- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Hmm, does this mean Shenhua's apprentices are especially high status for their cultivation realm compared to other Prism/White apprentices, since she's an innovator?
Threads Of Destiny(Eastern Fantasy, Sequel to Forge of Destiny)
- Thread starter yrsillar
- Start date
- Original Users' Choice!
Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
It likely will, yeah, given her reactions to killing the shaman and all the random people dying in Jiao's test. Good character development opportunities perhaps.
Arkeus
Crazy cat guy
- Location
- France
Is.... is this a hint as to what happened after Emperor An ascended, and why Jiao broke?
On the other hand Ling Qi arguably had better experiences with spirits than with people, so siding with the spirit actually feels in character, at least from my point of view.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
I did theorize that based on the timing, it was something to do with how Emperor An changed things that led to Jiao 'Losing his Way'
- Location
- The Core
I think this is a good point. Not that I mind too much, but perhaps as a point for future choices, I think having to make decisions on little information like that is...weird, due to the format. This has happened before, and honestly I don't think it is a big deal, but maybe something to think about; having choices with little-to-none information makes them much less meaningful. Difficult choices are good, in the sense that the difficulty is some moral choice, or in a social conflict (like Gu Xiulan and Han Jian in the fist thread), these sorts of things.
Having no information to base a choice on however, while that makes finding the right decision very difficult, does not feel satisfying, as it is essentially random. There is little attachment to the choices, because all arguments for one thing or the other are conjecture or feel far-fetched, and everyone kind of shrugs helplessly, picks one and moves on.
Now, just to be clear, I think this is mostly an artefact of the format: narratively speaking it makes sense, there is a choice here, the thing is, due to the updates being always a significant chunk of action, it lacks the granularity that an actual person would have; whereas a real person can change their mind upon learning new information, it is not possible in this format for the thread to react to new information in any meaningful way. We are basically committing blind, and that is much less interesting a choice than say, subduing both sides and hearing their version of what is happening, and then having the actual judgement call.
Just to be clear, this isn't a major point of criticism @yrsillar - I love the story, and am immensely grateful for the work you put in, but it's a minor thing that you could perhaps keep an eye on, to improve the quest part of the story a tiny bit.
- Location
- foraging for beans
You seem to be ignoring that we did have a choice that would have led to more information, and that we as a thread chose not to do that option. You also seem to be conflating your personal dislike of choices that must be made with imited information with the idea that everyone dislikes such choices. I do like this kind of choice where appropriate, and immediately after walking into a random spirit dream is certainly a good place for it.
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
I have issue with the second part of this argument over voter participation. According to NetTally you can see that almost the exact same amount of people voted during the plan vote as during this vote(118 vs 121 for those who care for specifics).
Both topics also generated a lot of discussion. It's a rote claim to make that plan votes drive away voters, and unsupported in this case.
I can bring up literally dozens of other examples from the previous thread if you want to hash out this argument.
Its your funeral.
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
And that is the previous thread, which you were not discussing in your initial argument when you said "the last vote". That is the situation which I was pointing out and the limited situation where I said your position is unsupported.
I don't particularly care about the previous thread, in large because I agree with you that there were large plan votes which killed voter participation in it. Stuff like the conditionals once we got massive overflow come to mind. However, because I was talking about and engaging with the limited case you were discussing, they don't matter.
Our current choice is complicated by lack of context, but it's multiple contexts we're missing. The first is obviously that we don't know what's going on in the dream and what the consequences of our choices are likely to be. The second is probably more important and it's what our goals are within this scenario. The two are related of course, because whatever we decide we want to be doing in the dream, lacking the context of the dream's circumstances means that we cannot have a clear idea of what choice or choices actually leads to the outcome we're pursuing.
Now, the logical consequence of our current choice is that it will more or less lock us into an overarching "goal" for the dream. As players, the tension arises from not knowing what the choices actually are or if our current choice would or could even lead to them anyway. It's entirely possible, maybe even likely, here for the players to commit to goals they find unpalatable with the only route out being self-sabotage. I think this is a valid set of possibilities, and having that take place in a comparatively narratively isolated setting like a dream/memory fragment of the past is in some ways an elegant way for @yrsillar to handle it. The vast majority of considerations binding Ling Qi's hands in "the real world" don't (obviously) apply here, so her character can stretch its wings in ways we might otherwise not see.
However, that only has value as it applies modification to her character development which does exist past this sole event into that "real world", which does make the blind nature of the choice problematic. How much retroactive justification for the course she picks is Ling Qi going to automatically apply here, exactly? What's the level of commitment to a choice made in ignorance? What degree of knock-on and consequential sub-choices are we actually making here? My concern here is that making this choice with the set of circumstances we are aware of might have Ling Qi making further superficially complementary choices in a completely different informational context.
What would have really helped at least kind of guess at the consequences of our decisions is if we were given a bit more insight into the structural nature of the overarching phenomenon. Unfortunately, we've been cut off from our designated source of knowing shit about dreams, so that meta-understanding -meta-contextualization- of our environment is absent. Which was on purpose, probably. If we have our fight then interrogate the survivor, then that's one thing, but if we get whisked off into a firm chain of obligation then it's pretty frustrating.
This post is kind of huge and insubstantial so maybe I'll complain about specifics later.
Now, the logical consequence of our current choice is that it will more or less lock us into an overarching "goal" for the dream. As players, the tension arises from not knowing what the choices actually are or if our current choice would or could even lead to them anyway. It's entirely possible, maybe even likely, here for the players to commit to goals they find unpalatable with the only route out being self-sabotage. I think this is a valid set of possibilities, and having that take place in a comparatively narratively isolated setting like a dream/memory fragment of the past is in some ways an elegant way for @yrsillar to handle it. The vast majority of considerations binding Ling Qi's hands in "the real world" don't (obviously) apply here, so her character can stretch its wings in ways we might otherwise not see.
However, that only has value as it applies modification to her character development which does exist past this sole event into that "real world", which does make the blind nature of the choice problematic. How much retroactive justification for the course she picks is Ling Qi going to automatically apply here, exactly? What's the level of commitment to a choice made in ignorance? What degree of knock-on and consequential sub-choices are we actually making here? My concern here is that making this choice with the set of circumstances we are aware of might have Ling Qi making further superficially complementary choices in a completely different informational context.
What would have really helped at least kind of guess at the consequences of our decisions is if we were given a bit more insight into the structural nature of the overarching phenomenon. Unfortunately, we've been cut off from our designated source of knowing shit about dreams, so that meta-understanding -meta-contextualization- of our environment is absent. Which was on purpose, probably. If we have our fight then interrogate the survivor, then that's one thing, but if we get whisked off into a firm chain of obligation then it's pretty frustrating.
This post is kind of huge and insubstantial so maybe I'll complain about specifics later.
Last edited:
> speaks in terms of general voter trends and cites an example
> BUT ACSHUALLY
> Reminds you of the premise of the original argument
> NAH THAT DOESNT MATTER
sure man
You can have my concession on that specific example lol
- Location
- The Temple of the Winds
I agree, variety in the presentation of the votes is nice.
If they were all presented the same way it'd rapidly become boring.
This is the only thing I'm actually concerned with here. Having to make these kinds of event decisions in the context of limited information is fine, and perfectly natural.
The questions about characterisation effects I think are more relevant. My problem here is that while the players can justify going on team spirit all they like, there really isn't any good reason for it IC. "He seems kinda shady" or "but if we don't help him he'll be pissed" are pretty shit reasons for deciding to just go and murder the guy. The only way to justify it, really, is if Ling Qi jumps straight on meta-gaming the dream and going "well, the moon sent me here, so I want to get the spirit point of view and have them like me and it doesn't matter if I kill him since he isn't real and the only broader implications are spirit-based ones".
Last edited:
BungieONI
Seven gremlins in a trench coat
- Location
- Lickwidget
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Or the presumption of guilt based on the Bloody Moon presence, what the spirit tree said and what she knows of the Weilu, which is in the same family of thoughts as your idea and as problematic.
- Location
- The Star Kingdom of Manticore
My basic thought process on this is that each path will lead to something and the vote is for what path we want to do a lot like in the serpents treasure. Each vote is a different path and each path is viable.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
Yeah, I don't see this having a major character impact simply because it was effectively a blind and off the cuff choice, where our expert on the matter was directly silenced and prevented from providing advice. You don't usually demand big, character-arc defining choices to be made on critically low information.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I dunno, being willing to intervene in a fight to the death so that we can choose who dies when presented with a blind and off the cuff choice seems like potential fodder for major characterization to me.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
In a simulation.
One which we know is a simulation even, or a 'Memory'.
There's a vastly different utility calculus involved when "Real people" are involved as opposed to "Literal ancient dream memories taken form."
Like, fearmongering here. Deciding to fight the asshole humanoid who demanded our compulsion in support of a spirit who had done us no wrong and would have been happy with just not getting involved isn't some horrible betrayal of the human race that'll affect your character arc forever.
The concerns are "Did we buy more trouble in this route than we can afford." "Was this the correct choice?" Or "Maybe we should have gambled for more information before taking action." Not "This choice will have a major impact on Ling Qi's character going forward." Adding that on as a reason to put down the choice that won is pretty inappropriate I think.
Last edited:
On a completely different subject, @yrsillar, how are we supposed to train Speech? Because it's not an art skill. We'd expect to get xp there from doing social - except we didn't get any from the party.
A fair argument can be made that now that Ling Qi knows how to not embarrass herself in polite society basic talking and socialising doesn't really do much for her. She needs deliberate practice and teaching. This I'm all for. However, I would argue that this is what Sixiang is providing us. Their coaching on what people are thinking and how to social better should provide a great opportunity for Ling Qi to get speech and empathy xp from relevant encounters.
A fair argument can be made that now that Ling Qi knows how to not embarrass herself in polite society basic talking and socialising doesn't really do much for her. She needs deliberate practice and teaching. This I'm all for. However, I would argue that this is what Sixiang is providing us. Their coaching on what people are thinking and how to social better should provide a great opportunity for Ling Qi to get speech and empathy xp from relevant encounters.
Hey, George's comment was completely side-neutral. Throwing in that "horrible betrayal of the human race" isn't fair. There's plenty of other negative character consequences purely tied to one's willingness to shove their nose into unknown lethal situations for shaky reasons. Like being the kind of person who does that, for instance.
If we look at another dream, I think we had a situation where it was really cool that Ling Qi treated it seriously, treated it as real. When Ling Qi was in Jiao's test, she felt the situation in a pretty raw way and made difficult decisions, but she didn't make them in the context of the unreality of the situation. The whole adventure was so fun because she was making the choices she'd make if it were the real deal. Treating the dream flippantly because it's a dream has character implications in and of itself. Also might be mildly racist against Sixiang.
This smearing of the prince because he didn't recognise our inherent protagonistness and get down on his knees and beg us for help is ridiculous.
We have noble cultivator fighting against what seems to be a large scale spirit problem. Upon seeing some fellow cultivators he assumed they were part of his forces and told them to assist him (and given that this is a dream simulation there is probably something in there about fitting us into the story). There is nothing problematic about this. It is perfectly normal and reasonable behavior in this kind of high-stakes tense situation. This constant attempt by people to denigrate his character in order to justify murdering him for no good reason is, well, questionable to say the least. Though if you're looking for a way for yrsillar to continue that thread of Ling Qi dehumanising people she kills then that's a good option I guess.
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I voted to side with the spirit and am happy with my choice so I think you have me wrong here. I think we have a tough job ahead of us and may need to be colder sometimes.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
(Shrug)
It ultimately just comes down to differing views on the narrative I guess.
I mean, to be honest, I was legitimately conflicted until I looked at all the pieces on the table, read the vote options, and determined that it was a Bloody Moon curated event (Based on which phase was in the sky), that the Prince lied at least once (Calling the tree a 'Mad Beast' that needed to be put down, when its reaction was merely "I have no quarrel with you just don't join this guy." Not the act of an insane destructive threat that needed to be put down), and the use of the term Oathbreaker (Which is a mystically charged word--important in a setting like this, and doubly important considering that vengeance deities often take special interest in the punishment of Oathbreakers), and determined that the best choice for the purposes of this event was "Support the spirit"
In other words, I was viewing this event as a 'Puzzle to be Solved', and not a major test of character. If it was a test of character, we would be given more context as to what was going on. A snap decision to support a guy who looks like you over something that doesn't look like you based on little to no context is not an accurate test of character. Which is why I immediately dismissed 'Test of Character' as a thing even in my initial assessment.
With that eliminated, and with Sixiang being silenced to actively deny us context it seemed, I reverted to the thought I would for any functionally context-free situation. Assess the situation on the merits we had on the table and take action accordingly.
So yeah, if this debate is purely based on "Some people think it was a test of character that we just failed because we didn't take the Pro-Imperial Propaganda choice", then I guess that's correct maybe? That's just not how I saw the event--and special care was taken to deny us of most forms of context we could have gotten to make a more informed choice.
Really doubting this was a test of character for that reason. A test of character needs build up, this received none. Would Serpent's Treasure have been a test of character if our relationship with Meizhen hadn't been established? Because this would basically be the ending of Serpent's Treasure... If we had skipped the entire event leading up to it and was paired with a complete stranger, and we were told to figure out which one of us gets to go forward.
That's not a test of character that has a Correct Answer, and claiming it has a Correct Answer is just mean-spirited shit stirring on the part of whoever set that up.
It ultimately just comes down to differing views on the narrative I guess.
I mean, to be honest, I was legitimately conflicted until I looked at all the pieces on the table, read the vote options, and determined that it was a Bloody Moon curated event (Based on which phase was in the sky), that the Prince lied at least once (Calling the tree a 'Mad Beast' that needed to be put down, when its reaction was merely "I have no quarrel with you just don't join this guy." Not the act of an insane destructive threat that needed to be put down), and the use of the term Oathbreaker (Which is a mystically charged word--important in a setting like this, and doubly important considering that vengeance deities often take special interest in the punishment of Oathbreakers), and determined that the best choice for the purposes of this event was "Support the spirit"
In other words, I was viewing this event as a 'Puzzle to be Solved', and not a major test of character. If it was a test of character, we would be given more context as to what was going on. A snap decision to support a guy who looks like you over something that doesn't look like you based on little to no context is not an accurate test of character. Which is why I immediately dismissed 'Test of Character' as a thing even in my initial assessment.
With that eliminated, and with Sixiang being silenced to actively deny us context it seemed, I reverted to the thought I would for any functionally context-free situation. Assess the situation on the merits we had on the table and take action accordingly.
So yeah, if this debate is purely based on "Some people think it was a test of character that we just failed because we didn't take the Pro-Imperial Propaganda choice", then I guess that's correct maybe? That's just not how I saw the event--and special care was taken to deny us of most forms of context we could have gotten to make a more informed choice.
Really doubting this was a test of character for that reason. A test of character needs build up, this received none. Would Serpent's Treasure have been a test of character if our relationship with Meizhen hadn't been established? Because this would basically be the ending of Serpent's Treasure... If we had skipped the entire event leading up to it and was paired with a complete stranger, and we were told to figure out which one of us gets to go forward.
That's not a test of character that has a Correct Answer, and claiming it has a Correct Answer is just mean-spirited shit stirring on the part of whoever set that up.
Last edited: