The Queen is Dead, 2024
★
Noah Kahan
noise dept.
NASA

untitled
almost home
Misplaced Lens Cap
Mike Driver

blake kathryn

oozey mess

Game Changer & Make Some Noise
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
hello vonnie
todays bird
Today's Document
Xuebing Du
𓃗
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Philippines
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Colombia
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Venezuela

seen from Germany
seen from Colombia

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Russia
seen from Germany

seen from Spain
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from Australia

seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Italy

seen from Singapore
@deniisu
The Queen is Dead, 2024

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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
in my little pony universe youd go to a job interview and theyd be like so how does your cutiemark reflect your dedication to this position. And every time youd have to spew some bullshit about how your cutiemark of two tennis rackets actually means youre a team player and good at multitasking and view the market like a playing field. or whatever. and you wouldnt even get the job
Thanks to Equestria v Sugar Sprinkle, cutie mark interview questions are considered hiring discrimination, so if anypony asks you any cutiemark related questions or even alludes to any questions about your cutiemark such as "In your own words, describe your life purpose" you can and should refuse to answer. Know your rights, ponies.
Some writing advice I will never give up:
Your characters are allowed to be bad people. Your story is allowed to have no moral lesson.yyour ending is allowed to be sad. The villain can win. The good person can do something unforgivable. The lovers can destroy each other. You are allowed to write the thing that no one asked for and everything that everyone told you doesn’t work and you are allowed to not explain yourself.
It’s your story. Burn it down if you want to.

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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
finding that one fandom friend that GETS you and your blorbos the way no one else does is a privilege and it will literally change your life
The main problem I have with Iris is that she doesn’t haunt the narrative enough. We should’ve seen Zero preferring to go on missions without a navigator so he can avoid getting close to another. We should’ve seen him cutting off Maverick’s during their speeches because he’s afraid of hearing her voice echoing just under the surface. We should have seen him shutting X down every time he tries to make him promise that he’ll kill him if he ever loses himself, because deep down Zero knows that’s a promise he can’t keep.
Did you play AD&D? I can't remember how old you are, so hopefully that's not too offensive. If so, was a typical game really as hostile as people say it was?
That's one of those question where the answer hovers somewhere between "no, with a couple of massive caveats" and "yes, but not in the way most people think".
A lot of AD&D 1st Edition's GMing practices are pretty hardass by modern standards; however, they need to be understood in the context that the game's authors were writing for a target audience who mainly played the game in college wargaming clubs, where players would frequently transfer between groups and group sizes tended to be very large – six players per GM was considered a bare minimum, and up to a dozen player characters in a single party was by no means unheard of!
In particular, players would often bring their character sheets with them when hopping between groups, and it was considered a faux pas for a GM to reject an incoming player's existing character or request any substantive changes be made, so managing expectations could be quite challenging; even as late as 2nd Edition, the Dungeon Master's Guide contains extensive discussion of how to gracefully handle players bringing existing characters with them who aren't necessarily a good fit for the present game's tone or resource economy.
The upshot is that the culture of play these iterations of Dungeons & Dragons are targeting inherently obliges the GM to take a much firmer hand to keep things on track than a pickup game that draws players exclusively from within the GM's established friend group might – and to be sure, some GMs abused these expectations to act like petty tyrants, but some contemporary GMs do that, too.
A big part of the modern perception that 1E and 2E were extraordinarily player hostile, meanwhile, has nothing to do with the previously discussed GMing practices; rather, it emerges from the transition away from that culture of play in a slightly unexpected way.
In brief, back when D&D was mainly played by wargaming clubs, it was fashionable to run pre-written adventure modules competitively at conventions; the competition wasn't between players, but between parties, with multiple groups running the same adventure in parallel to contend for prizes. Tournament play sometimes chose its winners based on the fastest real-time completion of the module in question, or set specific objectives within the module which would award points when completed, a bit like speed-running or achievement-hunting in a video game (though neither practice existed yet at the time).
It was the survival module, however, that quickly emerged as the most popular tournament format. In a survival tournament, each player would provide or was furnished with a binder containing a fixed number of pre-generated character sheets, switching to the next character sheet in the set as each preceding character died; the winning group was the one whose last surviving character's corpse hit the dirt furthest from the dungeon entrance.
Many of 1E's most popular adventure modules, including the infamous Tomb of Horrors, were originally written as survival modules to be run at tournaments in conventions. As such, they were designed to kill off player characters both quickly and efficiently, so as to reduce the likelihood that the tournament would run overtime and get kicked out of the convention venue. When they were later cleanup and repackaged as commercial adventure modules, their text rarely bothered to explain any of this – who doesn't recognise a survival module when they see one?
The answer to that question, of course, is kids who didn't come up through the mentorship system of the college wargaming clubs, but taught themselves how to play D&D from first principles using books they bought at their local hobby stores – and when D&D's popularity unexpectedly exploded in the early 1980s, there were suddenly rather a lot of them!
These kids purchased the repackaged survival modules along with all their other D&D books; having no frame of reference, they assumed that these represented what a "standard" D&D adventure was supposed to look like – and since they weren't experienced players with whole binders full of pre-generated backup characters at their fingertips, the result was a lot of seemingly unfair total party kills, and a lot of kids concluding that the previous generation's GMs must have been objectively insane.
There is an additional amusing point of order here, which is the answer to the following two questions. I once had a discussion with someone in Gary Gygax's gaming group, who was involved in early TSR work a bit. Allow me to paraphrase my questions and his answers.
Why publish survival modules as your primary format of published adventure?
"Because that's what we had -- they were already laid out for publication. Why not publish them and make some money off it?"
Did it ever occur to you at the time that publishing adventures like these would shape the larger D&D culture's expectations of what play was supposed to look like?
"No, why would it?"
One of my favorite anecdotes about early D&D, from Blog of Holding:
"It’s hard to get that context just from reading the original Dungeons and Dragons books. If nine groups learned D&D from the books, they’d end up playing nine different games.
"Mornard told us about an early D&D tournament game – possibly in the first Gen Con in Parkside in 1978? Gary Gygax was DMing nine tournament teams successively through the same module, and whoever got the furthest in the dungeon would win. You’d expect this to take all day, and so Mike was surprised to see Gary, looking shaken, wandering through the hallways at about 2 PM. Mike bought Gary a beer and asked him what had happened – wasn’t he supposed to be DMing right now?
“It’s over!” replied a stunned Gary Gygax.
"Gary described how the first group had fared. Walking down the first staircase into the dungeon, the first rank of fighters suddenly disappeared through a black wall. There was a quiet whoosh, and a quiet thud. The players conferred, and then they sent the second rank forward, who disappeared too. The rest of the players followed.
"The same thing happened to the next tournament team, and the next. Players filed into the unknown, one after another. And they were all killed. The wall was an illusion, and behind it was a pit. Eight out of the nine groups had thrown themselves like lemmings over a cliff; only one group had thought to tap around with a ten foot pole. That group passed the first obstacle, so they won the tournament.
"Gary and his players couldn’t believe that the tournament players had been so incautious. But, to be fair, none of those tournament groups had played in Gary Gygax’s game. They had learned the rules of D&D, but they had no experience of the milieu in which the book was written. Of those nine groups that had learned D&D from a book, only one played sufficiently like Gary’s group to survive thirty seconds in his dungeon."
#ngl survival module sounds fun as fuck. maybe i gotta torture my current group a bit (via @nadaismus)
It's worth bearing in mind that tournament-style survival mode developed in the context of a version of D&D where you can create a new character and hit the ground knowing everything you need to know to effectively play them in just a couple of minutes. 5E isn't structurally terribly well-suited for the binder-full-of-backup-PCs approach, and it's definitely a recipe for disaster in 3E or Pathfinder unless your entire group consists of a very particular flavour of high-effort masochists.
It also bears mentioning that the current culture of RPGs encourages a separation of player knowledge and character knowledge. I, as a player, know that the big cat with tentacles out the back is a displacer beast, but my character doesn't, and the character that replaced the one the displacer beast killed. That separation, particularly with Survival Modules, was not the case back in the day. Characters had full knowledge shared between them, so if Dave the fighter got disintegrated by a beholder, Dave's identical twin brother now knew beholders have disintegration attacks. This is part of the reason why it was considered bad form for players to read monster books.
It's broadly untrue that the idea of separating player knowledge from character knowledge is a modern development. The practice descends to tabletop RPGs from the historical wargames they splintered off from; tabletop wargames which focus on accurately re-creating historical battles often operate on a gentleperson's agreement to refrain from acting on strategic information that your side's commanders couldn't reasonably have been aware of, or employing tactical doctrines which had not yet been developed when the re-created battle took place, and many early tabletop RPGs adopted similar conventions, to greater or lesser degrees. Heck, games like Paranoia were parodying those conventions as early as the mid 1980s! It's come in and out of fashion in mainstream RPGs over the past half-century, but it's not a recent thing.
It is, however, correct that there typically was no expectation of observing these conventions when playing survival modules in particular.
Oh, so that's where Munchkin got the idea of your identical twin turning up when you die in game.
Yeah, having your previous PC's identical cousin randomly come rocking up five minutes after you died is totally a thing that happened, largely as a response to the awkward transitional period where survival play was still in fashion, but the game's rules had become too fiddly for rolling up a new PC on the spot to be a pain-free process, so folks would just recycle their existing character sheet instead. You saw a lot of it in the 2E era!
And conversely, "3d6 in order" is a totally deranged way to generate stats when chargen takes half an hour and then you're going to play that character through a dozen sessions of epic narrative. But it makes perfect sense when chargen takes one minute and you're going to do it multiple times per session; the fact that some characters turn out randomly good and others suck horribly isn't a huge problem if you're going to get both experiences on a regular basis.
In that style of play, if you do 3d6 in order and you roll up 10, 11, 8, 6, 7, 5, you put that guy in front, and when he inevitably falls into an invisible pit that teleports him into a disintegration trap inside an Elder Brain pool you just roll up a new guy.
wasnt jkr the guy who got assassinated by the president? why is he bad?
i. ive been thinking about how to reply to this for like ten minutes. i can’t even add anything. it’s already perfect .
YOULL NEVER TAKE MY EM DASH

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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
starting a collection for my anthropology class can you guys send me more posts like these
Here's a few I have
once in a while, I happen to have the fortune to stumble upon a Tumblr post that actually delights me
many of you just. genuinely don’t believe that people can grow and change.
this is about the death penalty and its also about call out posts about people who have already apologized for things they did a long time ago and it’s also about using ‘toxic’ or ‘abuser’ as if its an immutable class of person, and its also about any other circumstance with permanent consequences or wherein you assume someone is still the same person they were.
Fascinating how what's considered feminine and what's considered masculine can change over time. The rebranding of being a horse girl into being a stereotypical feminine girly trait needs to be studied.
Look at classic children's novels. As recently as the 50s and early 60s, being obsessed with horses as a girl was depicted as strange and tomboyish, and the very concept of being obsessed with horses from early childhood and loving toy horses and desperately wanting your own horse being a "little girl thing" and not a "little boy thing" would send someone from the 1800s and earlier into a coma.
There's maybe a point to be made here somewhere about how when keeping and riding horses stopped being necessary to the functioning of society and became a more "frivolous" thing, it was rapidly rebranded as silly and girly and for women, but what do I know.
i wrote a paper in my masculinity studies class in college about this exact phenomenon, specifically about how high heeled shoes started as a practical way for Persian cavalry to keep their feet on their stirrups, then likely due to that association, became a popular fashion item and status symbol among the upper classes of Europe, before the Great Male Renunciation of the 18th-19th centuries, when men started shunning opulence in favor of utility, leaving them as a fashion item for women instead.
I've joked that the two genders are Aesthetic and Utility before but thats just kinda the case
You know it also goes the other way, right? Women/girls start expressing interest in something and it becomes seen as frivolous or otherwise negative?
This is just off the top of my head, but in the mid-20th century we have a big interest in Black Beauty, which is THE horse novel; Wikipedia shows multiple adaptations just in the 1970s. Marguerite Henry was publishing the most amazing, gender-neutral, quite famous horse stories from the 1940s through 1990s. (Misty of Chincoteague, have you heard of it?) It strikes me as very likely that these were actually very popular with a female audience, and so toymakers and publishers went harder on aiming new things at girls specifically.
I just don't think people went "horses are stupid and unnecessary now, let's gender them as feminine," and the target market was too dumb to realize they were being given scraps.
NEW WANGXIAN ART FROM 喵屋小铺 x MDZS ❤️💙

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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Sometimes I’m absolutely weirded and icked out by mods people come up with for games.
And sometimes I come across one so delightful and silly that it makes my day.
Some Mitzi art I did a little while back for a thing. Didn't have time to fuss with it and it didn't quite turn out how I wanted, but I've had so little time for non-production art lately, it was nice to get a little something done.