tbh i think that even unwinnable fights should be winnable. some of the BEST fights i've ever run as a dm were ones i built kill the players (in a fun way. I had some cutscenes prepped so even the loss would be a different flavour of win)- but then they were clever bastards and managed to either win the fights or pull themselves out of trouble. I think it's perfectly fine to plan for a fight that players aren't supposed to win, but you need to let them. if they can't win, they can't lose, and the meaning of that encounter is diminished. do that too many times, and they stop trusting you to give them roleplay prompts and start expecting to sit there waiting while you drive the story for them.
but if they can win... if there is always the chance to win, no matter how impossible the odds, then they ALWAYS have hope. they always get invested. they feel the big emotions of success or the big emotions of failure, and you fucking Win as a dm/roleplay prompter/lead bastard.
153 notes
·
View notes
Scenes like this keep cropping up and I cannot help but roll my eyes all the way back into my skull
Don't worry guys, having NEW children fixed him. This famously teaches a violent man to stop hitting kids and makes him no longer feel the need to construct nightmarish scenarios so he can humiliate and embarrass those he has power over. Men whose wives produce lots of babies for them are Very fulfilled and Understand how strong bonds are supposed to be
"Instead of advising him he'd been defensive" is a REALLY INTERESTING way to phrase "got so offended at the suggestion to stop murdering women for their land that he shoved his son's face in a festering wound and told him to leave him to get eaten by maggots."
I wonder how they'd spell something like, "walked through a patch of thorns so that his son would be in physical pain and then belittled him for finding an alternate route because he wanted him to suffer" and "lied directly to his face about why he abandoned him when he realized the child could be useful"
76 notes
·
View notes
how did u learn to paint?? like i just cant wrap my head around it
<3 I love answering asks like this!
You will have to bare with me, I don't save many of my studies, and my files aren't that organized so I don't have as many images as I would like.
The studies I've found most helpful for myself personally with painting are various master studies. (This is also, as always, alongside study of fundamentals.) And always follow a study with self-critique (and, if you can get it, outside critique!)
"Master" in this sense means anyone who you want to learn something from.
One way you can do this is by copying an artist's work directly. This is to try and understand some of their stylistic techniques. Leyendecker, Andrew Loomis, and John Singer Sargent are personal favorites of mine! I try to keep these quick, I'm not trying to get an exact copy.
I also get a lot out of copying photos. In this case, I'm not trying to glean some technique, rather, I'm trying to interpret the photo and explore my own stylizations.
(photo credit mountain men of alaska )
I also really enjoy taking a painting or piece that already exists, and making it "mine" by putting my characters in it haha, which is sort of a combination of master studies and photo studies!
(William Bruce Ellis - Covent Garden (1930)) (Barberini Faun)
And then, in my work that's not a study at all, I'm informed by all of these!
What master studies do is help me refine my style and practice my technique, but also I'm communicating with artists of the past through my art! They're teaching me! And I have so much to learn.
And of course... most importantly... I paint.
a lot.
I don't do as much study anymore, not because I feel I've learned all I need to, but because for work I draw 50+ drawings a week. 'Drawing for work' and 'study' occupy the same space in my brain and I need some fun drawing time!
So to sum up, draw a lot, reference constantly, and copy the people you want to draw more like!
(and, of course, when doing a study off of someone else's work, always give them credit. If it's your photos there's no need.)
39 notes
·
View notes
people actually went on about how game of thrones made it socially acceptable to be a fantasy nerd, as though the lord of the rings movies hadn't been released less than a decade earlier and left far greater cultural ripples and i am just
got may have made the adults feel better about liking fantasy, but lotr got into the kids' heads when they (we) were just young and impressionable enough to be absolutely transported and emotionally rewritten by don't you leave him, samwise gamgee and my brother, my captain, my king and and rohan will answer
lotr was rewriting entire generations' brain chemistry long before asoiaf and so obviously it's not fair to compare any post-lotr fantasy novel to it, and each book series was trying to do different things within their own spheres and so that also is not a fair comparison, but in terms of the cultural impact of the adaptations that came out within a decade of each other, saying that it was game of thrones that made fantasy mainstream is baffling
game of thrones could only run because the lord of the rings movies laid the path, and i will die on this hill
121 notes
·
View notes
[ID: two pieces of digital fanart depicting Luz and Belos from the owl house dressed as Sarah and Jareth from Labyrinth (1986), respectively. They're wearing the costumes from the hallucination/ballroom scene. In the first piece Luz stands in the foreground with her skirt bunched in her fists, facing towards us but looking at something out of frame. She has a necklace of her egg palismen and a rod of Asclepius hairpin, and is wearing her white vans under her ballgown. Belos stands behind her in shadow, looking down at her and holding up a light glyph. The background is black. The second image is the same piece except with no shading, more vibrant colours and a purple background. End ID] @toh-described
🦉💫Don't tell me truth hurts little girl/Cause it hurts like hell🔮🌟
Labyrinth au!! Honestly surprised I've never seen one of these before?? feels very fitting. But I guess I'm the only one w/ this specific brainrot cocktail lol
(DO NOT TAG AS SHIP OR I WILL EXPLODE YOUR EYEBALLS💥)
614 notes
·
View notes
I wanna know ur Fontaine msq criticisms 👁️👁️👂I’m all ears
I'm not sure if you wanted me to talk about this secretly or publicly but! Here I go!
The TLDR: Fontaine MSQ aestheticised prison, poverty, child abuse, the justice system/court and didn't properly address any of it.
More:
Focalors/Furina has way too much of a sympathetic angle for a dictator who's lets people drown with her inaction.
Neuvillette feels Bad for sentencing some people to death/prison, but that's it. He's one of the most powerful people in Fontaine. If he felt like there are systemic injustices, I.E sending an abused Child to prison, he should be the first person to DO something about it, not just cry and be sad so the audience can be like aw, that's complex character writing isn't it? No it's not! And guilt doesn't absolve you!!!!!!! (These are stuff we deal with in OTCOJ read my fic now /j)
Meropide has children in it, both Sentenced there (Wriothesley) and BORN THERE (Lanoire), and this is just a quirk of the place. Not only that, Meropide accepts prisoners of all genders and crimes. There are abusers and abuse victims in one place. Do you know how bad that is? How much potential for crimes to happen in a place like that— oh wait, Meropide isn't under Fontaine's jurisdiction. If you are assaulted as an inmate it literally means nothing to the court.
Wriothesley had no qualifications when he took over. Depending on how long he lived on the streets, how old he was when he killed his parents, how old he was when he was first taken in by the orphanage, etc, the man might never have more than 4–5 years of formal education. Sigewinne probably had to teach him how to write reports. And do Meropide's spreadsheets. Edit because I forgot to elaborate on this one: This isn't a point brought up anywhere, which is bad, because when poverty and incarceration robs you of a proper education (and the rights to vote in many places too, too, by the way), it reduces your prospects for jobs, reduces many people's ability to get a home etc etc. Wriothesley was just, narratively, Given his position.
Meropide is an industrialized prison, and they portray this as a good thing. Prisoners are paid in coupons for their labour, and this is also portrayed as a good thing.
The One-Meal-A-Day reform was something Paimon gushed about being so great of a perk, that people might want to go to jail for food (could be interesting and reflective of systemic poverty if MHY had brains, but they don't, so I was just Pissed because essentially all Paimon wanted to say was "Prison isn't so bad, but still don't go to prison guys! Prison labour is really hard!"). By the way, in most real-world prisons they are obligated to feed you three meals a day. Because that's how much food a human needs. MHY went with one meal just so they can say "if you want to eat more, you have to work." And then the welfare meal is a goddamn gacha. So imagine you're a starving child who's too weak to work in the fucking robot assembly line, and you wander up for your first meal in 24 hours, only to luck in with a shit one. I'd kill myself.
They wrote Wriothesley, who's a victim of the system, into a guy who's say shit like "I'm the Duke I can do whatever I want" for a cool moment where he choke-slams an inmate (I know he was a bad guy. But also, in copaganda when cops are violent/disregarding protocols, they are always only portrayed to do that against bad guys, so what does our critical thinking tells us about this one?) They wrote Wriothesley, who was an inmate of a prison so bad, so notorious that it is the literal boogeyman of Fontaine, that has a legal (???) fighting pit, with an administrator who abuses his position to be unreasonable, to willingly stay in the place and become an Administrator who would choke-slam an inmate while saying a cool line about how he has the power to do whatever he wants. They wrote him, the guy who had to be fed on the streets by melusines, to think one-meal-a-day was a good enough reform (while he spends god-knows how much on his boat). This wasn't a victim-turns-into-abuser narrative either, they want all this to be seen as positive character growth.
And then, the final kicker is, they gloss over his entire abuse. You can only read about these shit in his profile, which most people don't because they don't Have Him or doesn't care to unlock it/read it online, and they jammed his entire backstory into a flaccid info-dump at the end of his character story quest. This man isn't Allowed to feel abused and neglected and show any reaction to it within the narrative of Fontaine itself, because if they actually Gave Weight to what happened to him, they'd have to confront THE FUCKING JUSTICE SYSTEM they had NO PLANS on criticising. I don't think they ever explicitly said the fucking Crime-Theatre nonsense was Bad either.
I could go on, but this is already so long. But yeah, I hope this gave you an idea.
23 notes
·
View notes