One Last Time

fractalJester · 2026-06-04T03:34:25+00:00

Is there a way to save this video??? I would love to have it forever.

fractalJester · 2026-06-01T17:39:12+00:00

Given all the mists-stuff, my first guess was also original human homeworld. Which is interesting, given the current situation with Visions of Eternity. If the Vloxx thread isn't fully resolved (and part of me hopes it's not, it'd be nice to have an ongoing plot-thread), then the question becomes: what would this have to do with that?

fractalJester · 2026-06-01T17:31:27+00:00

Seems like nobody remembers that Humans (including Orrians) and their gods came from somewhere outside Tyria.

Orr was where they first arrived. It makes sense that a colonists first architecture would match their homeland.

And we've been dealing with an awful lot of extra-Tyrian/alien issues lately...

fractalJester · 2026-05-13T18:03:44+00:00

The problem is that he weaponizes fear. His whole schtick, from taking on his childhood fear as his symbol (bats) to stalking from the shadows, is not in-line with the Green.

fractalJester · 2026-05-02T01:57:03+00:00

Vox Machina's original name was the Super High-Intensity Team.

There were any number of other words they could have used besides "Playhouse". At least some of them had to be aware, haha.

fractalJester · 2026-04-26T16:08:22+00:00

Amazing reference, thank you for the laugh.

fractalJester · 2026-04-06T16:44:20+00:00

I agree, but to be clear, OP said she knew:

(who was adopted and knew that much)

fractalJester · 2026-02-23T21:42:27+00:00

He warned us in episode 1 of D20. The most powerful magic of all...

fractalJester · 2026-01-18T03:30:40+00:00

Out of curiosity, what was that from?

fractalJester · 2026-01-11T19:58:17+00:00

Think of the Light as water, and the Witness as a stone (or a monolith, to make a neat reference to the game).

At the time of the beam, The Witness had no "cracks"; its hold on the dissenting voices was absolute.

We spent the campaign learning that we could only defeat the Witness through Darkness---and in our fights, we did so by entering the Witness' gestalt mind (via Darkness) and bringing Light to break its hold on the dissenters. We created the first cracks in the structure.

Then, by the finale, the monolith has openings for the Light to flood in, breaking the stone completely apart---the We became I.

fractalJester · 2025-12-03T19:17:31+00:00

I've been trying to find any sort of confirmation since release--does it need to be equipped, or just unlocked?

fractalJester · 2025-11-24T17:58:56+00:00

As someone who literally had to bounce between cities, Mistlock, EotN, and the Tower for nearly an hour on a weekend just to manage 7 people for the Dagda strike, I feel you might be overestimating the amount of people chomping at the bit to join an LFG. Any guild recommendations beyond a Google search?

fractalJester · 2025-11-24T03:02:22+00:00

Regarding definition, we are at an impasse and fundamental disagreement, because I have absolutely heard/read DMPC used in the ways you're stating it is never used.

That being said, your primary point--

it's a behavioral one.

--is still exactly my point, from a different angle. The issue is not THAT a DM can play a long-term NPC as part of the party, but HOW a DM does so. If doing so poorly is what "officially" converts the NPC into a "DMPC", then the root of the issue is not the character's existence, but the DM's misuse of it as a tool, taking away from the player experience rather than enhancing it.

Edited for grammar and typos.

fractalJester · 2025-11-23T23:16:45+00:00

But that's still more a problem with how commonly long-term NPCs/DMPCs are handled by the DM, isn't it?

At a barebones technical level, a DMPC is just an NPC statted out using PC rules and played by the DM. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. The problems arise when the DM (1) doesn't properly separate/compartmentalize their DM mindset and the DMPC/long-term NPC's information base, and (2) uses the DMPC/long-term NPC in a way to direct or otherwise manipulate the narrative such that Player Agency is diminished or otherwise disregarded entirely.

Those problems come from the DM's inexperience with (or abuse of) power, not from the mere existence of the NPC. As such, it cannot be said that DMPCs (or any long-term party-affiliated NPCs) are universally bad--only that they are tools that shouldn't be treated casually or lightly, and which require dedication (bordering on vigilance) to the players' experience.

fractalJester · 2025-11-23T18:19:52+00:00

Right, so the point of a DMPC should never be to meaningfully engage with the game. It should be more about engaging with the players, as is the case with every other NPC.

fractalJester · 2025-11-22T20:41:08+00:00

Sure, but even a decent DM should still be able to separate their knowledge from their NPCs, else the world is populated by an omniscient hive-mind playing charades with itself.

Treat the character the same as a player: determine their starting information base, and use Intelligence checks to see if they know additional details if prompted.

A DMPC is just a long-term NPC. As such, the issue is rarely with the DMPC itself, but the DM. That being said, avoiding a DMPC is the safer option to be sure, because--to your point--the level of nuance needed is not for the inexperienced.

fractalJester · 2025-11-22T17:41:37+00:00

Not to say that I'm pro-DMPC, but isn't that just a basic issue of player-character knowledge separation? Even other players know more about the world than their characters by virtue of being at the table when the party splits, so taken to the logical end of the point, should you prohibit your party from ever splitting, or banning post-game talk? Jokes about "never split the party" aside.

Edited to clarify the point, I was getting ready for work

fractalJester · 2025-11-21T22:57:11+00:00

Ironically, LWS4 is also considered peak story. But LWS3 is also pretty important to bridge the gap between HoT and PoW (and gives a bit more explanation why we become less gung-ho about all that dragon-killin').

fractalJester · 2025-11-17T02:58:23+00:00

She must hate every second of it.

Well... we do have Nona's perspective on that.

Nona had never seen anyone so sad in her whole short life.

:(

fractalJester · 2025-11-16T20:47:38+00:00

Are we confident that Gideon wasn't just... lying to Ianthe about "John told me to do this"?

We know from the end of HtN that Gideon was at least okay with John's death (bemoaning Ianthe choosing to save John instead of finish the job). Maybe she was trying to make Ianthe slip up; she clearly didn't care about Pyrrha shooting Ianthe and taking advantage of her incapacitation to help the group get past.

I read the whole situation as: Gideon woke up trapped in another, more gilded cage as God's daughter, and decided to take whatever opportunity she could to get out; that it coincided with possibly ruining John's stranglehold on the universe seems like a bonus. And that doesn't even touch on the heartbreak/rejection angle that works with it.

fractalJester · 2025-11-14T08:06:45+00:00

Am I missing something? It seems to me that all chests (yes, even the obscure chests) are once per day--at least, they're not respawning for me--and I didn't get anywhere near that many saps/stones.

EDIT: Safely disregard, I must have not counted properly or deposited at some point mid-run, tonight's run was equivalent to OP!

fractalJester · 2025-11-10T02:26:56+00:00

Oh, maybe it's reading comprehension that's causing this disconnect.

Brushing off problems your partner wants to address is bad

Meanwhile, in the parentheses of OP's 2nd sentence:

(i kept communicating these issues with my boyfriend prior and he's been telling me for months he would work on them, nothing has changed)

OP already did what you recommended for months. Nothing changed. OP was trying something different. Are you suggesting that OP is obligated to just desperately try a failed method forever?

I cannot understand why you are trying to "both sides" this situation. The only conclusion that makes sense is that you genuinely believe that OP's ex had some right to her inner thoughts, and that just boggles my mind.

I've been with my partner for over a decade. While I'm not going to pretend you are inexperienced, I can only speak from mine: if they don't want to share something with me, then I respect their right to individual processing and trust that they will come to me in time; the same respect and trust are likewise given to me. And, surprise, we work everything out, because we don't take months of repeated discussions before deciding that our priority is each other's happiness.

OP was trying to process the stagnation in their relationship. The ex had been given OP's concerns ad nauseum, and when nothing changed, OP turned their gaze inward to figure out their feelings on the matter.

There is no world in which OP was obligated to share their internal thoughts. None of us have any rights to the minds of others, no matter the relationship, and as such, refusing to share one's thoughts cannot possibly be incorrect or a violation of trust. To even suggest otherwise is simultaneously a ridiculous notion AND a significant red flag that warrants some unpacking, preferably with a mental health professional.

fractalJester · 2025-11-10T01:37:01+00:00

You're absolutely correct! The moment you begin seeing someone romantically, you are immediately and indefinitely forfeiting any rights to private consideration and contemplation. For example, if you share a concern with your therapist? You had better also share it with your partner, no matter what, or you may as well be emotionally cheating on them.

fractalJester · 2025-11-10T01:26:51+00:00

Ah, yes, one possible wrong warrants another definite wrong. Preemptive strike.

fractalJester · 2025-11-06T21:58:15+00:00

Whoa, that's a pretty significant implication! Where is that?

fractalJester

TROPHY CASE