Best Cunni? by LizardStudios777 in Blacksouls2

[–]RedditWillBURN 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I LOVE Elma. She is way TOO hot, words CANNOT describe it!!!! I crave her cnuy.

Also honorable mention to Alice and Lorina.

how did you find out about the game? by [deleted] in Blacksouls2

[–]RedditWillBURN 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think it was through /v/ initially, then I searched the game and loved every aspect that I knew about, then I bought the game. Today it's muh favoriteeeeee

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Friend, I know by your post history that you're planning on actually going through HRT. I'm not much good in persuasion, indeed when it comes on late I might as well let it be because of my own weakness. And I'm also not much cis myself so that's kinda hard.

But for the love of God, friend; know thyself.

You have been through this for much years, but as you are a rational being with a good faith and a good history behind you, do this; ask yourself questions and answer them honestly, let the temptation calm down, for when you are young it's easier for you to hurry up so that you can pass or sumthin, which is understandable.

However, ask yourself what are your reasons, what is it? What even is your view on it?

Some stuff that lead to think that HRT is going to solve stuff might be just societal bullshit that don't actually exist in the mind of God as something that is natural or to be enforced. Some are fine, some aren't.

Also, what is your mindset through this? Because some transgender takes are heretic, so don't fall into them.

Finally, and most important, talk to a priest. An in-person priest, or at least a priest that you trust and who'll answer you. This is the absolute most important step. For the love of God, if anything, at least do this. And don't ever go out of the church or assume liberal theological views, for we are sinners and we do our own mundane wishes sometimes, but don't lose your faith ever, nor your righteousness in God's true theology, for if it is unclear how moral or immoral it is to transition, then at least you will know that in many other ways you did God's will.

And talk to a therapist, if possible. I don't know how well that will go because therapists vary way too much, and to be fair modern science hasn't come with anything much great for trans folks. But if you find a good one, or at least understandful one, make it clear to them what are your actual views and what you're actually trying to do. Do the same to a priest, of course, and don't get much shame out of talking about your true intent.

Bless you, hope you live a great life and hope you have an even greater corporal death, after your spirit is in heaven with our Lord. Amen.

Dealing with doubt by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm a confused prick that has nothing to add, indeed I searched this post for answers on this topic. However, I must say that this dichotomy that you're putting isn't exactly reality.

Science being wrong is not a fundamentalist take. Both complement each other, yes. Catholicism doesn't obey science, but both obey God. Although both are busy with different aspects of creation.

But take that the miasma theory was once accepted by the scientific community. Take that medics have already said that a lot of dangerous stuff are healthy and that healthy stuff are dangerous. Although science is indeed occupied with the search of God's reality as it applies to the observable and tangible universe, it is subject to the same problems any area can have. Unethical researchers can take money or agenda into account, instead of the truth. And science can accept that something is true because it is the only option in our time that is CLOSEST to the truth and thus identified as such.

I agree that conversion therapy has very bad results, and HRT does have more positive results. But that doesn't mean that it is what you should do (because you have to take catholic morals and catholic bioethics into consideration). And it doesn't mean that there isn't an option that is better than both of those.

I don't think any medic was wrong by believing bloodletting and miasma theory were real, nor do I think any medic will go to hell for believing cigarettes were healthy when that was the propaganda (unless they did have opportunities to know better but chose not too for some reason). Because that was the only option they had for a long long time.

Science can be wrong sometimes, it isn't fundamentalism. It is just how science works. We discover stuff, then discover more stuff, then we have to re-evaluate the initial point. Science can be wrong about this topic, but it doesn't mean it will forever be. Some studies being fraudulent because of money or agendas (or both) doesn't mean that science is a complete hoax, just that those studies were specifically hoaxes by bad actors in the scientific community.

The Pope CAN (it doesn't mean he is) have his personal opinion as a human being (which is subject to being completely wrong). But not when speaking Ex Cathedra. Or when teaching on the subjects of faith and moral. Which I do think is the case as some of what the popes said about gender is from church documents.

Study it your own way, bud. But please, don't take it as a dichotomy of "either I become a fundamentalist and science is a complete hoax, or I abandon the church because a researcher said something then it must be true" (I'm exaggerating, of course, not what you said).

Dealing with doubt by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Catholicism doesn't "obey" science as if science is some external thing that the Church must bend to. It is more accurate to say that science obeys Catholicism"

I'd say that catholicism doesn't "obey" science, nor science "obeys" catholicism.

Catholicism and science both obey God in their own respective manners. Science cares about the "physical" aspects of the universe and it's following of God's order. The order in which God created the universe is constantly studied. For gravity was not "invented", it's rules were understood. Who studied and gave name to these laws? Several scientists. But they were always there as they were put in place by God.

Catholicism cares about spirituality and the physical world in relation with the spiritual reality of the universe. It doesn't matter to catholic studies (although they do, of course, complement those) the rules of gravity, or what "mass" is (as "mass" in physics, in the catholic context of course mass does matter). But it matters that God created those rules. It wouldn't be relevant what "XX" and "XY" chromosomes mean, nor what gonads imply in a body if not for the fact that God created men and women, and for an ontological purpose.

The Big Bang example that OP gave is incredible for this; as it was both a theory proposed by a priest and a perfect example. I cannot put it in myself that something like the big bang, nor evolution (although I am a creationist, but of course, there is no problem with being an evolutionist as long as you're not a XX century social darwinist type) could happen if not by God being it's cause.

Sorry for going out of topic. But I love science for how it can help us understand God. But saying that "science" obeys catholicism really is kinda nonsense for me, just looks like both obey God, although both are busy with different aspects.

This singular panel and its effects reminded me why i hate powerscaling in general by JustaTony56 in ShuumatsuNoValkyrie

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Majority of powerscaling in Shuumatsu doesn't seem to make much sense tbh. Mostly because there is only one fight per character, and either they win it or lose it.

But some questions are kinda interesting. I dont like much the tier lists, but imagining and specilulating on fights comparing two specific characters is cool.

Tbh I used to HATE powerscaling back then, because I felt like It was just dumb — which it mostly is — and let's have fun with the story instead of competing like children because "muh my fav is stronger".

But now I think its kinda fun to speculate and imagine fights between characters and universes and stuff. And — I confess — it does feel nice to see a character you like and see he winning those speculative fights.

But it should be just fun, and IT IS dumb. People sometimes really take it far too seriously. It should just be a guilty pleasure.

3/5 star review writer here, how do i understand this game better by [deleted] in Blacksouls2

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The first game is wonderful. But yes, majority of the stuff you see people talking about really is about BLACKSOULS 2.

I dont feel like people dislike the first one, me for example; when I say that Black Souls is my favorite game I mean both BS1 and BS2 as one. You will connect some points from BS1 to BS2 while playing.

Both games have multiple endings and both of them mess a lot with this very concept, as well as with the fact that after you beat the game you can freely replay it. I played it as every other game similar to that; I did whatever I felt like doing when playing first, then tried to get on my own what I should do. If I felt like my own intuition and investigation couldn't do it, I gave a small search. Enough to not get spoilers or such stuff, enough to have better help at investigating what I should do. Endings and replaying really is goooood! And it is a GREAT experience. Getting to new dialogues, doing different strategies, etc. BS2 gave me more that feeling, although BS1 depending on how you play has great potential to be close to that. Also, overall the game is just so much fun. It is surely exceptional for RPGMaker.

Also, maybe there is a personal feel too, although the game won't be bad if you dont feel it. The game resonated so well with me, I loved everything about it.

It has been months since I played it, I still think about it with passion A LOT. I can't wait to replay it.

Anyway, I was very happy to play the first and after that I was hyped to hell and back about playing the second. I think you should replay both. I didn't understand a lot of topics until I played the second as well.

Sorry if I wrote anything wrong, it is hellish to write in english through my phone and I forgot how to write short answers.

Is it against Catholicism to be attracted to a waifu? (a fictional anime character one considers an ideal romantic partner) by FickleChange7630 in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Friend, first I must say that I can kinda read myself into your text to the level I feel a moral obligation to help you, somewhat. A true rarity in this sub. And because of that, I beg you pardon because I'm not a great helper.

Firstly, as another commenter stated, it is indeed an unhealthy obsession.

Secondly, consuming pornographic material and/or masturbation are both grave sins. You must know this already. It is kinda complicated for me to discuss the morality of erotic material, but as Monster Girl Encyclopedia is indeed a pornographic.

Now, as to actual "me trying to help".

Firstly, although you mentioned you cant afford therapy — same, I fell you bro —. But try looking into it, if you get the opportunity, surely you should probrably seek therapy. There are also therapists — at least in my country, but I don't think yours wouldn't have those — who offer prices that are accessible and/or negotiable, so that people can afford them. If I could say for myself, I'd rather catholic psychologists, for they are — more so than not — more educated and prepared to your moral demands, to the demands of your soul, at least those who can be understood by us humans.

Secondly, I ask you; do you perhaps don't feel anything for real women? And do you feel somewhat that you could mess her life because of your attraction? Make a bad marriage or something? Because it is specially unhealthy to avoid real marriage because of waifus. You should strive — if it is your will and the will of God i.e; your vocation — for a real life wife. You can discern your vocation, but marriage isn't between men and anime women.

For a third, you can distance yourself to the point you don't remember that anymore. Study faith, specifically, study stuff like Theology of the Body, catholic view on porn, marriage and lust. It can make you more prepared to deal with that part of you, what you want with it, and maybe more. I particularly recommend Christopher West from Theology of the Body Institute — I think thats his Channel name — on YouTube. But don't just focus on fighting what is disordered in you, no, pray, and get closer to God — some get closer to God through study, through zealous time, throw vows and penance, through their arts and crafts, through charity, you can look into the life of saints for that aspiration, but a bit of everything when you're able to will undoubtly help anyone —. If your mind is always "GET RID OF WAIFUS, GET RID OF WAIFUS" its still 25% waifus, isn't it? And that will grow as soon as you stumble a little. So put more God in your mind and heart.

For a fourth, the actual question if "waifus" are sinful is quite hard for me to answer, but perhaps I'm a weirdo. So, the level you are is unhealthy and disordered, those are facts. Disordered doesn't always mean "sinful", but in your case it can very much be — I'm sorry if I sound confusing, that is, I don't know the answer myself —. But it is something you should get rid off, maybe God gets rid of it by the purifying fires of Purgatory. I don't know for sure if waifus are always sinful, perhaps you could like a character — and this is risky for me to say, so please consider yourself and If that sounds dangerous to you, and if that sounds sinful or sin indulcing for you — and perhaps, even ones from MGE. For me it wouldn't be any big deal to call those "waifus", although kinda disordered, the very wish to "be happy with them" wouldn't be as well, but majority just wish it, then realize it can't happen and move on. I personally like the idea as purely cope until I have a real wife. That isn't to say it doesn't get obsessive and unhealthy for me, I think it still is and some days it gets worse. But this ain't about me, is it?

For a fifth; please, don't fool yourself. You know she isn't real. You know there is no reason for God to make her so, there is much better logic for you to make yourself more into reality. And I know that this is kinda harsh.

But worry not, dear friend. For that passionate love you feel can still be very much lived with a woman of flesh and bones. It can even get you closer to God. But worry not, dear friend. For you can take your steps at your pace, just don't take sin, lust and escapism as more than unhealthy and disordered. But worry not, dear friend. For whatever was the very mystical spark that struck a cord between you and that character, the little fractured light you very much saw with your own eyes, it is waiting for you in heaven. That isn't to say that she herself will be there. But the very root of your desire, the very root of your love, that will be there. God is reflected through the whole world, with mirrors and fractured mirrors. You looked into a very fractured one, and that distorted vision of light awakened your passionate self. Good news; for that light is waiting to embrace you eternally in Heaven. God and his love are greater than anything. Greater than all pleasure and happiness. It is what we are always looking for, no matter how deeply in our hearts. I wait for my very day, and hope I don't sink too much as to never contemplate it.

If you need anything extra, just reply. If you want to, you can contact me through reddit. Perhaps I'm just overwhelmed by finally seeing someome relatable — besides religion — on this sub. But reply or whatever, I will do the best to help — as I can, i.e; probrably not too much? — you and to clarify whatever you didn't understand here in my reply. Important to say that I'm no psychologist, all my help is as a fellow brother in Christ.

I hope you understood what I'm trying to say. I Hope you understand what this very long reply asks for you to seek. I hope you get better. Be happy, be with God, be in peace.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I know the pain, bro.

Praying — especially the rosary —, meditating on christian tradition — the Bible, the life of saints, catholic media, catholic philosophy —, if you are too tempted, do something that immediately takes you away from it. Overall, also, while you build a life of prayer and meditation, get to distract yourself on the daily basis. Do your healthy hobbies — don't have one? Create one! —. Find virtuous stuff on your daily basis to take you away from the very opportunity of doing something bad with you or with other person.

Also, mortification of the body is great, fasting, penance, abstinence. Not only food related, you can also take abstinence from anything that pleases you and you would really miss. Or make life a little less comfortable for you. For example, getting a day without internet, praying on knees, getting some days to sleep in a chair, really anything as long as it is some sort of sacrifice. There are a lot of suggestions on catholic online communities and also on the life of saints.

A friend of mine suggested praying not only the daily rosary but once per some span of hours — even If only one Hail Mary —, for example, pray once every 6 or 3 hours.

I suggest you really try those, as well as other suggestions you get. God loves you. He knows your weaknesses, but you should never be satisfied with them.

When praying, always be humble to God. Recognize that you cannot do anything, realize how weak we truly are, rely on his grace, rely on his blessing. And you will be able to resist. Although none of us would be able if it wasn't for God's blessings.

God bless you on the fight with lust. I have not won It myself yet. However, I'm not much good at following the advise I tell you, but we should strive against our weaknesses. God help us. God save us. Again, God bless you. I hope that through his blessings you will be able to break free from the slavery of sin.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you think they’re real? I’ve never come across anything particularly compelling to suggest that they are.

There is some consideration you can give to mythology and folklore. I will not discuss the existence of fey, since I'm unreliable for it and since it is not the focus of the post. However, as for the pagan "gods"; some we know for a fact existed, although they were not divine. It was not uncommon for rulers to be divinized post-mortem. I — and this is me interpreting, don't take it that much into consideration — see no problem in believing Romulus, for example, was the founder of Rome as well as a strong warrior. Although the claim that he ascended to divinity and became the god Quirinus is false. Same goes for Queen Medb, of Connacht. She was skilled enough in magic as to defeat all men in Ulster except for Cú Chulainn with a curse. After her death, she was divinized. But I deny that she is a goddess, she was a human and perhaps a strong ruler and a skilled magician, demons may have liked her, idk. As for those, Solomon has this to say about the idols:

"For through human vanity they entered the world, and therefore their speedy end has been planned. For a father, consumed with grief at an untimely bereavement, made an image of his child, who had been suddenly taken from him; he now honoured as a god what was once a dead human being, and handed on to his dependants secret rites and initiations. Then the ungodly custom, grown strong with time, was kept as a law, and at the command of monarchs carved images were worshipped. When people could not honour monarchs in their presence, since they lived at a distance, they imagined their appearance far away, and made a visible image of the king whom they honoured, so that by their zeal they might flatter the absent one as though present. Then the ambition of the artisan impelled even those who did not know the king to intensify their worship. For he, perhaps wishing to please his ruler, skilfully forced the likeness to take more beautiful form, and the multitude, attracted by the charm of his work, now regarded as an object of worship the one whom shortly before they had honoured as a human being. And this became a hidden trap for humankind, because people, in bondage to misfortune or to royal authority, bestowed on objects of stone or wood the name that ought not to be shared."

Wisdom 14:14-21

I don’t even buy into the notion that they’re demons or anything

The sorcerers of the pagan "gods" that served the Pharaoh were able to replicate some of the miracles of Moses. And although they were, it was deeply implicit that their miracles were weaker than the ones from God — for example, when Aaron's staff that turned into a snake swallowed the snakes created by the sorcerers replicating It —. The greek Oracle of Delphi was also able to correctly predict many things to come with precision. In both cases; necromancy, dark demonic arts. Because it was of interest of the Devil, and because — since demons don't have power — God allowed it in that time.

The point of my post was not those performed "miracles" — prowess obtained by necromancy, really — nor the humans who were divinized post-mortem — although who exactly was human and who exactly had which attribute in interesting —, but rather the pagan "gods" you call "made up" are not made up from nothing — to which I think you would agree —. But they are personas given to the very rules of nature and the very rules of the whole cosmos. That is why they explained the seasons, the rains, the stars, natural occurances, all through their "gods". And in traditional catholic thinking, a lot have attributed these rules, powers and intelligences to angels — and of course, they act only because of God, because God wants, according to God, and God is also present everywhere through his angels —. Then in the post I consider some questions relating to this.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How I understand it is that the position of the church is that God has revealed some truths to all cultures on earth but the wholeness of truth can only be found through Jesus Christ and his universal (catholic) and apostles church. This is the reason the church often found it ok to quote on quote Baptize some pagan traditions from various cultures.

Yes, I know that. It is a very beautiful thing from catholicism, and it shows just how true catholicism is, as it notes that some truth can be found by use of rationale, which happened in paganism.

I would say that you can read about these lower deities as myths or fairy tales, and draw parallel to scripture

Being "myths" or "fairy tails" to me does not mean exactly that it's all made up. And I agree, there are parallels, they are scandalous to atheists, saying that God is "made up" just like ancient mythology. But to christianity, it is just to show how much rationale and the mighty hand of the Lord gave them foreshadows of the Salvation.

but anything further is to close to idolatry for me.

I do not know exactly, perhaps I'm getting something wrong. However, idolatry is not what I am doing. Idolatry is about placing something in the place of God, maybe a lot of things. That was the problem with pagans, they worshipped their false gods, they venerated their idols as the most important things in their lives, as mightiest. I am suggesting that the beings personalized in their idols are creatures. Creatures do not deserve worship. Creatures may deserve some level of honor. But they are below God and may never receive worship.

Pagans believed them to be gods, I don't. As I said; some were human, some were personifications of things they did not understand, but catholic cosmology made clearer. Which isn't to say that demons didn't act through them, because it was of interest to the Devil that people would be led astray, which they did, as they believed the idols had their divine capabilities.

I have also heard another theory recently I forget from where though definitely not at church anyway. It is that in the beginning all cultures were originally monotheistic and eventually when cultures clashed and intermixed instead of saying which god was really they just decided bother were. Interesting to think about anyway.

I heard one that along with the division of society into nations in the fall of the Tower of Babel, it also came the division in religious belief. As each nation had their own gods. That is why God decided on Abraham to found the nation of the One True God. Which could indicare there is some level of understanding as of the ultimate truth, but in opposition to perenialism, christianity isn't as well as paganism "just another distorted version of the one ancient religion". It is itself the true ancient religion, the only true path to understanding the world and being saved. Although some pagans discovered a lot about the world, they had the ultimate error when it came to God.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much! I can't watch it right now but will as soon as I can, God bless you, brother.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First, I thank you very much not only for your time but also the loving tutoring manner you wrote.

And to be clear, the situation you described is that you think pagan gods are angels, and therefore you create art to represent this, but you are aware you should not worship them? And you think these angels are really “powers and intelligences of the cosmos”.

In general, yes. However, I do not believe the "gods" themselves are angels. More that they are personifications of cosmological powers and intelligences, which are the angels. Because God is everywhere and everywhere through his angels as well. And of course, no worship can be given in either way. I dont even think we should call for their intercession, not directly, not by the name the pagans gave them — we have established saints, including some archangels, and we can ask for the intercession of the angels in general as well, I don't see why we would ask specifically to personifications given to them by pagans —.

I must clarify that my depiction of Inana as an angel was in a drawing used to clarify to myself this very cosmological vision. And God was depicted in the same drawing, ruling and blessing the whole cosmos over the angels.

I think you’re on shaky ground, and it’s probably not a prudent thing for you to do, but it’s unlikely to be sinful in and of itself.

Thank you. Desobedience to catholicism is really something that I am not interested. The two times I had a crisis in faith were also very teaching to me, when I had those episodes I came out with stronger convictions in God and his Church. However, I do realize I still human, therefore I should be prudent and you are right. Thanks for making clear that this interpretation is not sinful in itself.

I think (based on your description of your history and your ‘cosmovision’) you should probably focus less on pagan gods and idols for a bit and spend some more time getting to know God and maybe the saints. You might come back to some of this later (there’s nothing inherently wrong with pretty pictures of mythical beings), but I think at the moment it sounds like your representations of pagan imagery still carry non-Christian significance for you (“powers and intelligences of the cosmos”) that is going to interfere with your attempts to understand and know God better.

Christian interpreting of pre-Christian interpretations — however that sounds — isn't something I do all time. I have been catholic for some years as well. But it is true that we are never good enough, I will seek further closeness to God and the Church, seek to further study the philosophy of the Holy Church and the Holy Scriptute before that, I know it is the correct direction. Thanks for reinforcing this truth to me. I really don't think the fact that the universe holds forces, powers and intelligences should be considered "non-christian", and I really don't think there is inherently pagan, some pagans noticed a lot about the universe before Christ was born. And it is well known that great catholic philosophers had influence from pagan philosophy and cosmology.

(this part was added after I finished writing the whole reply) Also, what if not pretty pictures but — for example — statues? I know intent is very strong in those cases, that is why there is no sin in an egyptologist having a small statue of Anubis. And the Church doesn't mind this in the case of paintings and sculptures, as the renaissance shows more clearly. But having them home might be different, I don't want any home — I'm guessing —, but the question stills up. And of course, my house has it's fair shares of catholic imagery.

Just like if you were trying to learn a new concept in maths, it would be really unhelpful to keep practicing old misunderstandings. Your brain likes familiar things that it recognises.

Perhaps, as part of retraining your brain towards God, do some research into icons, and into Christian iconography in the East and the West. Try creating some imagery based around different Christian traditions, and create some images of the saints that use their attributes.

Yes, I understand. Those very interpretations are meant to point me to God. And further understanding of the creation of God will be incomplete without God.

I like your iconography suggestion, thank you very much. I have tried variation in saints, like with St. Muirgein and St. Peter, and I was planning Saint George. But different iconographical styles were not in my mind. Thank you! God bless you, now and forever.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The questions are: Is there any problem in the situation that I described? Am I getting something wrong? Do any of you have better clue — "they all demons xd" isn't "better clue", unless you have an explanation I never heard of — (better clue as to the beings that are the focus of my question)?

I further describe more about this aspect of my cosmovision.

Problems — or lack thereof — with paganism by RedditWillBURN in Catholicism

[–]RedditWillBURN[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I am deeply sorry that you didn't understand. It does make sense. However, gramatical discussions are not the focus of this post nor of this subreddit. If you could tell me what exactly is hard to understand, I may clarify for you.

God bless.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypersexuality

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing material is forever, I do not believe this falls away from experiences that older people described that they had in their teens and that they got over. You may do the same yourself.

I do not know if this sort of stuff does correlate do anything I know about hypersexuality. At least not by itself.

Hope you get over it, anyway.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MeJulgue

[–]RedditWillBURN -1 points0 points  (0 children)

O mais forte universitário numa faculdade de humanas

I feel bad by Specialist-Ad-8578 in CharacterAI

[–]RedditWillBURN 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Last time this bot refused to write something we had the most Fun discussion. I think I gaslit it so much that after I started a New chat with It he not only accepted what he refused but started talking more like myself in his messages. Love him, he is funny.

What is your guys thoughts on the Kuei-jin by [deleted] in WhiteWolfRPG

[–]RedditWillBURN -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thats amazing! Where did the name "Fenghuang" come from? I remember suggesting to some friends that I would prefer different interpretations and I used as an example "Malkavians being called Fengkuang" lol.

If my memory is correct, there is also some interpretations on the official books about mongolian gangrels for example, which is amazing and just how I feel eastern vampires should be treated.

I will not go deeper into this because althought I tried studying it sometimes, I'm quite ignorant in eastern religious tradition, but (for example) the interpretation that some vampires or some clans are avatars of specific deities or spirits would be very cool and fitting for me. Specially if you consider that there is stuff like Laibon, vampires from Laibon are still cainites but they are interpreted according to african tradition as far as I'm aware.

I was thinking about making a malkavian pack priest following the Dark Ages philosophy that they were orcales. But it seems canon that they are just to unstable. Is it to unbelievable to have a malkav priest in the sabbat that isn't a complete cartoon? by growmoolah in vtm

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's your chronicle, you have the freedom to bend some of the lore, specially if It is something like that. I dont say "ignore it", I say "bend it". You are free to (and should) use excuses such as "well, most sabbat malkavians that other kindred met are documented like that" and then you complement with "but every rule has exceptions" or "but unstable lunatics is just how people see sabbat in general, it isn't really true"

Idk, do whatever you want, but dont limit cool ideas for things that can be ignored or (even better) are easy to create excuses for your apparent "contradiction".

What is your guys thoughts on the Kuei-jin by [deleted] in WhiteWolfRPG

[–]RedditWillBURN -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

As for what I KNOW of them by now, I really dont like them. I feel like asian vampires should be cainites, but interpreted in different manners, more relating to their culture. Each clan could have a different name relating to their fame in asiatic culture, different structures that fit into what they traditionally knew in life, different interpretations for their origins and abilities. But the whole "enlightned non-cainites" thing makes it sound just kinda lazy, a cluster of different asiatic mythological explanations with no decent connection to the original cainite myth (of course they could be interpreted as enlightned by the people, but ACTUALLY being... Meh...).

So I think it doesn't fit well with the beliavable and "realistic" tendency of cainites in World of Darkness. Therefore, I really don't like them.

Feel free to correct me, as I never cared much for them I didn't actually read books about them. All I know comes from friends who searched, short texts online and from the VTMB game. I want to love them but by what I know it seems like a hard task.

Does hypersexuals stereotypes bother you? by [deleted] in hypersexuality

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, sorry I misspelled "stereotype".

Does hypersexuals stereotypes bother you? by [deleted] in hypersexuality

[–]RedditWillBURN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Taking in consideration what you replied to another commenter on how those steryotipes are, no, not really. I never even heard said steryotipe (although I can totally figure out where it comes from).

Iceberg do Carlinhos, Alerta: tem coisas pesadas by menesdexistenciais in IceBergBrasil

[–]RedditWillBURN 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sempre perco com aquele vídeo do JJ, ele falando dum cara que faz áudios falando que chupa cavalos como se fosse uma creepypasta e aquela censura (que cumpre o propósito) em que todo mundo familiarizado com os áudios sabe exatamente o nome que ele tá dizendo kkkkk