Just because this is fair and true doesn’t mean that it’s right
One of my criticisms of WotR is that with most of its companions if the initial hook doesn’t grab you then you are completely unengaged with talking with them further and getting the depth that all of them have.
Like the conversations with Nenio where she gets drunk for the first time and you see just how comprehensive her power is, or the Wenduag Situation - you either dismiss a character as shallow or dive in deep, and you don’t get many opportunities to say ‘oh this person’s actually deeper than I think, I’ll spend more time with them’
(it does not help that Nenio’s place in Drezen is somewhere you will never go to unless you know to look)
I was just mocked for having role-played as a dragon by a guy who now keeps speaking about how cool the dracthyr are, both actions happened in the span of what, 2-4 hours? It is quite ironic to me.
And… you’re right: your point about power-levels is entirely valid. On a personal scale, RP is also about being comfortable and if meeting a character who can turn into a dragon is too much for you, that’s fair game.
I do think dragon RPers are valid, though several times I’ve seen them done in a very dissatisfying way. I have lost the enthusiasm for new expansions, but I agree that, despite all, dracthyr and dragons aren’t exactly on the same level, mostly due to the difference in size and power-levels.
At the same time the criticism leveled against dragons does extends far beyond the “power in RP” discussion, and was often mixed with accusations of being a snowflake or whatever other word floated through the herd’s mind at the time.
If you ask me, I believe most of the time dragon RPers (those I RPed with, atleast) weren’t the powerhouse people claim them to be. But perhaps I am mistaken and well, when I look at Uldum I understand where the bias may come from.
especially because if you’re against politics on these forums, why do you ever only show up when people mention politics and almost never elsewhere unless it’s for usual suspects
siri what is an illustrative exaggeration (it is also 99 times out of 10 so you know that was not going to be a realistic statistic lmao)
This position often is double-sided and not entirely unrelated to (suspiciously again from ‘moderates’) the more general sentiment, of hiring the skill not the person, but only when the person is cis white straight man. So, as an example, someone cries about the 50/50 movement, while also crying about a woman taking a job where she is the most qualified for. Typically in acting, or with other minority groups included. More direct example: Ariel.
People love to pretend that they’re wanting to only hire people whose skillset fits the job the best, while actively ignoring anyone whose skillset does fit the job, but simply isn’t cis male/white/straight.
Because the post already had gone long enough and I do not have the willingness in me to add a second essay on top of it all. In short, micro aggressions shape the way we think subconsciously about social things or structures, so being mindful of those can help alleviate certain social issues especially with more negative concepts in mind.
Saying ‘ugh that’s so gay’ to describe something as unpleasant is a homophobic microaggression, because while you might not actively hate gays or discriminate, you’re still adding onto the general social space where gays are looked down upon. It reinforces subconsciously the belief that being anything out of the main ordinary is wrong and at the same time others anyone who isn’t straight.
Lann and Wendu both get a poor depiction in the introduction. Lann comes across as the naive idealist and Wendu comes across as a raving lunatic, but they’re both much more than that once you get to know them.
Even if you’re evil, Wendu makes a terrible companion to start - you want someone who is either reliable or powerful as an evil character and Shield Maze-era Wendy comes off as neither.
So it’s mostly just if you want to hit it (valid, she’s hot) and/or if you just like the chaos, or if you know that there’s better stuff down the line
You expect me to touch General Forums? They’re a lost cause. Some people over there are nuts!
Yeah. I have to ask for a source over here. You also stated that it is a “general sentiment”.
Or is this another
?
How can you expect others to be arguing in a fair way when you can’t help but bloat everything in your favor, while also clearly arguing in bad faith?
You: Choose a topic!
Me: STEM field
You: in Ariel…!
In case you have not understood, since you’re so focused about it, I know what micro-aggressions are. Which is why I pointed out that I would not consider them a sanctionable form of violence which tosses you out of the political discourse.
I guess an evil character could also see there’s a lot of raw potential in Wendu. Who doesn’t want their own pet spider lady to lay eggs in their enemies?
No, this was a more honest observation on the online discourse.
The topic was hiring a 50/50% split, I assumed it was regardless of the field? Or are you only interested in arguing about STEM? Because, idk - in my experience it is explicitly a field where someone’s gender really doesn’t come into play and has historically been male driven further causing the hostility towards women in the environment.
Wouldn’t this be entirely dependent on whichever country you’re talking about? Sort of useless to argue about law when we’re all from different countries. In many cases from what I’ve heard on the Internet about ‘microaggressions being against the law’ have been cases of repeated harassment, which… is against the law.
Yes, of course it was.
Or maybe it was a convenient strawman, because this is all what you’re doing now, it seems. If you don’t have the intellectual confidence to give the benefit of the doubt to other parties, why should I bother discussing at all?
The topic was me offering an example to you. If you challange me on selecting an example, then stick to it.
True, though I was talking about social sanctions in political environments. Referencing what we were saying here:
We were not debating about what you want to see in a forum thread, but what should be acceptable in the public discourse at large, including the political sphere.
Yeah, I’ve yet to encounter anything that’ll change my mind on that front and I pose the question to all the people not powergaming and just being hidden dragons all day every day; what’s the point besides a secret identity?
The class struggle ends when there are no more classes.
Hiring on merit/best on the job alone is fine in theory and all, but when there are decades, if not centuries of built in prejudice towards groups of people its not as easy as it sounds. Systematic racism for example often leads to people turned down for having certain names for example.
The lack of women in other careers is also not just down to “choosing other ones” as commonly stated but rather decades of being actively told how youre unable to do those jobs in the first place, aswell as various sexual misconduct and many other things.
You don’t always have to be a hidden dragon, you can reveal yourself when needs must or desire hits.
And some don’t hide what they are by default.
It depends on the character’s goals and motivations.
My blue liked to see what spells mortals came up with (and will continue to do so).
My green associated with druids and the caretaking of patches of land.
Now you could say, why don’t you use X race instead of Y? And the short answer is, I prefer the lore of X.
