@The Harbinger of Ferocity Of course, ask me if you need anythang.
I will be sure to - as I just now have.
The Harbinger of Ferocity Member
STATUS: Masses are always breeding grounds of psychic epidemics. 6 yrs ago- Last Seen: 4 yrs ago
- Joined: 12 yrs ago
- Posts: 3754 (0.86 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- The Harbinger of Ferocity 12 yrs ago
-
Latest 10 profile visitors:
-
Most recent →
Vixere,
Captain Uni,
parelaxis,
Passable Writer,
rush99999,
Nightwing95
Status
Recent Statuses
6 yrs ago
Current
Masses are always breeding grounds of psychic epidemics.
6 yrs ago
The highest, most decisive experience is to be alone with one's own self. You must be alone to find out what supports you, when you find that you can not support yourself.
1
like
7 yrs ago
One cannot live from anything except what one is.
7 yrs ago
The slave to virtue finds the way as little as the slave to vices.
7 yrs ago
The core of an individual is the mystery of life, which dies when it is 'grasped'. That is also why symbols want to keep their secrets.
Bio
The Harbinger of Ferocity
Agent of the Wild, Aspect of the Ferine
Nature, red in tooth and claw.
"There is, indeed, no single quality of the cat that man could not emulate to his advantage."
- Carl Van Vechten
I am, at my core, a personification and manifestation of those things whose blood and hearts run red with the ferocity of the animal world. It is this which convicts and controls my works, my writing, my being; the force and guidance in which I gain wisdom from. It is what inspires me as a creator and weaver of words, the very thing I admire as an author.
My leanings, savage as they are, are of the feline sort as there exists no greater lineage of beasts whom can be drawn from. No others captivate and motivate my talent and skill as the greatest of cats do.
Most Recent Posts
In
Academy 218: Still looking for new people to join - now is the primetime.
→
11 yrs ago
Forum: Casual Roleplay
I will be sure to - as I just now have.
In
Academy 218: Still looking for new people to join - now is the primetime.
→
11 yrs ago
Forum: Casual Roleplay
I will begin composing a character sheet in its fullest tomorrow evening, given I have little time today as well as a few questions I will direct via messages to @Mr Allen J.
I have only read a portion of this - nothing in depth as of yet - but it all seems very well thought out and certainly explained. I will investigate further, but thus far you do have my interest.
Not allowing the minor things, which is most things, to draw one's ire is a wise plan of action. Living life with accepting not only the bad but bearing down your focus upon the good is far, far more beneficial.
Speaking from experience, fury and wrath are not two things of anger's domain one should toy with for any extended period in their life. Not letting them consume you makes all things travel that much more fluidly.
Simple, common wisdom I suppose, but I still find myself surprised about the petty vengeance and anger a lot hold over nothing - careless words, for example.
Speaking from experience, fury and wrath are not two things of anger's domain one should toy with for any extended period in their life. Not letting them consume you makes all things travel that much more fluidly.
Simple, common wisdom I suppose, but I still find myself surprised about the petty vengeance and anger a lot hold over nothing - careless words, for example.
I am well, certainly better off than you had been from those tests I imagine, all things considered overall.
As for my presence here, no - I am not a recurring aspect. I simply found an out of character topic interesting enough to foster investigation.
As for now, I am off to rest - my day begins again in just a few hours, sadly. Enjoy your evening.
As for my presence here, no - I am not a recurring aspect. I simply found an out of character topic interesting enough to foster investigation.
As for now, I am off to rest - my day begins again in just a few hours, sadly. Enjoy your evening.
Most often, when my name is actually shortened, I am simply called the Harbinger.
Again, call me what you prefer, as Fero certainly works - I do not take offense to it, it is simply one I have not heard before. Creative.
Again, call me what you prefer, as Fero certainly works - I do not take offense to it, it is simply one I have not heard before. Creative.
I do imagine you address yourself most often as Cara, so I do not believe it to be too ironic. However, if Fero suits what you would call me, so be it.
I can't imagine you owe anyone an apology for any reason - particularly that - but your words are noted. Hopefully now you needn't any more, further.
I can't imagine you owe anyone an apology for any reason - particularly that - but your words are noted. Hopefully now you needn't any more, further.
Greetings, Cara.
I cannot say I have heard my name interpreted in that way. But I digress, you are very correct - the Guild as a collective is always a lively, positive distraction. Particularly from the less enjoyable daily elements.
I cannot say I have heard my name interpreted in that way. But I digress, you are very correct - the Guild as a collective is always a lively, positive distraction. Particularly from the less enjoyable daily elements.
Two weeks... two whole weeks of nothing but PowerPoint and presentations.
At least the Guild always proves interesting.
At least the Guild always proves interesting.
There's a difference between being "evil" and "eeeeeviiiil"; the latter is quite insane in concept, as how many people (short of those truly mad) do things because "I'm evil and this is what evil people do." I've heard it best explained as everyone is the hero of their own story, which is both fair enough and accurate enough. Most stereotyped villains have no motives really but evil, or their motives are so transparent and phony that they are just hollow excuses to not come across as two-dimensional.
The awesome, great villains?
As stated before, the "good" bad guy - or really, the antagonist done well - has a valid reason and purpose for what it is they do, or have rationalized it in a way within their mind. For some, their conclusion might be illogical, making the villain's thought process flawed or showing signs of obvious mental illness. Others? Others are that grey area, wherein they might just be right. They might actually be the "good" guy. Some might skirt being more obvious in that realm by making what I would call as "decidedly evil actions".
It isn't often, for example, that a heroic ideal is to kill the "bad" guy. A lot of morality teaches (most) society to provide mercy or grace on someone and while it isn't always followed through, a lot of notable characters flat out refuse to kill a villain on moral grounds alone - for better and worse, no less.
But the "villain"? You can name any number of reasons or come up with conclusions as to why the character does what he or she does. If done well they're not a villain so much anymore as just the "antagonist". They're not really the "bad" guy per say, but certainly aren't on the side of the (often) obvious "heroes" and or protagonists.
That said, do I love the antagonist? Absolutely. My favorite archetype to write for is the non-heroic antihero whose goals are morally ambiguous as to if they're actually right or wrong. It feels the most natural and credible. Certainly more so than "eeeeeviiiil!". As an added note on this portion, it strikes - myself at least - as most "evil" when a character who truly is ambiguous does terrible, horrible things but rationalizes it to the point they accept it and then gleefully employ it. Sadly, that is fairly common in the real world too.
The awesome, great villains?
As stated before, the "good" bad guy - or really, the antagonist done well - has a valid reason and purpose for what it is they do, or have rationalized it in a way within their mind. For some, their conclusion might be illogical, making the villain's thought process flawed or showing signs of obvious mental illness. Others? Others are that grey area, wherein they might just be right. They might actually be the "good" guy. Some might skirt being more obvious in that realm by making what I would call as "decidedly evil actions".
It isn't often, for example, that a heroic ideal is to kill the "bad" guy. A lot of morality teaches (most) society to provide mercy or grace on someone and while it isn't always followed through, a lot of notable characters flat out refuse to kill a villain on moral grounds alone - for better and worse, no less.
But the "villain"? You can name any number of reasons or come up with conclusions as to why the character does what he or she does. If done well they're not a villain so much anymore as just the "antagonist". They're not really the "bad" guy per say, but certainly aren't on the side of the (often) obvious "heroes" and or protagonists.
That said, do I love the antagonist? Absolutely. My favorite archetype to write for is the non-heroic antihero whose goals are morally ambiguous as to if they're actually right or wrong. It feels the most natural and credible. Certainly more so than "eeeeeviiiil!". As an added note on this portion, it strikes - myself at least - as most "evil" when a character who truly is ambiguous does terrible, horrible things but rationalizes it to the point they accept it and then gleefully employ it. Sadly, that is fairly common in the real world too.
© 2007-2026