That's what I was focusing on, actually. So if I was trying to 'define romance' with my wordings, then so's this, sorta.It's two people dedicating themselves to each other, no matter what form that dedication may take.
That plus, just, "Will this person have my back in my life in general?" Will they provide support and care. Will they be a partner.That. You know emotional, physical, and probably but not necessarily, Sexual intimacy.
So yeah, while he might ahve been better of adding some "I feel" 's and "In my opinions" 's and all that, I think he has a legitimate point.
Well, I mean, I'm already putting a lot of parts where I go "I think" or "I feel" or hemming and hawing and "Hmmm..."s in my posts.So yeah, while he might ahve been better of adding some "I feel" 's and "In my opinions" 's and all that, I think he has a legitimate point.
Hey @BoneyM , I've forgotten the exact date, but shouldn't the results for the experiment with feeding the livestock the Moulder goop be coming back soon?
How did it turn out that Mathilde is just surrounded by people who are fed up with the elves? The Dwarves are fed up with the elves. Cython is fed up with elves. The Eonir and Asarnil are fed up with other elves. Wilhemina, Heidi and probably most of our imperial friends are increasingly fed up with elves over Marienburg.
With the exception of our invitation to the least Asur of the 10 kingdoms, I don't think Mathilde has ever a positive interaction regarding the Asur of Ulthuan.
@BoneyM
Have we uh... informed the Ice Dragon of the We? Or vice versa? It occurred to me and it feels like a very big gap to leave.
The average Elf is fed up with at least nine kingdoms of Elves.
Oh okay. I suppose at some point we're gonna have to formally introduce the neighbours. Interested in what Cython's take on hiveminded spiders is gonna be.No, but the We don't generally go above ground and Cython doesn't go below it unless given good reason.
More like twelve, counting Naggaroth and Athel Loren, I think.The average Elf is fed up with at least nine kingdoms of Elves.
Hm. How many of the other imperial state provinces is the average Imperial fed up with, in comparison?The average Elf is fed up with at least nine kingdoms of Elves.
And the reverse. Cython is only one, but damn, what a one.Oh okay. I suppose at some point we're gonna have to formally introduce the neighbours. Interested in what Cython's take on hiveminded spiders is gonna be.
Okay, perhaps I should have been clearer. It has no specific definition. Romance, for all that there's a general "meaning", has near infinite forms and, from an outside perspective, may not even look like romance at all. I know if someone looked at some of the people in my family and their relationships, they wouldn't believe it was real. It's like trying to define love. Everybody would have a different answer. In fact, I even clarify in the quoted post—you know that bit you skipped over when underlining?—that it can't be defined the way they are trying. but sure. Maybe my particular idea of romance isn't accurate either. I'll admit that.Well if Romance is not defined, then what's the purpose of having it as a word? Also you literally define Romance Yourself, right after you say that it is not defined.
Passion and romance are two very different things. But that's getting into semantics and about as difficult to argue as "what is love", so I'll leave off. And sure, Garlak has their preferences—I even share some, being an avid fan of Panoramia and Roswita myself—but the "point" they are trying to make is that romance only takes the form they prefer, and that a relationship based on intellectual discourse and scientific discovery isn't really romantic. That is something I disagree with wholeheartedly.But to discuss the definition, I'd have to disagree with your idea that Romance involves being "Dedicated", People will claim to have a night of wild Romance with someone, before never seeing them again, just one night of passion and all that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to call platonic relationships invalid or anything of the sort. But I do think Garlak might have the more mainstream view of Romance here, as I do expect most people, when they voted Yes Romance, were expecting some level of you know:
That. You know emotional, physical, and probably but not necessarily, Sexual intimacy.
So yeah, while he might ahve been better of adding some "I feel" 's and "In my opinions" 's and all that, I think he has a legitimate point.
The average Imperial is fed up with Nordland, including Nordlanders.Hm. How many of the other imperial state provinces is the average Imperial fed up with, in comparison?
Hm. How many of the other imperial state provinces is the average Imperial fed up with, in comparison?
Although I started off asking that semi-jokingly, I suppose it does work as a question about the topic of how the Imperials feel about their fellows, and what inter-empire tensions and relationships are like. I know that it's not perfectly harmonious of course -- not nearly, hah -- but how are inter-Empire tensions and relations going? (Or do we, bluntly, simply do not know enough about this -- and don't spend enough time and focus on the Empire to warrant such?)
Honestly, I think the dragon is more like an interesting mystery to explore, potentially a friend or associate, rather than a partner.
I feel that it's unnecessary, unlikely to be succeed, and has the potential to be harmful to Mathilde, the expedition, and the Conspiracy of Silence. So, no, I wouldn't be in favor of such an action. Best to just let him grow old and pass away in peace, as a reward for his unknowing contributions in combating his kind.How do people feel about getting one last uses out of Qrech? Set free with a sack of warpstone near clan Moulder. Put our matrix in him and tell him if the dwarf expedition is attacked by clan Moulder we will kill him from a distance. He might stop any attacks or he might not, but either way it costs us very little.
Interesting. @BoneyM i dont suppose one of Johanns half actions in the coming turn could be to teach him lingua praestantia more completely?
I didn't highlight that bit, but I did read it. I'll admit I should have included the underline, but I left it out for a visual break between the two bits. Which I could have accomplished with separate quotes in hindsight.Okay, perhaps I should have been clearer. It has no specific definition. Romance, for all that there's a general "meaning", has near infinite forms and, from an outside perspective, may not even look like romance at all. I know if someone looked at some of the people in my family and their relationships, they wouldn't believe it was real. It's like trying to define love. Everybody would have a different answer. In fact, I even clarify in the quoted post—you know that bit you skipped over when underlining?—that it can't be defined the way they are trying. but sure. Maybe my particular idea of romance isn't accurate either. I'll admit that.
Firstly, you stepped over no lines, he gave his opinion in a public forum, thus (IMO) you are automatically allowed to provide your opinion in a polite manner. And your response seemed polite and thought out, so I'd say you were good to go there. (As if I'm the arbitrator of who can say what and where )I don't know, maybe I stepped into a conversation I shouldn't have, and misunderstood something.
I agree that they are two different things, but I was arguing with your specific notion that:
It required dedication. many healthy relationships and Romances do involve to people dedicating themselves to each other, but not all Romances do in my opinion, that's what I was trying to say there.
I don't feel that was their intent, but this:but the "point" they are trying to make is that romance only takes the form they prefer, and that a relationship based on intellectual discourse and scientific discovery isn't really romantic. That is something I disagree with wholeheartedly.
This area where I think he would have been served well more of a "I feel that by classifying this platonic(in Garlaks opinion) seeming research partnership as a Romance, that it might end up leaving out people who very much wanted a Physical/Sexual/whatever Romance" Because as it stands, I do see how you get this:But don't block off romance and intimacy for the people that want romance and intimacy. Which is what drawing such a separation and definition would be.
Out of what he said. But in Garlaks defense, DP did sort of start with the very Definitive "This is how it is" language.I'm seeing: "passion and interest in someone's otherworldly nature/intelligence totally counts as a romantic interest" followed by "No, that sounds aromantic and like you just want to do cool magical research, so stop trying to say it's romance". And that made me stop and stare, because it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, especially when the "that's not romantic" person also says "so stop blocking off romance for other people who want it". When, you know, they're the one trying to tell someone a certain option isn't romantic.
When I can safely bet money, that there are just some people in the thread that want one more dragon bone in Mathilde's life.The dragon as a romantic pursuit is about fascination with magic, it's about wanting to be part of something great and terrible, a history older than the whole of mankind, it is about the little blurb next to Mathilde's learning score: The magical world makes more sense to you than the 'real' one.
He would tell them that we've deciphered Queekish.How do people feel about getting one last use out of Qrech? Set him free with a sack of warpstone near clan Moulder. Put our matrix in him and tell him if the dwarf expedition is attacked by clan Moulder we will kill him from a distance. He might stop any attacks or he might not, but either way it costs us very little.
I think some misunderstanding probably took place, yeah. Passion and interests in somebody's magic or nature could count, yeah, just... It's hard to express exactly. I guess it's more like an objection to the selected person, the dragon, specifically. That, to use an example or comparison, if it were passion and interest in Gilding or restoring the Caldera to life or waystones or maybe artillery or pets or whatever, it could work -- because those people would be Johann or Panoramia or Oswald. But there'd be more there, too. (i.e. If it were Max or Oswald or Kazrik or Gotri in the place here, and somebody was making the argument of wanting to get close to them over shared academic interest or interests in artillery or interests in runesmithing or curiosity about engineering... I'd shrug and go sure. But because it's the dragon, that's gets a 'No, because...' from me.) (Because I feel that those people, even if chosen to be approached for/from that particular reason... there'd still be more and other stuff, like the stuff I was sort of trying to define or explain, there too.)Passion and romance are two very different things. But that's getting into semantics and about as difficult to argue as "what is love", so I'll leave off. And sure, Garlak has their preferences—I even share some, being an avid fan of Panoramia and Roswita myself—but the "point" they are trying to make is that romance only takes the form they prefer, and that a relationship based on intellectual discourse and scientific discovery isn't really romantic. That is something I disagree with wholeheartedly.
I don't know, maybe I stepped into a conversation I shouldn't have, and misunderstood something. But reading the comments again, I'm seeing: "passion and interest in someone's otherworldly nature/intelligence totally counts as a romantic interest" followed by "No, that sounds aromantic and like you just want to do cool magical research, so stop trying to say it's romance". And that made me stop and stare, because it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, especially when the "that's not romantic" person also says "so stop blocking off romance for other people who want it". When, you know, they're the one trying to tell someone a certain option isn't romantic.
Relationship and friendship, sure. I mean, I'd bet a lot of posters would be interested in knowing more about the dragon. Romance, I don't agree on.I don't know - Cython seems to really want to learn stuff in order to make a relationship work. Like more than anyone else. Then there's thoughtful gifts and a willingness to place themselves into a relatively vulnerable position for Mathilde's comfort.
Those are pretty good signs - there's a very good potential for a relationship here.
So we both might have had people looking in on the conversation and going 'Huh, that person seems to be saying Do X/Don't Do X.' Heh. Perspectives and words, man.But my thought was more, You seemed to be telling him that he can't define Romance that way, then you defined Romance this way. Does that make sense? Like you seemed to be telling him he can't do something, that you then proceed to do?
I'm not even going to say that you're wrong there, just that, as I looked on from outside the discussion, it seemd that those two sentences should not be keeping each other company. They seemed Dissonant to me.
Huh, yes, nice! I think this probably gets to what I was trying to say or express more! (But fumbled it. And even as I was writing and posting it, I felt like I fumbled it, but went 'I can't make it any better; might as well post anyway and leave it up to the fates and fortune anyway and just pray.')This area where I think he would have been served well more of a "I feel that by classifying this platonic(in Garlaks opinion) seeming research partnership as a Romance, that it might end up leaving out people who very much wanted a Physical/Sexual/whatever Romance" Because as it stands, I do see how you get this:
I'm not sure that's a very workable idea. He most likely would seek to get the suicide-collar-equivalent removed from him. He might be flatly unable to do anything, have any influence, in Clan Moulder. Plus, just releasing him there means drawing attention to things going on there. Also also, this doesn't seem quite like Mathilde's style or methods of doing things... It doesn't exactly build on the approaches she's taken before, and instead is a big "Do this or you explode" thing.How do people feel about getting one last uses out of Qrech? Set free with a sack of warpstone near clan Moulder. Put our matrix in him and tell him if the dwarf expedition is attacked by clan Moulder we will kill him from a distance. He might stop any attacks or he might not, but either way it costs us very little.
Yeah. Though... I'd like to be able to do something more, or socialize with him in some way, still. I'd like to read more about him, basically. Once in a while or etc. (Though, some people wrote sidestories or short fictions about him, so that counts. Like him playing out the battle of Drakenhof, that was a cool idea.)Best to just let him grow old and pass away in peace, as a reward for his unknowing contributions in combating his kind.
He's got access to the same College courses that Mathilde has. If he's so inclined, he can make it happen.
A write in?What would be required for Mathilde to take a direct hand in teaching him?
Well to be fair I braught up Johann being our adventuring buddy because Roswita and Panoramia stans where touting their academic achivements and/or ambitions as reasons they where well suited to Mathilde and Johann wasn't. So I wanted to point out how Johann compliments us in a different way.Well, there's also the thing about which standards you're judging them by? I'd argue that Max is just as integral to Mathilde's achievements in the Karak, except most people don't think of shared academic experiences and insights as "adventures." To be fair, Mathilde regards academia and research as "something that has to be done" rather than anything particularly stimulating.
I feel it too. I'm not sure whether it's proto-sisterly or proto-loverly, but it's definitely very charming.And I have to say, I really, really liked Roswita in this last. Her giggle, her sly asides to Mathilde, her academic debut, even the way she mentions that she was a college student to imply she was a party girl before confessing otherwise- it felt like she came in trusting Mathilde as the person who was on her side and had her back. Which is cool, in that she has a TON of natural allies at a place like this and she conspired against them with us. (So to speak.) It feels like such an honest, unconscious gesture of closeness that I'm really touched by it.
This this this this. All of this. So much all of this.I think... that the most important thing about a romantic partner, would be... if they care about you and have your back and be there for you. This remains true for family and close friends, and it remains true for potential love interests too.
Not, 'how interesting they are as a character.' Not, 'how impressive they are as a mage or person or repository of history or mystery.'
But how much emotionally invested they can get in you. Can you go to them for comfort? Can you bring your problems to them and be confident in knowing that they'll care about them and try to help you with them or lend a listening ear, or at least be able to understand and care about your problems? Do you share enough culture and norms to naturally understand or just sorta-easily-get, on a simple and ground-base level, what is going on in the other being's head emotionally very easily?
...But most important of all, is "Will this person cherish and love you?" We can go to, for example, Anton or Johann or Regimand or maybe even Roswita with some of our problems or issues or doubts, and expect them to care about them off the bat, just because of who we and they are. That's good. Even if a Grey Wizard wounds up keeping lots of secrets and doesn't share everything, the fact is still important that those things that aren't super-secret-agent-classified can be shared.
To be fair, I'd give, say, an elf a pass for that, maybe, depending on the elf. At least enough to consider them, if they met the "do they have your back" test. Even if the relationship cannot possibly last more than a tiny fraction of their lifespan- do they have your back, while it lasts?Do you have the same rough expected age or lifespan, or at minimum would "a hundred years" be a significant chunk of their life? Can you live in the same society or household together? Look, these are very simple and practical and comfortable fundamental ideas.
Yeah, all of this.I think the dragon's an interesting person. And knows lots of interesting stuff. I'd be interested in hearing more about their life, more about magic, and so on. But as a romantic partner or someone to love? No.
Physical intimacy is what I was talking about, not temperature. Being able to sleep in the same bed. Being able to work in the same house. Being able to pick a person up and carry them in your arms if they're tired or sleepy or hurt. Being able to hug your kids.
Yeah, I do realize it, and those are points in Roswita's and Anton's favor. The big difference is, I don't know if Mathilde would be happy and comfortable going back to Stirland to live out the rest of her life, or even a large fraction of her time for the rest of her life. I'm pretty sure she'd be happy at Karak Eight Peaks.You realize that applies equally to Roswita or Anton? Maybe their insights into Mathilde's character are less than Pan's because they don't interact with her as often as the K8P magic club does as a whole, but they do tick the other boxes.