority that doesn't support it doesn't seem to care enough to actually do anything about it. No, I do not even slightly care about any of your oaths or reservations or traditions. You're begging us to fix your mess, and us choosing to come out here for these answers instead of staying to protect our people from your people's attempt at completely unjustified xenocide resulted in several of our friends dying and one of them being abducted. We're out of patience for trying to find the best possible explanation by following your recommendations; we'll have to settle for the best you can offer here and now, because I really don't think you or any of the Hearthguard comprehend the suffering and outrage your atrocities inflict or just how much literally everyone else in the galaxy hates you all. We need the best answers you, personally, can give us, because a recurring theme we've noticed is that Shiplords seem utterly, violently opposed to explaining themselves directly."
Honestly I can get behind this.

Though I'd rather just have the same conversation with whoever the keeper of the Fourth Sorrow is, because they're right here and Kicha is like umpteen thousand light years away.
 
What is the Tribute Cycle meant to accomplish? This one is plainly obvious: Maintain control with an iron fist to make sure that no one who finds the Secrets can repeat what terrible things happened in the past.
Well, no. That goal doesn't require genociding races that don't manage to blow up a tribute vessel; it would make more sense to genocide species that do manage to do so because that proofs that these do have violent tendencies.
Why are the Gysians an exception? Why did the Shiplords wait so long to stop them? Because the Shiplords used to see themselves as teachers and they thought they could reason with them. They hadn't yet chosen to martyr their emotions for the sake of the greater good.
Okay; and after having installed a more thorough system of surveillance it makes more sense to kill off offending races because integrating them like the Gysians is too much effort? Or why do these guys get the special consideration while other races get killed?
 
Last edited:
Well, no. That goal doesn't require genociding races that don't manage to blow up a tribute vessel; it would make more sense to genocide species that do manage to do so because that proofs that these do have violent tendencies.
You say that as if organizations don't frequently take actions that are counterproductive to their professed goals. Especially whole nations, which often have multiple different groups, with different goals, shaping policy.

So they aren't Spacebattles Competent Optimizers. This makes them more believable, to me.
 
If that's true ... how can you come up with a rational plan when confronted with an irrational adversary? I mean, besides 'mend the SL'.
Find out the shape of their irrationality. We know that they're driven by grief.

Find a lever to manipulate their irrationality. That's Origin.

Once that's done, puppet the (metaphorical) corpses of the people they're grieving to get them to stand down. There's a sliding scale of expected outcomes from White Diamond to Scion. Aim for wherever looks most likely to work.
 
Okay; and after having installed a more thorough system of surveillance it makes more sense to kill off offending races because integrating them like the Gysians is too much effort? Or why do these guys get the special consideration while other races get killed?
They didn't get special consideration. The current policies weren't in place yet. Shiplord policy at the time was to guide and correct, not to win at all costs. The only special consideration the Gysians got was the mass-destruction order -- pulling back on that was more in line with how the Shiplords back then saw themselves.

They don't see themselves that way anymore.
 
Really it's no wonder that the Hearthguards have become less culturally relevant over the centuries. The way that Kicha and the rest have interpreted their oaths of service have ensured that they remain locked in isolated ivory towers, forever cloistered away from, and unable to influence, the bulk of Shiplord society.
This. They're basically walking talking memorial plaques at this point, and the trouble with being a memorial plaque is that you're not flexible and other people may or may not even care enough to read what you say.

I know it's been a long story spread over a long time, but it does seem like you've forgotten a lot of what happened over the course of the quest. There are, in fact, answers to most of your questions, and you've acknowledged them yourself in previous messages, so the problem here is more that you're rejecting the answers rather than them not having been provided both in and out of story. There comes a time when you have to choose to suspend your disbelief; not every work of fiction is going to jive with the way you reason about the world.
Remember what I said about the creaking bridge?

This is the sound of that bridge, "the audience's suspension of disbelief," creaking really, really loudly.

It is probably not a great time to jump up and down on the bridge and demand that the bridge is sacred and must not be changed.

It is probably a good time to acknowledge that the bridge is in danger of collapsing.

For instance, we need to be honest with ourselves. The Shiplord worldview and self-justifications do indeed contain ridiculously thick layers of self-absorbed and often self-contradictory bullshit, that the Shiplords (and here I am including the Hearthguard) have been so fucking neurotic about answering not just sensitive questions about the Secrets (which would be understandable) but basic normal questions like "how do your own politics work and is there any real hope of bringing about change" and "how did this historical event you just told me about shape the Tribute system?"

And it is also noteworthy that the Shiplords are so self-absorbed that their idea of "self-sacrifice" and "martyring their emotions" is to inflict galactic agonizing mega-torture that every single member of every race apart from themselves screams inside about on some level. And that this very material suffering, by the way, makes the angst they feel about the Consolat dying to rewrite physics seem pathetic in comparison. Because oh, it is so sad that the Shiplords lost their friends and in the process gained the ability to do amazing things and to control the galaxy for five million years or however long it's been. So tragic that they live in the most powerful civilization that has ever existed and can do more or less anything it wants. Such a burden to have all the best stuff and just murder anyone who looks like they might get better stuff.

Meanwhile, in the other pan of the balance, there are trillions if not quadrillions of alien children sobbing themselves to sleep throughout the last five million years or whatever of galactic history, all wondering why Mommy and Daddy had to die and be rendered down into bio-goop.

Fuck this shit.

I think we need to be honest enough with ourselves to start from that place, rather than acting like saying the Shiplords' self-righteous and self-justifying and self-absorbed nonsense is something we need to treat like a precious sacred mystery. It's something that we have a practical need to figure out because preventing a giant galactic mega-war is important, but it's not precious and it's not sacred and the Shiplords long since gave up their right to be considered as a morally worthy culture even if they have specific individuals who are personally innocent.

There is a limit to how many times you can play the "grief and trauma" card, especially if you're doing your damnedest to inflict equal or greater trauma on literally everyone forever.

We haven't finished visiting the Sorrows yet, so to claim that they haven't answered our questions is premature.

And at some level you need to read between the lines to figure out the path they took rather than having it spoonfed to you.
Well yes. But at this point it is fairly important that we recognize that we are 90% of the way through the Sorrows, roughly speaking, half way through the last one we're checking out.

There is not a lot of time left on the clock here for remaining revelations. There are a lot of facts that are very well established at this point and that paint a picture that is very damning regarding Shiplord society. A picture along the lines of "the people running this show must be very evil, very crazy, or some combination of the above, and even the dissenters from that social order are so self-absorbed that they're quite capable of fatally botching their one chance to fix all this in the past several million years because they're so damn ossified."

You say that as if organizations don't frequently take actions that are counterproductive to their professed goals. Especially whole nations, which often have multiple different groups, with different goals, shaping policy.

So they aren't Spacebattles Competent Optimizers. This makes them more believable, to me.
This is beyond that.

This is a very basic foundational policy (mega-extermination of every species that isn't tooled up to blow up a Tribute Fleet battleship at the moment of First Contact). And they've been pursuing it consistently for millions of years. That isn't the kind of thing you get when there are multiple groups with different goals shaping policy. It's what you get when ONE group's hands are firmly Superglued to the wheel and is fucking up the nominal objective of the entire system, and no one else actually cares enough to do what it would take to change that.

See, if this were something the Shiplords debated, if there were different factions within their system that argued about this, I'd see matters quite differently. If there had been periods when the Shiplords actually encouraged the development of pacifist species, and others in which the cult of ritually committing genocide as a sacrifice to the memory of the Consolat took full control and killed pacifist species, then taht would convince me that the system is, well, sane-ish.

Instead, power has been in the hands of the people who choose the crazy course of action all the time, for millions of years. And the rest of the Shiplords just... go along with that. They don't even seem to suggest firing that particular guy who sets that policy, or whatever. They just roll with it.

Find out the shape of their irrationality. We know that they're driven by grief.

Find a lever to manipulate their irrationality. That's Origin.

Once that's done, puppet the (metaphorical) corpses of the people they're grieving to get them to stand down. There's a sliding scale of expected outcomes from White Diamond to Scion. Aim for wherever looks most likely to work.
I don't think Amanda would be psychologically capable of literally puppeting the literal corpses of literal Consolat to tell the Shiplords that everyone even slightly complicit in the Tribute system and who has not actively tried to make it stop is terrible and should just go kill themselves.

But if she did it, I'm not sure I'd be able to say with a straight face that she'd be wrong to do so.
 
Errr…no? I was pointing at your question as one to ask a Shiplord.
We did ask Kicha and she said they there were plenty of people who either killed themselves or went into stasis in response to the atrocities of the tribute system, we already have confirmation they do it. Using hibernation as a form of conflict resolution would go a long way towards explaining the current state of shiplord society.

I'm sure directly asking a shiplord will give a better and more concrete picture of shiplord political organization, but we don't need the specifics, just need to internalize the fact that shiplord society is fundamentally broken.
If that's true ... how can you come up with a rational plan when confronted with an irrational adversary? I mean, besides 'mend the SL'.
Humans have fought irrational opponents before. Of course, imperial Japan and Nazi German needed to have their cities turned into pancakes before they stopped fighting, which is what we are avoiding. Still, hammering a coalition of "let's stop the genocide" shiplords together mean we take that manpower from our enemy and give them to our own forces. If that manifests in a shiplord civil war, complete capitulation or just a shiplord resistance splinter, anything is better than the current situation.
 
basic normal questions like "how do your own politics work and is there any real hope of bringing about change"
It's up to you whether or not you believe what you were told, but this has been answered as plainly as can be answered. It isn't going to be productive to keep asking.

and "how did this historical event you just told me about shape the Tribute system?"
This one is your responsibility as a reader. You've been given the information. You have the intellect required to synthesize that into a conclusion, given that you know how things used to be, how things are now, and a number of events that you know were pivotal in getting here. Spelling everything out with a character in the story acting as a mouthpiece of exposition is often considered bad writing, an insult to the reader's intelligence as if they couldn't have connected the dots on their own.

I think we need to be honest enough with ourselves to start from that place, rather than acting like saying the Shiplords' self-righteous and self-justifying and self-absorbed nonsense is something we need to treat like a precious sacred mystery. It's something that we have a practical need to figure out because preventing a giant galactic mega-war is important, but it's not precious and it's not sacred and the Shiplords long since gave up their right to be considered as a morally worthy culture even if they have specific individuals who are personally innocent.
I... fail to see how we haven't started from that place. We all already agree that the Shiplords have committed unforgivable atrocities, and we all agree that the path they took to get here was irrational. The Shiplords may see it as sacred, but that has never stopped us from asking questions, and it's only stopped us from getting a direct answer once.

And no one is trying to argue that the Shiplords should be considered a morally worthy culture -- any explanation that seems like it's suggesting that is speaking from the Shiplord perspective (because of course they don't see themselves as the villains), not as an assertion that they really are morally worthy.

It really feels like you're interpreting "this is how the Shiplords got here" as "this is why the Shiplords are really not so bad". Understanding the Shiplord perspective doesn't mean thinking they were justified or even that their choices were rational. It's neither justified nor rational, but there are still facts that can be reasoned about.
 
Suffice to say that I may be oversensitive in a particular sore spot, because it stuck with me when I saw people interpreting "The Shiplords are terrible, and I am honestly not sure the Shiplords even can be reasoned with, because as a collective body, they come across as really invested in being both difficult to communicate with and nearly unsalvageable" as "you must want galactic mega-war."

So now I'm having alarm bells ring on things adjacent to that, I suppose, even when they shouldn't be.

...

At the same time. another aspect of it is that I'm getting this sense from @Snowfire and a very few of those closest to him. A sense of this sort of insistent wall of "no, no, everything is absolutely fine, trust us" combined with language that, if it's not "this is why the Shiplords are really not so bad," is very easily mistaken for it by multiple people.

And when there's a very clear divide between a handful of people who are very very close to the project and have all discussed it in private for years, and other people who are merely readers of the project and are getting a very different picture of the situation... Well, it's easy to circle the wagons and resist acknowledging a problem in a project like this. And I think in this case, even if you disagree with the people you're telling are mistaken...

There is a problem.

The way the work is affecting the audience doesn't seem to line up with what you and the QM seem to want the effect to be. And to some extent it feels like you're blaming us for not feeling the way you want us to feel. Maybe you aren't blaming us consciously, but that's how it feels. And it seems to me that either:

1) Something about the way the whole scenario has been set up isn't affecting the audience the way it was expected. The author expects, implicitly, that reasonable readers will think X in response to Y, and then they don't do that when Y happens. In that case, it would be good to have that out in the open and understood as something that can be addressed sooner rather than later. Or:

2) Something about the way the facts are being presented is causing a LOT of confusion and dissension. In which case, again, it would be best to have that out in the open, I would think.
 
They didn't get special consideration. The current policies weren't in place yet. Shiplord policy at the time was to guide and correct, not to win at all costs. The only special consideration the Gysians got was the mass-destruction order -- pulling back on that was more in line with how the Shiplords back then saw themselves.

They don't see themselves that way anymore.
They are getting special treatment, though, in that they continue to exist, even in the face of current-day Shiplord mega-death policies. As you've just noted, times can change; policies created and judgments made by one generation can be altered or even reversed in another. The Gysians of today, living under the currently xenophobic, omnicidal Shiplord Authority, should be a species under fire at the very least: discriminated against, rights curtailed, forced into ghettos, and finally being exterminated, etc; we've all read about the Holocaust and should recognize the progression. But they're just somehow not, despite being exactly the group of people the Shiplords should be irrationally, obsessively distrustful of and hateful towards.

That's incredibly weird, just as weird as the Shiplords genociding newly-discovered species for the crime of being too pacifistic or just happening to have weapons that are less effective against Second Secret technology when their species is supposed to be fanatically obsessed with making species less prone to abusing the Secrets for mass destruction. It's frankly something that Entara should have remarked on, as the continued survival of his species seems entirely relevant to the Sorrow over which he presides, but it was never remarked on and we ran out of questions to ask. It's just one of those seeming inconsistencies that speaks to how weirdly inconsistent the Shiplords' society is.
 
Last edited:
That's incredibly weird, just as weird as the Shiplords genociding newly-discovered species for the crime of being too pacifistic or just happening to have weapons that are less effective against Second Secret technology. It's frankly something that Entara should have remarked on, as the continued survival of his species seems entirely relevant to the Sorrow over which he presides, but it was never remarked on and we ran out of questions to ask, but it does speak to how weirdly inconsistent the Shiplords' society is.
Well, this one at least I think I can answer.

They consider themselves to be Shiplords, and are seen by other Shiplords in that manner. While nominally a different species, this is also a society that's had the Second Secret for X million years, so they're only as different as they want to be. Moreover, the common use of Masques means it wouldn't be possible to tell regardless.

Yes, this does mean the Gysians are about as complicit as everyone else. Considering how they were described in the first place, I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they were involved in the Shiplord invasions becoming as terrible as they are today. Though there aren't enough of them to control society as such, they might be ... well, I'm not going to make assumptions about voting blocs right now.

As for why exactly the Shiplords ended up genociding the pacifists? ...I want to know that as well. I'm fairly sure there's no explanation at all, which doesn't sum up as societal trauma and/or sliding slopes dragging them deep into sheer evil.

I think I mentioned that before. The Shiplords are tragic, but that's in the greek sense. They aren't supposed to be sympathetic.

Amanda sort of has to do it anyway, or else there will be no hope of stopping the war, and she seems to be on the edge of cracking under the stress.
 
Suffice to say that I may be oversensitive in a particular sore spot, because it stuck with me when I saw people interpreting "The Shiplords are terrible, and I am honestly not sure the Shiplords even can be reasoned with, because as a collective body, they come across as really invested in being both difficult to communicate with and nearly unsalvageable" as "you must want galactic mega-war."

I mean, I said something that used a bunch of those words, so I might as well speak up and try to clarify my point. I was responding to the idea that the Shiplords being awful and intractable meant that there was no reason to accept any negotiated settlement position short of full capitulation and as many retributive clauses as we could fit into the treaty - the idea being that we couldn't trust them under any circumstances, and any rope we gave would just be used to build up their military.

And I think my response to that being 'so do you just want to fight the war' was a fair one, because it's a sensible decision if we accept the premise that we can't have peace until we strip them of the ability to hurt us. If we can't trust them with a ceasefire, we indeed shouldn't have one. And that means a lot of exploding stellar extractors - and probably relatedly exploding stars.

But I fully believe that the costs of fighting that war are too heavy, and that while the Shiplords suck I don't think they are beyond our grasp in terms of diplomacy and politics.

This is less a defense of the Shiplords, and more of an argument that their trauma and violence makes them fragile to an effective political and social attack and I want to believe we can stab them in their gaping unhealed emotional wounds with knives made of truth and either open a dialogue, politically paralyze them, or kick off a civil war.
 
...or just happening to have weapons that are less effective against Second Secret technology when their species is supposed to be fanatically obsessed with making species less prone to abusing the Secrets for mass destruction.
Uh, I don't think the Shiplords do have weapons that are particularly less effective against the Second Secret. Or am I missing something?
 
This is less a defense of the Shiplords, and more of an argument that their trauma and violence makes them fragile to an effective political and social attack and I want to believe we can stab them in their gaping unhealed emotional wounds with knives made of truth and either open a dialogue, politically paralyze them, or kick off a civil war.
Personally, I don't trust the Shiplords for a second. It might be worth accepting a negotiated settlement to prevent WW3, but I don't envy anyone who has to make that decision. Much less so if the people you're negotiating with are objectively more advanced and powerful, and may have ways to prepare for renewed conflict that we can't detect.

They already found a way to fight the Uninvolved, and while Practice is probably closer to what the Hijivn attempted to create than a regular uninvolved, I do not think we should give them a chance to figure out how they can fight us. Nor to secretly build up whatever terrifying weapons they, ten million years ago, would have destroyed a species for designing. Another two stages of Shiplord escalation and the universe won't exist anymore.

...

What we've learned from the Sorrows thus far is mostly that, while it might be possible to make them stand down, they're in no way trustworthy or even sane enough for that to make sense. Some of the disconnect might be because we thought a negotiated settlement was the goal, but that was never really true. The goal is to avoid the war. Nothing else.

So what are our alternatives?

- Fighting the war. Let's just exclude this for a second.

- Instead of trying to convince the Shiplords as a whole, aim for them to tear themselves apart. There may be sufficient internal pressure and sane-ish factions left for that to work, and even a small rift would improve the odds of that war.

- Whatever's left at Origin, when we get there. The Consolat, I guess.

The Consolat created the Secrets, and 99%+ of the Shiplords' capabilities are thanks to said Secrets. If the Secrets were to go away, then the Shiplords would be more capable than anyone else of still doing ... anything.

But what if they go away only for the Shiplords? What if we found a way to toggle the First on and off, in specific star systems? Or to use the Secrets themselves, directly, as weapons?

How quickly can we possibly expect to decode what's there... when Mary and Amanda are both exemplars of what the Hijivn only hoped they might achieve, transhumans far beyond what has ever been possible for the Shiplords? Snowie's going to kill me for that comparison, but I think it might well be an accurate one from a mechanical perspective. By way of growth, not consumption, but...

... I wonder if any of the Shiplords who fought her might have noticed. Probably not. They do seem nearly blind to that axis.

Uh, I don't think the Shiplords do have weapons that are particularly less effective against the Second Secret. Or am I missing something?
The opposite is true. They're terrified of the Second Secret in particular, and carry high-end weapons intended to prevent it from operating.
 
And when there's a very clear divide between a handful of people who are very very close to the project and have all discussed it in private for years, and other people who are merely readers of the project and are getting a very different picture of the situation... Well, it's easy to circle the wagons and resist acknowledging a problem in a project like this. And I think in this case, even if you disagree with the people you're telling are mistaken...
That's not where the divide is, because for example Lightwhispers and Tirfarthuan aren't in the tech support group. And while Lightwhispers does hang out in the Discord server (if Tirfarthuan does, I don't know their username) there's actually very little on-topic discussion in that server, because we try to keep most of the discussion here on the forum in order to include everyone!

And it's also not about following it for years or not, because TheEyes appears to largely be agreeing with you, and they've been around since PW.

When it comes down to it, it's really just a difference in opinion with regards to how you've read and interpreted the story and the information. We are, in fact, trying to acknowledge the problem, but the solution to the problem isn't to rewrite the story's past, or to have the characters go back to previous locations to try to get more information. We're trying to do our best to answer your questions with the information that's available to us as a way to help fill in the gaps, if that helps, but it feels like we've run into something that's become adversarial instead of just questioning, and that's kind of hard to work with.

The next update ought to help quite a bit, in part because it's the last Sorrow and we're going to be going into it with all of the other information we need to be able to know what we're looking for, and in part because we voted Remember this time so we're going out of our way to get the perspective that you've been saying you need to see.
 
The Gysians of today, living under the currently xenophobic, omnicidal Shiplord Authority, should be a species under fire at the very least: discriminated against, rights curtailed, forced into ghettos, and finally being exterminated, etc; we've all read about the Holocaust and should recognize the progression.
Or, instead, the Shiplords could've seen the Gysians as the "good end" and tried to repeat it by taking the children and killing the adults, instead of what they're doing now.
Uh, I don't think the Shiplords do have weapons that are particularly less effective against the Second Secret. Or am I missing something?
It's the other guys with the weapons. Remember those guys whose nanobots just splashed off the Shiplords?
 
Two days ago I almost deleted this thread.

I woke up, I stared at several thousand words of text ripping my world apart for…what felt like not conforming to someone else's idea of how the world is meant to work and something in me flat up broke.

I spent the next 10-15 minutes sobbing into my girlfriend's t-shirt. It was, in fact, the first time I've cried in months.

And isn't that tragic.

Does it make you feel sympathy for me? I'm not sure. I guess part of me hopes so. Part of me struggles to care.

But okay. Enough pity-party.

Tragedy isn't always about feeling sympathetic for someone. Sometimes truly awful things happen, people take the wrong roads, compound the wrong choices, and down and down it goes until suddenly they're so far past the lines they'd set that they can't even remember setting them.

And, at least to me, that's tragedy. Does it make that person any less a monster? No, no it doesn't. Does it make them or their methods and beliefs any less horrific? God no. Does it change anything about how people have to deal with the nightmare they've turned themselves into?

No.

And that is a form of tragedy. I'm not trying to get you to sympathise with the Shiplords. I'm not trying to have you find a way to tell them "It'll all be okay."

The Hearthguard wouldn't believe you if you tried, anyway.

As Baughn and others have said, this is greek tragedy. It's the tale of a broken people, given far too much power, who failed. No matter how much some of them want to have not failed, they did. No matter how much some of them didn't want the blood of trillions on their hands, they do now. And those stains will never run clear.

There's more to it than this, a lot of details that matter a whole bunch. But the tragic aspects of this story aren't designed to make you feel sorry for the Shiplords. At least not who they are today.

Mostly they're meant to make you feel sorry for the galaxy. And, maybe, just a little, for who the Shiplords once were and could have been.

But for now, you need to learn enough to make this war something you can end without going for a new record on the galaxy-being-fucked-as-40k speedrun tables.

So Remember this Sorrow. Maybe Witness it If you'd like. Maybe it'll give you those answers. Maybe go back and demand the rest from Kicha afterwards if you'd like - I won't stop you. Or hell, take her with you to the Consolat's Origin.

That's up to you.

I'm just going to write.
 
Last edited:
Two days ago I almost deleted this thread.

And I'm glad you didn't.

I'm sorry that you're feeling badgered.

I might as well just say this explicitly: even if a quest's world-building is rock solid and the writing is objectively perfect, it's still an interactive medium and the presentation and structure of the quest are going to be highly dependent on what decisions the players make. In practice, in real life where the author is never starting with perfection and still has to juggle audience interaction, it's amazing when the resulting quest turns out to be good. It's a difficult art form. I've enjoyed what you have been posting, and I continue to be grateful that you have enjoyed writing it enough to continue doing so.

(if Tirfarthuan does, I don't know their username)

I do not. I only use the forum, and I have to admit to being slightly baffled at why you would have a whole forum thread and then want a discord set up for it as well. Discord does some things very well, but competing with a public forum thread for engaging a wide community, keeping track of important information and having well recorded discussions that are easy to navigate never seemed a fair fight for my attention.
 
I do not. I only use the forum, and I have to admit to being slightly baffled at why you would have a whole forum thread and then want a discord set up for it as well. Discord does some things very well, but competing with a public forum thread for engaging a wide community, keeping track of important information and having well recorded discussions that are easy to navigate never seemed a fair fight for my attention.
My technical channel, that I'll let Coda or Baughn explain the reasons for.

That and for @justinkal posting memes :V
 
something in me flat up broke
If you need to take the time to regroup, you can always ask the moderators to lock this thread for a month. If the feeling are that raw a temporary time out might be just what is needed.

And that is a form of tragedy. I'm not trying to get you to sympathise with the Shiplords. I'm not trying to have you find a way to tell them "It'll all be okay."
I think our inability to interact with wider shiplord society without detection hampered us from seeing that. Now you have the opportunity to write an arc where we interact with that wider society, and we have the proper cultural background to not get found out.

The only problem is that during this whole whole less than satisfactory recon mission some of our friends died and one of them is being tortured and experimented on. I think that should be the focus of the next bit. Find out where Savino is through shiplord society infiltration.

You can illustate the tragic current state of the shiplords to your heart's content.
 
Last edited:
I'm just going to write.
And, as always, I am here for that. :) I absolutely love this Quest and can't wait for the next post.

I think that a lot of us are getting hung up on stuff that's not in the actual writing, but in the author comments, in particular:
I think I mentioned that before. The Shiplords are tragic, but that's in the greek sense. They aren't supposed to be sympathetic.
This isn't tragedy! Calling this "tragedy" is like calling anything in that Alanis Morissette song "ironic"; it just isn't, by the definition of the word.

The core of a good tragedy is that the main character / characters possess a tragic flaw; in particular, the key to a good tragic flaw is that it's relatable. Hamlet, King Lear, Captain Ahab; these are tragic figures because we can imagine real, actual people having these flaws; God help us, we can imagine knowing these people, being these people, if things were just a little different. Jack Slash, the Joker, Pinhead, Jigsaw, Jason Vorhees are not tragic figures; they're people you stare at in horror and fascination: notably, not sympathy.

Similarly, the Shiplords are not tragic figures, and, hopefully, aren't meant to be. They're monsters, through and through. Attempting to understand them isn't about, ultimately, understanding ourselves, as we do with tragic figures; attempting to understand the Shiplords is about trying to comprehend madness, insofar as it pertains to stopping them.

TLDR: Secres' Crusade isn't a tragedy; it's a horror novel. Notably, it's one that's well-written enough that Snowfire doesn't have to resort to cheap jump scares, although I guess you could call the Medicamet excessive gore. :D
How quickly can we possibly expect to decode what's there... when Mary and Amanda are both exemplars of what the Hijivn only hoped they might achieve, transhumans far beyond what has ever been possible for the Shiplords? Snowie's going to kill me for that comparison, but I think it might well be an accurate one from a mechanical perspective. By way of growth, not consumption, but...
We've been getting fire over this for half a decade, but if Snowfire really didn't want us calling Amanda a Magical Girl then he wouldn't have given her a Barrier Jacket. :V
 
Last edited:
...Look, I'm sorry.

I honestly do think that to some extent there's a mismatch between the tone, not of the work but of what is said about the work, and where the work is naturally leading the audience. This doesn't mean the work is bad, or condemnable.

I should hope that it comes across as reasonable to say "the Shiplords are super bad and super unreasonable," because you've clearly put a great deal of effort into making them appear so.

I think there's just... something... about the OOC discussion of Shiplord regrets and tragedy that pushes people's buttons somehow, and makes them think they are being told that they are supposed to sympathize, even if that is not the intent. And that, more than anything else, leads to the clash.

...

Perhaps partly because, in the years since this story started, so many of us have had real life reasons to grow tired of people who do ask us to sympathize with the devils of our very real existence.

Perhaps people are, through no fault of your own, more likely to grow hypersensitive around the story of a bunch of truly horrific villains whose undisputed power makes it deeply risky to even try to force their overthrow. The villains having an elaborate narrative of why what they do is right, one that somehow seems to justify whatever they need to do to continue the cruelty, and one that's so firmly cemented in place that rewriting the laws of space itself seems easier in some ways than just getting them to listen... Well, again, I think that may cut too close to home for some of us.

Maybe that's part of the problem. If so, it certainly isn't your fault.

I'm sorry it hurts, and I don't know what else to say right now, really.

It's the other guys with the weapons. Remember those guys whose nanobots just splashed off the Shiplords?
I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people who've tried a lot of things that a Tribute ship no-sold at some point.

The Dragons seem to have been relatively badass Second Secret creations (they appear to have sussed out something at least adjacent to the secrets of the Uninvolved and the Consolat, and done so fast, which is very impressive!

And even they had problems with the Tribute Fleet's anti-Second weaponry. Something less formidable than the dragons, using the Second Secret, might have just gone 'splat' the same way those nanites did.
 
This isn't tragedy! Calling this "tragedy" is like calling anything in that Alanis Morissette song "ironic"; it just isn't, by the definition of the word.
Not the ones that are committing the atrocities, or directly contributing. They are monsters.

All the Shiplords that are either sitting or the sidelines, or currently in the process of being socialised into this society. The ones we hoped to get help from, who are so far embedded in the insanity that even strong personal biases towards rationality are rarely enough. Those ones. The ones we would like to convince, if that seems plausible.

There's probably more Shiplords in that overall grouping, than there are who are irredeemable monsters. Plausibly by a large margin.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top