Status

Recent Statuses

4 yrs ago
Current Masses are always breeding grounds of psychic epidemics.
4 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
5 yrs ago
One cannot live from anything except what one is.
5 yrs ago
The slave to virtue finds the way as little as the slave to vices.
5 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

@Vilageidiotx

As I am aware that was what the administration at the time had their policy of. In either circumstance, that does not change the fact it negatively impacted those factors I mentioned prior, which was only the concerns I was talking about or giving priority to. I have to agree without doubt that the American public's resistance to back its own global endeavors since the Korean War are a factor too; the United States is not fond of occupying or holding territory.

To refer to the vetting issue, the concerns are different both in role and execution. You are correct that Europe faces a different and unavoidable aspect of the threat, but the United States is still severely lacking in terms of proactive fundamentals of foreign national circulation control. Terrorism, by its very function and in this case as a political and ideological effort, does not need mass numbers to gain effect; you cannot equate school shootings to acts of violence which have a specific target and effect under these criteria. Radical Islam employs terrorism as a means to cow, enfeeble and panic its targets, not to cause sizable injury or loss. It affects the morale of a populace to help gain compliance.

And yes, it should be no secret the Obama administration was far from anything "peace loving" in action compared to their word.

To address the "Europe is a caliphate." comment, I explicitly and openly remarked that was not my belief or understanding. No less, I never once claimed forced Islamic conversion through means like those of coercion, duress or threats. What I said was, it is their goal to change the dynamics of the populace to be sympathetic to their cause while actively pursuing advancement of their extreme religious agenda. The "Fall of Europe" is not a literal action where these people are taking the countries by force or storm, but because they are actively subverting traditional European law and values. Radicals have no interest in integration into European, or even American, society.

With response to the perceived threat of nationalism, it isn't even on the metaphorical radar in terms of credible threats that pose catastrophic consequences for the United States and or foreign nations. In fact, some of the technologies you are alluding to are the very reason there is an environment of deterrence over that of aggression. I also need mention that these policies change with each administration, at least in the United States, but to date none of these policies since the 1960s have elevated the concern for those actually involved. In short, the danger of a World War does not lie in your superpowers like the United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom or any of those who conscribe to nationalist policies in them. Your most likely conflicts to expand to a larger theatre are cliché at this point, to which I imagine you know the reference.

And by expand I mean multiple nations waging the war.

But I digress, if you want a basic level assessment of the Alt-Right and the Trump movement, they are not considered a threat to security or safety. In fact, Antifa and its associates fulfill more of those criteria and are becoming increasingly more important in that scope and spectrum. What will come of this? Likely nothing. Both factions, even politically, are not extreme enough to gain enough power to severely leverage or alter the scale. Yes, even the Trump administration is not that powerful or successful despite the opinions of both sides, from those who believe he is Hitler to those who think he's the Messiah. The American pride movement is nothing that was not already present, the difference being it was mobilized by being spoken down to and socially oppressed by its peers; the pendulum now is swinging the other way.

The left is mainly driven by a fear of pogroms in this case. Nobody wants sharia law, but not everybody sees sharia law hiding behind every fence post, so for many people this bloated threat-of-Islam rhetoric seems like the a request for another Final Solution type thing.
Vilageidiotx

And this is why there is no such thing as Islamophobia.

This is the desired, intentional effect of a campaign of terrorism. By design, as I had mentioned earlier, acts of terror are committed to cause panic and fear. This belief and perception, as well as the propagation of the myth that people might consider this reasonable or that some large amount of the population finds it credible, is part of its finer mechanism. It is to create an "us versus them" environment where, in this case, some people sympathize with the radicals and aid them or conspire against them and become "the other extreme". This is more or less a textbook execution of that.

To answer on your closing, I agree from an economic and security angle the stagnation of any market is a danger, although a rebound and both a dip are coming in the relative future; the dip, or rather two dips I know of, are not as concerning as the past, but they do align at a bad time. The rebound I am more skeptical of because, as with others in our age group, a "promising future economy" is usually met with suspicion and rightfully so.

The division on racial lines and Right versus Left, at least in the United States, I believe to be a self-aggrandizing effort. It has been and still is being used to drive political points, of which have only become more exaggerated with time. The "Alt-Right", not to be confused with the actual Alt-Right, or those you see now making up the distinctive political right that helped get Donald Trump elected, in large do not care about the matters of race; they go so far to treat it as a joke now, which further polarizes their opposition in the Far Left that believe in the tenants of social justice.

Again, I cite my earlier concern that domestic terror, to include that political focused as in this case, is in fact likely. I legitimately fear that during some demonstration or incident there will be an attack. Based on what I know, the Far Left is the most likely attacker, which only brings ill omen from the regular right, "Alt-Right" and the Alt-Right. I say this because any such transaction will only prove them "right" and with a right-leaning government, potentially lead to a heavy handed albeit needed response, which will provoke more backlash.

My mindset and talent is in defense, so it is no surprise I see it form this lens. What worries me is that I can see it at all and said, "Maybe." with any amount of reliability in the impulse. That is what concerns me and that is why I believe these things.
I have reason to believe she's stable now, @Gordian Nought, @Hekazu.
Was the priest insane?

They had undergone all of this elaborate effort to just scratch by and gain an opportunity to capture one of these raiders alive and she drives an arrow into their leg with a weapon capable of piercing or splintering bone; the same sort of weapon one hunts large game with. Unsurprisingly, the woman dropped the moment the stabilization of blood became uneven in her veins and the half-blood warrior collided with her in his characteristic warcry, throwing her to the ground and at a point of disadvantage; the crimson of her person followed suit and spattered on to the low lying grass.

The huntsman in all of this was not far behind, dropping the sword and removing a knife from his person instead before becoming crouched by her side.

Brannor knew well what went wrong here, other than shooting her with an arrow, so what followed was the cutting of the captive's hood from her cloak and its conversion into a loop around the injured leg, not much more than a hand higher where the arrow struck. Once the man found that point, he cinched, only then to break the arrow in twain and take the shaft's remains; it too became a bar now atop the cloth, with the rotations of his hands clamping it down. When he finished, he tucked the material within itself so not to come loose.

"That should cease the bleeding..." Brannor's voice was punctuated with frustration when he completed his crude but effective woodsman talent, dressing the rest of the wound thereafter.

When he finished, still crouched by her side, he returned the knife to its sheath on his waist, letting Orchid do the rest as he seemed so intent on.


@Hekazu@Ryonara@Lucius Cypher@Gordian Nought@Norschtalen
All this talk of the radical Islamic threat is giving me a nice mid 2000's vibe. Broad swathes of the West are going to implement Sharia law any day now ect ect.


When there are government and law enforcement no-go zones in France, sexual assault numbers elevated in Sweden, laws that target Islamophobia and "hate speech" new to the books in Canada and mass, uncontrolled, and extensive illegal immigration by mostly male refugees who refuse to conform to their new country's customs across portions of Europe, I find this to be a completely different game and set of stakes than it was. That is what spurred me to make the claim of an "evolving threat".

And to note for the record, no, radicals are not likely to do so now, but based upon the numbers currently in play with regard to Europe, they will advocate it in the relative future and resist external, national laws and request exception for themselves; they already have, although their success is still slower going.
What are we talking about specifically? Most of the things that happened in the Obama administration were following a pattern that has been going on for some time. That he failed to put out the fire is completely true, but the fire has been burning for a while now.


There was a distinct shift in doctrine and execution of aspects vital to stability, security and reliability. The first factor is one of the most obvious, in which I mean I point to the neglect of the Korean Peninsula, the expansion of ISIS and its evolutions, the interactions with Iran, ignoring of Israel and of course the on going diplomatic problem which has become Turkey and greater Europe. I will reiterate that this is not leveled squarely on the Obama administration, but under that extended period territory gained all but vanished. They had many opportunities to improve these elements not on a prospect of globalism or "unity", but of national interests; they did not, as was their policy.

The next element is security, which is one that can only be discussed to varying lengths, but the lacking of secured borders, extensive screening and vetting of foreign nationals, and a failure to fight a dynamic threat at its core has escalated the odds (as we have seen with the increased issues of detection for electronic devices). It is sad to comment on, but vehicle ramming type attacks, knife attacks and similarly cheap, expedient, efficient means will continue to rise to. More notably, to address the issue of "nuclear terrorism" that is an extremely unlikely scenario, what is more likely is an improvised radiological device that contaminates an area after detonation because of its psychological, not physical, potential; all of this stems from an eroded environment lacking a focus on physical national security.

As a side note, the real threat of radical Islam is the conversion of the non-native populace and conditioning them to their customs or forcing them to abide laws foreign to their land. This is considered by some to be an "extreme" statement, but it is one I believe to be accurate because the radical Islamic leaders have realized, as a relative whole no matter their particular leaning on Wahhabism, that they cannot alter the strategic level without doing so. Looking at Europe as my point of reference, with its absolute and continued collapse between this factor and a broken economy, I believe it safe to say the mainland might be regrettably lost for the foreseeable future.

But I digress, last is the tenant of reliability, which is to say politically and militarily, the United States lost immense footing. The readiness of the armed services dwindled, its numbers waned, its morale dipped and its prominence again faded. It was not made a priority in a time where the enemy is active and in many forms and faces. This is not to say it cannot be effective, but it is not to the standard expected of it. This was compounded by the insult to injury given where the military and related services were not backed, most infamously in the Benghazi scenario. That example has been beat to death, but it will stand as testament.

To transition to the current topics, the credible threat is not nationalism in any case, be it found in the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom and so on. Political ideology is not the greatest external threat to anyone and the abstract demon of capitalist society is, in fact, its saving grace. Since the end of the Second World War, the booming defense industry has continued to display technologies and developments that are on the level of science fiction... all while pinching every pretty penny it can from the pockets of taxpayers. It is just the nature of the beast; it wants to be fed. Conflict and war feed it, with those times in between when it is most hungry. However, without it, I believe we would be worse off. I also need mention that it is not even linked with nationalism in the United States, to which I can only assume you are meaning in majority.

How do I come to that conclusion? No one is under the illusion that these companies have any other objective other than to make money off of martial technology. There's not the honor and superiority of the warfighter in it, but the understanding that without their presence, the United States would be lacking some of its core military assets; air, space and cyber warfare advantages. This is not to ignore how well prepared and equipped the land or sea based elements are, but it is no secret that the future of conflict is moving smaller and larger at the same time. Realistically, the only issues I really have politically with the behemoth is that the government is terrible at making deals and prioritizing anything, especially with independent contractors or agencies, at all levels, local all the way up to federal.

The tension I mention is of a different brand and methodology, again which is why I cite it as more dangerous. The fact alone you turned to the prior references is why I use it. In this era you are seeing a portion of the American populace directly sympathize with the enemy, to the extent of supporting or defending them both in word and action. You have citizens of a country attempting to defend tenants of radical Islam, ignoring the aspects of Sharia Law alone, and welcoming fundamental elements of foreign indoctrination that make self-radicalization possible. But, this does not end there, in that you have anarchists, socialists and communists often working hand in hand with this threat spectrum, all the way down to the bystanders who tend to get in the way rather than pose any threat at all. That is what concerns me and how easy it is to carry out an act of terror because of it. With the current political and social environment, such an action would not go unnoticed and with excuse; it is dangerous waters and should put anyone involved, regardless of their political or ideological side, on edge.

A financial crisis I am not unfamiliar to, as I think all of us here are of the age to remember it and be affected by it, but it still is not nearly as concerning as a depreciation in safety and security. Not to say it is of negligible impact, but this entire lengthy ordeal was just to explain my point and rationale. It should not bear repeating, but all of this is my opinion, formulated through my experiences and personal understanding.
I have to disagree that the Obama administration years were "not really exciting by comparison", mostly because the decisions of that administration deeply eroded stability, reliability and security. Coming from a background that lives and breathes it, it became deeply troubling. To which I also make note of, owing to this field I find my upbringing from, the dangers of "nuclear fire" and a "World War" in the sense of what many outsiders think are unlikely. There has not been a more consistent, notable degredation in those areas of concern since the Cold War officially ended; the Bush administration may have had many issues, but the more recent ones caused actual harm.

Mind you I am only speaking for one particular angle because it is important to note that unless you are familiar with this area of topic, many are comfortable with saying it is "heightened" and "more likely now than it was"; it is not. The only real threat worth noting, and that of which is capable of starting a multinational war, is that of radical Islam. Not because it will ever unify into some "great caliphate", but because it has eroded many traditional understandings and dynamics of foreign nations.

Unfortunately, a more potential incident to arise in the future is from that aforementioned disdain for capitalism, especially at the youth base, and can be found on the home seat of the United States of America. By law, the acts of "protesting" you have seen have qualified in a number of cases for Use of Deadly Force and the mobilization of the National Guard in localized areas to restore order. This is unlikely to become large scale, but is on the verge of what I fear most; what we saw with the 2016 Texas incident as domestic terror that left six police officers dead.

Again, while I cannot make a threat assessment on the nature of this strictly hypothetical outcome, I believe there is reason to be deeply concerned about some of these groups who are protesting against the United States. This I believe mainly because they have demonstrated competency and willingness to use crude improvised explosive devices and mortal injury and have had minimal law enforcement leveraged against them compared to what is authorized.

In short, more people are bound to be injured or killed, for certain in Europe under increased radical Islamic pressure, and with the dangers born domestically in the United States.
Welcome to the Guild, @lostinmymind. You would be correct that we are an active forum and recently, only becoming more active and undergoing a series of updates and improvements because of it. This said, it is a very good time to join and become a member.
I am pleased you noted how wonderful a feline such as myself is, @Quoll. You have earned yourself a fair welcome here to the Guild.
@Lucius Cypher, Orchid from his previous adventure of dragon fighting, strikes me as the sort who would leap on the man and try to grapple him, given we said not to kill him and the efforts made to take him alive thus far. If that means Orchid would rather use the flat of his sword based on his reasoning, go with that.
This is not an advocacy of rushing anything, this is a matter of fact that even for a play by post tabletop, we are far behind the curve in story, mechanical progression and activity. I am understanding people have lives, that isn't my complaint, it is that with the way things have been, others have been forced to wait four, five, six or so days for one post, only to turn around and wait another four or so days for another and so on until their own turn.

That is beyond excuse. It does not take roughly two weeks to make any major plot advancement. No less, this synergizes poorly with the circumstances.

Yes, we are vastly outnumbered and lacking in preparation. It is a 1st level adventure and I would wager they wrote it that way on purpose to put us out of our league so we have a story arc. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is the fact we have virtually nothing to show for it that irritates me. We have, as I said before and will again, run into the Hollywood problem where we wedged a bunch of character elements and individual plot development into a small span of time.

Torus has been cleansed of his malady, Orchid fought a dragon, Kyra has saved her mentor and her temple, and Parum has confronted her optimism with realism. I leave myself out simply for the sake of saying that my opinion on it is biased and given my stand point, you can gather I view it as much too fast for him as well.

Some of this can be seen as revealing information and insight about them, whereas others are the sort you go and say, "That already happened for this character? At 1st level? What?" For some that might be fine, that isn't mine to judge, but that is a huge amount of ground covered all the same.

To change topics and points, I realize and state that I am aware there are different rates of posting. But again I say, is no one bothered we are still in Greenest doing the exact same thing we were doing a year ago? The biggest upset was the dragon, which I am thankful for in the meta because it shook things up. We needed something to change the story because it was, and is now back to, "Beat up bandits who give us nothing."

Is it fun? Of course. I enjoy writing combat. But I can say for myself that nothing has become dynamic about that. We are still out of spells, wandering through the woods and street, fighting enemies who have no plot relevance. People make fun of "mooks" in fantasy stories for that very reason, which I understand, but what changes is where they are and why they are. This scenario? This conflict?

It does not take a year to resolve. There is no explanation for it that would be or will be suitable. I will hear out those claims day and night, but I will not agree to them.

In rebuttal to character death, that is all fine and well that you see it that way, but some of us don't want their time wasted. I have been in this topic as with some of you for the entire year. Is it really unreasonable to say, "I have invested a lot of time and effort in this roleplay. If my character dies now at this point, I basically wasted a year of my life on a character in this topic."

Is everyone else affected? Maybe, maybe not. As you admitted they are all none too invested in each other. That comes with time, experience and progression. But it only solidifies the point of why that is such a problem and a danger. I will freely admit I would and will walk out on this game if I die, not because I "lost", but because I have only so many slots for topics on the Guild and only so much patience for my time to be spent. I know some enjoy writing for the sake of doing so, but I am here to tell a story; losing that and the stakes in it is losing everything I worked for.

I could care less about the argument of the "game stopping as a whole" because there have been plenty of times this thread has ground to a near halt. Fortunately, we have a Dungeon Master who doesn't just up and disappear, which I would say is a rare saving grace on the Guild. No less, that isn't my point or appeal, which I will state again is that if I invest time and effort into a character, spend a year of my time writing for them and advocating their angle, I am going to be pretty damn annoyed to have them die to luck of the draw because we aren't even close to the level to do anything about it.

No less, wedging in new characters feels akin to that; wedged and forced. I was so astonished and pleased to find someone actually staying when we added Torus that he became my favorite character because of it. Not that I think anyone else's character is bad, but because of the timing he appeared, followed by Kyra who managed well too. Introductions of new characters is so bad in most cases, or short lived, you see it as a Dungeons and Dragons meme on the internet.

To close, one might ask about my solution if I have so many problems, to which I will answer with this.

First, get rid of milestone and go direct to experience based. We level up when we get the points to do so. No waiting, no delaying, no hemming and hawing. It is done. If you don't update your character sheet by the next combat or check you need to make, then that is unfortunate for you; you are where you are if and when that happens.

Second, a post timeframe needs to be enforced. If you cannot post in the limit, say so in the out-of-character section with what you want or would do. We go from there. If need be, ask the Dungeon Master to please assume your role and treat you as a non-player character until you return. Or even let someone else in the party take your turn or post for you; I am truly indifferent to either, all I care about is the results of not being delayed again. Stay out long enough and you get removed from the game for inactivity.

Third, if you aren't active in the out-of-character, you aren't active in the game either. Try to pre-plan, or at least plan or discuss actions. When all of us are waiting on one or two opinions over and over again, it gets old.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet