'Lo! I'm gremble, and once every seven years I emerge with fanfic. This used to be a blog for my ddads fic, but these days it's been taken over with a lot of witcher shit.
I'm on AO3.
Click here for my introduction and for info on trigger warnings. Send me ASKS!!! i craves them.
Hello, I am gremble. I am a fandom cryptid who comes out with new content once in a blue moon.
DREAM DADDY (MY TRUEST LOVE)
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood - Robert/Dadsona, 112k words, the slowest of slow burns, because "men having emotions that they don't know how to deal with" is my JAM.
ddads primer, which will equip you with everything you need to know in order to read my fic.
gremble's favorite meta on ddads (and I wrote a lot of it)
WITCHER SHIT
And then when ddads fandom was dead, I somehow stumbled into the Witcher, and apparently Geralt/Jaskier is where I live now.
FICS
For the Asking -- Warlord AU that began as a thought-exercise into what Geralt's side of the story looked like in @inexplicifics' āWith a Conquering Air," and then turned into 55k words of pining and fantasy politicking.
āThat Uncertain Seasonā -- A short 9k spinoff of "For the Asking," looking at that power imbalance from Jaskierās angle, and exploring a different way that their relationship could have developed.
A Song of Selfish Hearts -- aka "the tropey amnesia fic" -- in which Geralt loses a chunk of his memories, meets a handsy bard, and comes to the obvious conclusion: that somewhere along the way, he apparently lost his godsdamned mind and decided to take a human lover on the Path with him.
META
I enjoy discussing the ways in which The Witcher Netflix disappointed me. š
In my capacity as a leather armor-maker, Iāve discussed the costuming. (And here, have some pictures of gremble in Geralt's armor)
AND ALSO I DID THAT ONE DRESDEN FIC LIKE TEN YEARS AGO
Enemy Mine -- Dresden Files, 120k, Harry Dresden/John Marcone -- Reads like a Dresden Files novel, with ensemble cast & complicated plot, but more gay shit.
PODFICS
My podfics are on AO3 under the gremble-pods pseud.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
I really donāt want to open this can of worms because Tumblr hath no fury like people called out on their political performativeness but it is literally driving me up the wall to watch people react to Serkisā ākeep Tolkien whiteā commentary by insisting twice as hard that Tolkien would descend down to earth and dropkick the entire Republican party to hell or whatever, just because they want to ensure that a piece of media they enjoy isnāt seen as being morally impure. Case in point: I have seen at least five instances of Tolkienās āI hate apartheidā valedictorian address being used as a ācounterā to Serkis being racist, including by actual news outlets.
Except itās only ever the āI hate apartheidā line thatās shared, and not the actual quote in its full context. Because here it is:
If we consider what Merton College and what the Oxford School of English owes to the Antipodes, to the Southern Hemisphere, especially to scholars born in Australia and New Zealand, it may well be felt that it is only just that one of them should now ascend an Oxford chair of English. Indeed it may be thought that justice has been delayed since 1925. There are of course other lands under the Southern Cross. I was born in one; though I do not claim to be the most learned of those who have come hither from the far end of the Dark Continent. But I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones; and most of all I detest the segregation or separation of Language and Literature. I do not care which of them you think White.
Which is to say. This isnāt exactly the antiracist quote of the century, to say the least. This is a white South Africa born man and a white Australian shaking hands and going āomg we relateā and expressing what is a very, very mild āsegregation is not greatā opinion in order to convey his thoughts on an academic subject, ie the confluence of language and literature. Using race to make a point about his own subject of interest, in his own interest, which is, amusingly enough, what a lot of ostensibly well meaning progressive seem to be doing.
I also think that some of the general surprise around āwhat do you mean large swathes of the Tolkien fandom are incredibly conservative!?ā in lib/left Tolkien fandom is the result of a tendency in said parts of the fandom to transpose oneās own progressiveness onto Tolkien and turn a blind eye to things like, say, the Shire being a very specifically mid-century British racist construct that is very, very clear in its politics, often going so far as to insist itās anarchist or an ideal society or whatever the fuckā¦ and then getting really Pikachu-meme ābut theyāre misreading itā every single time a conservative explains exactly what it is about the legendarium that they really love, and get surprised when someone uses the Shire being a racist construct to do more racism. It is 2026 let us do away with āI donāt see colourā interpretations of media, I beg. Nobody is cancelling you for enjoying a book that is not kind to race. Most of the books I love are not kind to race.
I genuinely donāt have the energy to go deeper into it now because I and others have been beating this drum for ages but like man. Man. Iām not surprised by Serkisā comment. I donāt really give a shit about what Andy Serkis says and does because if I was the kind of person who gave a fuck about Andy āI felt like an ethnic minority on the Black Panther setā āI somehow interpreted Animal Farm in the most ridiculous way possibleā Serkisā opinions on anything, let alone race, my life would be much sadder. I think the adaptation will be an enshittified money-grab, and I will probably embrace cannibalism when McDonalds inevitably starts giving out little Gollums with every Happy Meal. Again.
What I am surprised and disappointed by is how the liberal-left reaction to this shit is to always and forever just either pretend it doesnāt exist in the text, or is the result of a complete misreading. So seldom is the response āfuck me, this book has some real wild thoughts on race, letās see how we can engage creatively with that in an adaptationā. Which has never happened. In fact, all your thoughts on Amazon and lore faithfulness and other adaption criticism or applause aside, TROP, the only Tolkien interpretation that has directly engaged with race has thus far done so very, very badly, and only on a surface level. Why?
Because the loudest parts of liberal Tolkien fandom is not interested in exploring race as it exists in the text, to explore it progressively, to engage creatively with the structural conservatism present within the very construction of Middle Earth. Theyāre interested in concessions that change very little: you can have your brown elves, as long as we donāt have to think about the implications of foundational aspects of our beloved world, which we relate to greatly and do not wish to think about why we relate to it beyond our own experience of encountering the text.
No, itās always either an insistence that the Racists are Wrong because the Text is Pure, or a slight, grudging concession that Tolkien had āa few racist elementsā but ānothing like the racism of todayā. Of course itās nothing like the racism of today. Tolkien isnāt writing in 2026. It was the racism of yesterday, and it is very clearly written into the text. Tolkien is not your mildly problematic grandpa. Tolkien was an Oxford don with an enormous, wide-ranging cultural impact, and refusing to acknowledge that is the misreading, not the pointing out of or engagement with structural racism within the text.
There's also a version of this where people cite Tolkien's 1938 letter to the German publisher, ie the one where he refuses to confirm he's of "Aryan" descent and basically tells them to fuck off, as the other canonical "proof text" that Tolkien Was Not Racist, and it does the same flattening as the valedictorian quote. It's a great letter, very āget thee gone from my gateā but it is also a letter about refusing a specific, legally coded Nazi racial category, not a statement about the internal racial logic of his own fiction.
Nobody is saying Tolkien was a fascist white supremacist Nazi. Hell, Tolkienās own thoughts on military atrocity in general is pretty clear in the depictions of the escalating kinslayings. But people love to conflate "hated actual fascism, said so on the record and is very evident in his fiction" with "therefore the legendarium contains no racialised hierarchy," as though those two things have to rise or fall together, when they don't. You can be sincerely, personally opposed to Nazi race science and apartheid violence and still write a mythology where moral and aesthetic worth consistently map onto a Northern-European somatic ideal. Because the racialisation Tolkien both inherited and passed on wasn't Nazi race science, it was the broader Edwardian/interwar philological raciology he was actually swimming in, hell, drowning in, considering the Oxford environment. And I find it so, so frustrating how fandom keeps failing to make this distinction: structural racialisation and personal bigotry are not the same axis, and refusing to be measured on one doesn't clear you on the other.
The Southrons/Easterlings material is obviously the part most quoted when it comes to Tolkienās āproblematic elementsā except it's imo super telling how rarely it actually gets quoted compared to how often it gets vaguely waved at (except Charles E Mills. I love you Charles E Mills). Anyway āBlack men like half-trolls," swarthy, slant-eyed, riding out of the south and east to serve Sauronā¦ itās the same mapping of good-north/evil-south-and-east you get in a dozen other early-twentieth-century adventure texts. And this imo actually undermines the "it's just medievalism, calm down" defense, because medievalism is a selectively retrospective construction of which past you're claiming and which one you're othering, not some sort of static, neutral historical styling.
Tolkien's medievalism is specifically Northern European heroic-elegiac medievalism, the "Northernness" he talks about loving as a kid, and that aesthetic preference is not extractable from the racial hierarchy it produces on the page. You cannot keep the aesthetic and disclaim the politics because as in all art, the aesthetic is the politics, that's what "structural" means as opposed to "incidentalā, and I just wish that many extremely clever people who understand this in a contemporary sense would allow themselves to feel uncomfortable and look at it in a beloved text.
Jackson's trilogy didn't invent racialisation in Tolkien, hell I think he even softened some of it because the Scouring is straight up impossible to adapt without it being very clear about its politics, but his adaptation does go quite some way make the existing racism legibleā¦ casting, costuming, choreography and cinematography does the same racialised sorting the text does, and does it visually: Uruk-hai as a kind of grunting brutalised, brutalistic mass, Haradrim on oliphaunts as a fairly straightforward Orientalist boogeyman, and the Fellowship itself photographed like a Pre-Raphaelite fantasy lmfao. Serkis isn't introducing a new interpretive layer with his commentary, hell Serkis was in all those Jackson films as well! Serkis is being very clear about what aspects of the legendarium matter to him, and that aspect happens to be the whiteness of it all. And I genuinely cannot understand why the huge āscandalā around his comment is not that someone said the quiet part, but that saying it out loud is what became the scandal, taken as some kind of transgression against Tolkien and all his readers with Good Politicsā¢ļø, rather than the quarter-century of adaptations, readings, and analysis of the text that wordlessly encoded the racism and got called faithful and dedicated for it.
I didnāt want to go to author is dead territory but. Fandom discourse keeps reaching for authorial intent as the arbiter of textual meaning in exactly the way most of these same people would reject in any other context. Everyone is a massive New Critic the second the author in question is someone they love. But Tolkien doesnāt need to have consciously intended a racial hierarchy or a white nationalist mythology for the text to functionally produce one, for it to be so loved by conservatives and ethnonationalists who come fifty years after his time.
Intent is not even a contested position in literary theory, it's just the very basic understanding that "text has ideology independent of authorial intent". The insistence on relitigating Tolkien's personal feelings as though that settles the structural question is wild to me, and I find it so extremely unproductive how liberal fandom reaches for this constantly, repeatedly chanting Tolkienās few vaguely liberal statements that read far less liberally in context. But I guess the alternative, ie reading the actual construction of race in the legendarium on its own terms, requires giving up the fantasy that the thing you love is politically inert. And itās just so sad man. Like I fucking love the legendarium, and I think insisting on its moral purity is the worst thing you can do to it.
I think my entire argument can be summed up in a few questions. Why do conservatives keep saying "I love Tolkien" completely unashamedly, in a way they donāt realy say about most other ācanonicalā twentieth-century texts, while we on the left have to perform a whole apologetic dance before we say it? What is it that they embrace about the text, that we have to occlude in order to express an unproblematic āloveā? Why do we have to disavow parts of a text to claim we love it? Who are we performing to? What are we losing in focusing so hard on this performance?
This is why the Serkis-style comment, or the Rings of Power casting discourse, ends up being the deepest engagement we collectively get in fandom terms. Because both "sides" of that fight are actually shallow in the same way, just from opposite ends. The right-wing backlash to diverse casting is, repulsively, responding to something absolutely present in the text: a defensive crouch around a racial aesthetic it identifies as being under threat. The liberal-left response, the "just add brown elves" gesture, claims the problem to be one of representation and casting rather than structure, which is precisely why the racial elements of The Rings of Power satisfies no one and changes nothing.
You can put actors of colour in NĆŗmenor and Harfoot villages and yet the underlying moral framework of who is coded as inherently noble and who as inherently monstrous, whose skin colour the textual narrative uses as a standin for corruption, stays completely untouched. Again, see my TROP link above, with the jihadi-coding of the villains. Because that framework isn't located in the casting of an adaptation, it's located in the construction of Arda itself and physiognomy-as-morality at the level of the prose itself, constantly present throughout the text. Casting a Black actor as an elf doesn't do anything to the fact that "evil race coded as racially other" is still sitting right there in the Southrons and the orcs, unadapted, undiscussed, doing exactly the same work it always did, and this work takes on a new look in post-2001 adaptations.
So what you get is two adaptations of the same tiresome insanemaking discourse rather than two different arguments: the right defends the racial aesthetic as the substance of their love, and the liberal mainstream defends the fantasy that representation-level tweaks constitute engagement with race. And so, nobody actually produces the adaptation that takes seriously what nonwhite Tolkien scholars have been saying for decades, which is that you'd have to touch the orc/Southron/Valar/Valinor/blondeness architecture itself to ever productively have this conversation. Not diversify who plays the good guys, but interrogate why "evil" in this legendarium has a face and a hair colour and points compass east.
But if the talk about this goes on as it does, and continues between Tolkien the Pure versus Tolkien the Misread, there will never be anyone willing to make that adaptation, and weāll go on forever in a sisyphean climb, where both the reactionary embrace and the progressive denial are just two versions of refusing to read the same damn book. Basically, I think we on the left etc need to stop treating "is Tolkien racist" as a yes/no gate you have to clear before you're allowed to enjoy the books, and stop acting like enjoying problematic media makes you a fascist. We need to start treating the racialised architecture within Tolkienās world as the actual object of study, same way you'd read imperial romance or Forster or Kipling or Haggard, without needing to acquit or convict the author first.
Which means we have to name the conservatism specifically rather than gesturing at "some outdated attitudes," trace where it comes from historically (the philological Northernness Tolkien grew up steeped in, not some special personal failing that reflects badly on you), and then ask what an adaptation would look like which dramatised that rather than smoothing over it or weaponising it. We have to let go of the idea that critical engagement is disloyalty, and let go of the idea that loving something requires defending its honour. We need to get the resilience needed to engage with the idea that a work can be both formative and ideologically compromised at the same time.
We donāt need to resolve that tension into either adoring hagiography or totalising cancellation. If we do, we're going to keep getting ākeep the Shire whiteā Serkis soundbites and āhooray we cast a brown elf in our we-invented-elf-jihadis show!ā news cycles standing in for a conversation that hasn't actually started yet, and ngl buddies I have to say I personally will be biting people the next time I see yet another rendition of the same damn response-reaction cycle start again because everyone, both the conservatives and the left, wants the things they love to be a reflection of themselves, and will twist themselves into pretzels to ensure that remains the case.
brooding men who cannot communicate their feelings if their life depended on it are only hot when they're fictional. if i have to deal with one in real life i will curse him and pray for his downfall every night before i go to bed
It's because the writer communicates their feelings for them. If people wanna pull that off in real life they need to hire a guy to walk around behind them narrating.
i'm rereading the murderbot diaries and murderbot's utter conviction that it and gurathin are bitter enemies is still so funny. buddy. gurathin got over this months ago. he's just a quiet guy.
one-sided antagonism is so delicious.Ā murderbot diaries i also very much enjoy how surreal it must be for gurathin / Ā to know that the heavily armed rogue secunit holds a grudge against him /Ā and also know that all it will ever choose to do about this is make frowny faces and flip him the bird. / (tags viaĀ space-mouse)
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
Today, July 11th marks the anniversary of the Srebrenica Genocide where Serbian forces rounded up over 8,000 Bosniak Muslims in the UN-declared "safe area" of Srebrenica, and murdered themāfor no other reason than being Muslim.
gotta say Iām a fan of Wells choosing to not only have canonically non-white central human characters in her Far-Future Space Sci-Fi, but also choosing to give them ethnically specific names
Dr. Mensah, Dr. Bharadwaj, Dr. Ratthi, Pin-Lee, etc.
thereās often a bit of a tendency in speculative sci-fi for humans to be āambiguously brownā cuz of āidyllic cultural melting potā and thatās ~fine~, and thatās often what makes sense for certain types of setting/story but... i like this better. makes it more real. feels a bit more respectful. and it suits her worldbuilding better.
my vision of Preservationās past is that the planet the original colonists were set up on looked fine at firstāhuman-habitable atmosphere and temperature and gravity and all that good stuff (TMBD appears to operate on Star Trek rules of habitable planet distribution)ābut the heavy metals in the soil proved unsalvageable. The plan was intensive terraforming to remove metals and toxins and corrosives from the soil, but the job was too big and required too much consistent investment and had too little return, so the company that owned the colony justā¦ wrote it off. Pulled support. Stopped sending new seeds and new bots and new medicines and any new supplies because they considered it a money sink not paying off the investment. And they just left the people there.
So the original colonists were stuck on a toxic planet where not much food could grow and the stuff that did was very often contaminated with toxins! So the question left to them was mostly āwill heavy metal poisoning or starvation get us first.ā
So modern Preservation is kind of culturally neurotic about food scarcity and has a lot of social/political structures built around prepping against famines, and a lot of social mores about food production, food access, and food sharing. They are only three generations out from being abandoned to die on a toxic planet, after all; they are never ever gonna let anything like that happen again!
I like this a lot! I agree 100% that it's a cultural preoccupation for Preservationers to be certain there's more than enough food for everybody. It vibes with some other headcanons I'd been kicking around too, re: Preservation's food supply networks, which is that I think they're a lot more distributed and less centralized than our modern factory farming, with a greater percentage of the general population involved in food production.
One, because it increases famine resilience for all communities to be contributing to the food supply to some degree. A natural disaster in one area isn't going to cause catastrophic global shortages. Communities can survive potential disruptions to the supply chain because they're not relying solely on imported food. If everyone knows "some" gardening, a community is a lot more food-secure.
Two, I feel like it's in line with Preservation values to want its citizens to keep in touch with how their food is made. A lot of the horrors in our modern food production industry -- the horrific abuse and exploitation of farm and factory workers, vile living conditions for animals, unsustainable agricultural practices that are devastating to the environment -- are allowed to happen because the average person is so completely disconnected from the systems that produce our food. It's out of sight/out of mind. It's a job for an exploited underclass, not one that gets respect and worker protections, a profession that schoolkids would be encouraged to pursue.
By contrast, I think that Preservation would have strong cultural convictions regarding the dignity of all labor, especially jobs as vital for society as food production. And while agricultural work is always going to be a physically-demanding job, it doesn't have to be slavery conditions.
I'm reminded of when I was in teacher in semi-rural Japan -- one of the standard elementary-school field trips is taking the kids out to a rice farm at planting time so they could "help." We were issued boots for wading around the knee-high water in the paddies and given a pallet of little seedlings to embed in the mud (and also there was a frog that caused a great deal of consternation):
(lol you can tell the seedlings in the foreground, planted by the kids, are a bit more haphazardly placed than the ones done by professionals. š¤£)
I like to imagine Preservation having a lot of events like that -- field trips for schoolkids, but also seasonal events where urban workers are given time off work with the expectation that they're going to go help out/celebrate on a family/friends' farm. (Because agricultural work is so ubiquitous that everybody knows somebody they could spend that holiday with.)
........mainly because I want Ratthi to be really bad at this, city slicker academic than he is. š¤£ He is cheerfully going to help on Mensah's farm, Happy To Be Included š„°, while Murderbot is there clutching its face like OMIGODDD THIS IS JUST "INNOVATIVE NEW WAYS FOR RATTHI TO FALL DOWN A HOLE / FALL IN FRONT OF A COMBINE HARVESTER." š± WHO AUTHORIZED THIS. š±š± NOT MURDERBOT, THAT'S WHO.
Rereading A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood for the upteenth time, because it's one of my favorite books. Thank you for your service. We love seeing an emotionally wrecked character be loved.
Thank you! Beautiful Day is a fic that meant a lot to me to write, and Robert is indeed the trashfire of my heart. ā¤ļø
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
Hello, I just finished rereading Bring Down Rain for the nth time (absolutely TRANSCENDENT writing by the way, thank you SO MUCH) when I noticed you linked your tumblr-its very sweet that you have a tag that's just "Tarik š„°", and it was a joy to read through. Thank you.
lol yes, I adore Tarik, and Bring Down Rain is my subtle psyop to make the rest of fandom fall in love with him too. š
my petty gripe about anachronism in historical/fantasy/spec-fic worlds is attraction language.
Weāve all heard the āshould you use modern queer labels or notā argument but honestly even when people go ātrue, they wouldnāt use the labels āaromanticā or āasexual,āā so often the characters describe their experiences as āI never felt romantic attractionā or āI donāt feel attracted to anyoneā in ways that makes me go. You are stilllllll thinking about this in an extraordinarily modern online way. That 19th century steampunk detective man will NOT be angsting about having never felt romantic attraction, he would be angsting about being unable to feel moved by the beauty or charm of a woman, or something. And I do think that āattractivenessā language is different from the identity-level idea of experiencing attractionāSherlock Holmes does not talk about not experiencing attraction, but when Watson says āWhat a very attractive woman!ā Holmes responds āIs she? I did not observe.ā (And then Watson calls him an inhuman automaton and calculating-machine and Holmes calls Watsonās judgement biased). Never swayed by the attractiveness of a man or woman, never desirous of marriage, never charmed by the delights of love, all of these feel like some of the variety of ways that someone in this milieu might describe an ace- or aro-spectrum identity more than ānever felt attractionā does. Mostly because, like the terms for aromantic and asexual themselves, nailing down an exclusively attraction-based definition of a-spec identities is a relatively new and extremely post-AVEN thing. And yet in fiction everybody knows to articulate their experience as feeling sexual/romantic attraction. And I always want to go nooo how would THIS character think about it?? Not how you think this character SHOULD think about it, how would THIS person in THIS context articulate their feelings?
Previously, all Assassin's Creed games and tie-in media have been synned into the Assassin's Creed - All Media Types Metatag, without distinct fandom tags for individual games. With the recent Changes to Fandom Metatag Wrangling Guidelines, we're now able to break out individual tags for different Assassin's Creed games.
In summary: we're creating new fandom subtags that are specific to each Assassin's game! These fandom tags will cover both the games and associated tie-in media, and will allow for users to more easily filter for fanworks by game, while still allowing filtering for multiple games and excluding other crossovers.
For the full details of the restructure, please read on after the cut.
Overview of Restructure:
As described above, Assassin's Creed - All Media Types will now serve as the top-level umbrella fandom for any Assassin's Creed related works! We've now also canonized the following subtagged fandoms:
Metatag: Assassin's Creed - All Media Types
Assassinās Creed I (Video Games)
Assassinās Creed II (Video Games)
Assassinās Creed III (Video Games)
Assassinās Creed: Black Flag (Video Games)
Assassinās Creed: Rogue (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Unity (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Syndicate (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Origins (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Odyssey (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Valhalla (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Mirage (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed: Shadows (Video Game)
Assassinās Creed (Movie 2016)
Assassin's Creed: Last Descendants - Matthew J. Kirby
What does this actually mean?
This change would allow for users to search for works related to a specific game or multiple games. Previously, this could only be done by searching for the game's protagonist and/or specific characters that appear in the game. For example, to filter for works related to or about Assassin's Creed I, you would previously have had to search by filtering for characters such as AltaĆÆr or Malik. With this new change, you would only need to filter for Assassin's Creed I, and all works that have been tagged with this subfandom will be found.
This also means that users who want to exclude crossovers with non-Assassin's Creed fandoms will be able to do so. After this change, Assassin's Creed - All Media Types serving as a metatag will mean works tagged with multiple subtagged Assassin's Creed games will show in search results even if crossovers are excluded. This will also allow users to exclude works tagged with specific Assassin's Creed fandoms.
How were specific subtags decided?
Subtags were chosen based on previously used fandom tags. Because some Assassin's Creed games have continuity between them (e.g., Assassin's Creed II and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood), grouping by assassin allows users to filter based on games characters typically appear in and canon continuity.
I've posted works under the Assassin's Creed - All Media Types fandom tag. Do I need to re-tag to specify which game they're about?
You are not required to re-tag! Your work will remain discoverable under the All Media Types tag. However, you are welcome to re-tag if you wish! Re-tagging the work to specify the game(s) only means that if a user were to search all works under that specific game, your work will appear. You can also update works to add tags for specific games alongside the All Media Types tag if you wish. Ultimately, the choice is yours to make.
How do I search by specific tie-in media if there isn't a fandom canonical with a subtag?
Assassin's Creed media (e.g. comic runs) without their own canonized fandom will still have canonized freeforms if they've been tagged for by users. These freeforms can be used to filter for works tagged with this media.
Will you be adding more subfandoms as new Assassin's Creed media is released?
Fandom wranglers will continue to evaluate new fandom tags as they are used, including for new Assassin's Creed media!
(From time to time, ao3org posts announcements of recent or upcoming wrangling changes on behalf of the Tag Wrangling Committee.)
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
Love it when you finally do a project you've been putting off for like. Literal years. And it takes all of two hours. I will learn nothing from this experience. āļø
