R E F E R E N C E

I couldn't find the caramelldansen base in this post, but here is a version that should work just as well.

Here is the original lick icon base.

To save these and have them be usable, you have to click the "free download" button underneath the image.

Some other good bases:

Dance Icon

Caipirinha

Run Run Run

You can find many other bases like these through DeviantArt.

How to make them into a GIF:

Step 1. Edit the base however you like (I used MSPaint)

Step 2: Crop and save each frame individually as PNGs (Note for the lick base: It's best to crop them to include the black boarder. This makes the GIF 50x50, which is the standard DeviantArt icon size and can easily scale larger if need be.)

Step 3: Go to ezgif.com/maker and upload all your frames

Step 4: Set "delay time" to 10, then click "Make a GIF!"

Step 5: Right-click the result and save it. Congrats! You used a GIF base!

Absolute beginner adult ballet series (fabulous beginning teacher)

40 piano lessons for beginners (some of the best explanations for piano I’ve ever seen)

Excellent basic crochet video series

Basic knitting (probably the best how to knit video out there)

Pre-Free Figure Skate Levels A-D guides and practice activities (each video builds up with exercises to the actual moves!)

How to draw character faces video (very funny, surprisingly instructive?)

Another drawing character faces video

Literally my favorite art pose hack

Tutorial of how to make a whole ass Stardew Valley esque farming game in Gamemaker Studios 2??

Introduction to flying small aircrafts

French/Dutch/Fishtail braiding

Playing the guitar for beginners (well paced and excellent instructor)

Playing the violin for beginners (really good practical tips mixed in)

Color theory in digital art (not of the children’s hospital variety)

Retake classes you hated but now there’s zero stakes:

Calculus 1 (full semester class)

Learn basic statistics (free textbook)

Introduction to college physics (free textbook)

Introduction to accounting (free textbook)

Learn a language:

Ancient Greek

Latin

Spanish

German

Japanese (grammar guide) (for dummies)

French

Cooking with flavor bootcamp (used what I learned in this a LOT this year)

Beekeeping 101

Learn Interior Design from the British Academy of Interior Design (free to audit course - just choose the free option when you register)

Video on learning to read music that actually helped me??

How to use and sew with a sewing machine

How to ride a bike (listen. some of us never learned, and that's okay.)

How to cornrow-braid hair (I have it on good authority that this video is a godsend for doing your baby niece's black hair)

Making mead at home (I actually did this last summer and it was SO good)

How to garden

Basics of snowboarding (proceed with caution)

How to draw for people who (think they) suck at art (I know this website looks like a 2003 monstrosity, but the tutorials are excellent)

Pixel art for beginners so you can make the next great indie game

Go (back) to school

Introduction to Astronomy (high school course - free textbook w/ practice problems)

Principals of Economics (high school course - free textbook w/ practice problems)

Introduction to philosophy (free college course)

Computer science basics (full-semester Harvard course free online)

Learn a language

Japanese for Dummies (link fix from 2022)

Ukrainian

Portuguese (Brazil)

American Sign Language (as somebody who works with Deaf people professionally, I also strongly advise you to read up on Deaf/HoH culture and history!)

Chinese (Simplified)

How to Write an Abuser Being Called Out

(content warning: emotional abuse, abuser tactics, manipulation)

Unfortunately, this will require that you get into the mindset of an abuser. If you want one to sound convincing, you have think like one.

When put on the spot, an abuser with even the slightest inkling that they’ve done wrong will do some or all of the following things:

Immediately go on the defense, find a moral high ground, garner pity, and make themselves the victim; “You could never understand what I go through. I have sacrificed so much. I do the best a past victim like myself can.”

Deflect by replying to every question with another question, rapidly changing subjects, and make it about the accuser; “Do you really think I would harm my children? What kind of person thinks like that? You once hurt someone badly, have they forgiven you? Have you ever considered how much that hurt them?”

Slander, blame, and insinuate that the victim deserved it. Get the accuser to agree to any of their points, and then double down on them; “They’ve done horrible things to me, by the way. You may not know this, but A has some bad habits. In fact, you once saw them exhibit bad behavior, remember? So you know what I’m talking about. You would have reacted the same way.”

Never blatantly admit fault. Ever. If they do they defend themselves by blaming the victim, or they quickly take it back and turn the accusation on the accuser (or both in the same breath!); “I only did it because of what they did to me, and I can’t believe you would spread lies about me, I've never done those things."

If at any point the abuser feels they are losing the argument, they may choose to back off while making it seem like their accuser is the toxic one; “I can see you won’t hear reason. I thought you wanted to discuss this problem of yours, but if you just want to argue and make me angry then I'm done talking to you.”

These can happen in any order repetitively until the abuser has spun the accuser in circles. If they feel themselves failing at one of these tactics, they will switch to another instantly. If their opponent exhibits emotional reaction to their manipulation, the abuser will make them seem like the crazy, unreliable one. Whoever argues with an abuser, especially in the case of emotional abuse, will come out feeling like they lost and are stupid.

If you would prefer not to harangue and demoralize your players—or you know someone in your party would get too into it—play it safe and stick to this simpler pattern of behavior for your character.

Deflect the accusation

Blame the victim

Make self the victim

Attack the accuser

Leave with the last word

Oh, and there will be no logical explanation offered for their behavior because there isn't one. They are petty, their reasons are unjustified, and knowing this they will do anything to hide those facts. If they feel ashamed of anything they will force that shame onto someone else.

Now, I’ve just shared a mishmash of behaviors I’ve experienced up close from a male with NPD. Female abusers will also exhibit these behaviors, but may vary in their execution (e.g. passive-aggression, performative emotional outbursts, double-edged comments, etc.). You might consider carefully researching more about narcissists and abusive behavior in general, if not for the campaign then at least for yourself. Emphasis on carefully as this field of research is rife with disinformation spread by abusers. On that note, I would rather stick with my own experience than recommend anyone at this time.

—

+ Please review my pinned Ask Policy before sending in your ask. Thank you.

Even a deer dying is an explosion of specialized life like that; maggots eat the flesh, everyone knows that, but as the soft flesh is cleared away you get hide beetles that only eat skin and bone, moths that only eat fur, even special kinds of maggots that specialize in the interiors of broken horns, not to mention all the bacteria and fungi pouring out into the surrounding environment as well. In turn, all of these things have their own specialized parasites and predators; larger beetles that prey exclusively on maggots, mites that feed on the eggs of carrion insects, parasitoid wasps, nematodes, a whole food web exploding just around one roadkill skunk. So if you have a setting where gods have always existed and gods can die, then you have to wonder what kinds of things had to have evolved to make a god decompose :)

1) Binary files are 1s and 0s

2) Knitting has knit stitches and purl stitches

You could represent binary data in knitting, as a pattern of knits and purls…

You can knit Doom.

However, after crunching some more numbers:

The compressed Doom installer binary is 2.93 MB. Assuming you are using sock weight yarn, with 7 stitches per inch, results in knitted doom being…

3322 square feet

The idea of a “binary code” was originally developed in the textile industry in pretty much this exact form. Remember punch cards? Probably not! They were a precursor to the floppy disc, and were used to store information in the same sort of binary code that we still use:

Here’s Mary Jackson (c.late 1950s) at a computer. If you look closely in the yellow box, you’ll see a stack of blank punch cards that she will use to store her calculations.

This is what a card might look like once punched. Note that the written numbers on the card are for human reference, and not understood by the computer. 

But what does it have to do with textiles? Almost exactly what OP suggested. Now even though machine knitting is old as balls, I feel that there are few people outside of the industry or craft communities who have ever seen a knitting machine. 

Here’s a flatbed knitting machine (as opposed to a round or tube machine), which honestly looks pretty damn similar to the ones that were first invented in the sixteenth century, and here’s a nice little diagram explaining how it works:

But what if you don’t just want a plain stocking stitch sweater? What if you want a multi-color design, or lace, or the like? You can quite easily add in another color and integrate it into your design, but for, say, a consistent intarsia (two-color repeating pattern), human error is too likely. Plus, it takes too long for a knitter in an industrial setting. This is where the binary comes in!

Here’s an intarsia swatch I made in my knitwear class last year. As you can see, the front of the swatch is the inverse of the back. When knitting this, I put a punch card in the reader,

and as you can see, the holes (or 0′s) told the machine not to knit the ground color (1′s) and the machine was set up in such a way that the second color would come through when the first color was told not to knit.

Wires going through magnets.  This is how all of the important early digital computers stored information temporarily.  Each magnetic core could store a single bit - a 0 or a 1.  Here’s a picture of a variation of this, called rope core memory, from one NASA’s Apollo guidance computers:

You may think this looks incredibly handmade, and that’s because it is.  But these are also extreme close-ups.  Here’s the scale of the individual cores:

The only people who had the skills necessary to thread all of these cores precisely enough were textile and garment workers.  Little old ladies would literally thread the wires by hand.

With a Jacquard loom instead of painstakingly picking up every little thread by hand to weave in a pattern, which is what folks used to do for brocades in Ye Olde Times, this basically automated that. Essentially all you have to do to weave here is advance the punch cards and throw the shuttle. SO EASY. 

ALSO, it’s not just “little old ladies sewed the first spacesuits,” it’s “the women from the Playtex Corp were the only ones who could sew within the tolerances needed.” Yes, THAT Playtex Corp, the one who makes bras. Bra-makers sent us to the moon. 

And the cool thing with them was that they did it all WITHOUT PINS, WITHOUT SEAM RIPPING and in ONE TRY. You couldn’t use pins or re-sew seams because the spacesuits had to be airtight, so any additional holes in them were NO GOOD. They were also sewing to some STUPID tight tolerances-in our costume shop if you’re within an eighth of an inch of being on the line, you’re usually good. The Playtex ladies were working on tolerances of 1/32nd of an inch. 1/32nd. AND IN 21 LAYERS OF FABRIC. 

Here are the punch cards:

Some of these looms take up to 1600 spools. That is necessary to make their many different patterns.  Here are some patterns:

How many punchcards per pattern?

 This many:

Dialogue is tricky for many reasons, but a good place to start is knowing what shouldn’t even be in dialogue to begin with. 

Filler Words

While using words like Um, Uh, Like, ect. can do a lot to show a character’s hesitance or nervousness, there are other great ways to show these emotions without those filler words. Add body language, gestures, facial expressions, or pauses to show the character’s anxiety. I’ve seen ellipses used to denote pauses in dialogue, but only do this if you’re stingy with them. 

Also, be economical. Don’t use more words than you need to. When I’m editing my own dialogue, one word I’m always deleting is “that.” If you cut it from the following sentences, they roll off the tongue much easier. 

“I didn’t know that she was there.”

“I found out that he was cheating on me.”

“He said that he’d meet us there.”

Long Explanations

Say you’ve just written this fantastic chapter where your protagonist has been through absolute hell, yet they discovered something crucial to your plot. Then, in the next chapter, your protagonist meets up with another character and needs to catch them up on everything that just happened. It is more than okay to say something like, “Sarah told Bill what happened.” Focus instead on how Bill reacts or what he says in response. Readers  don’t want to hear an explanation of something they just read, so keep that in mind when recapping events between characters.

Greetings

When I answer the telephone, I say hello. When I see someone at work, I say hey and ask how it’s going. That’s realistic dialogue. But despite its authenticity, it has no place in fiction. Have you ever noticed how people on TV never say goodbye when they’re on the phone? Or they tend to just barge into a scene and start talking? We know people usually greet each other appropriately, but we go with it because we don’t want to waste time on trivialities when we’re enjoying a story.

Character Names

Use character names in dialogue sparingly. When two characters are speaking to each other, it’s redundant to use the other’s name.  A general rule of thumb is to only use a character’s name in dialogue when you’re trying to get that character’s attention, or if there are multiple people in the scene and you need to make it clear who she’s speaking to. When in doubt, leave it out!

And some last tips!

-Watch movies or television, or listen to an audio book. Part of learning to write great dialogue is hearing it. 

-Find a dialogue heavy scene you enjoy and analyze it! Do some characters speak in only fragments? Do some rarely use contractions? How many simple sentences vs. compound/complex sentences are there? How does the author denote accents or bizarre speaking patterns? 

-Read aloud dialogue you’ve written, either by yourself or with a friend. 

-If you’re writing prose, write the scene in script format first. Don’t worry about anything except the words inside those quotation marks.

Now go put words in people’s mouths!

Other great resources:

How to Write Great Dialogue

The Power of Silence

How to Write Dialogue

ᴋᴀᴡᴀʜ ɪᴊᴇɴ (ʙʟᴜᴇ ᴠᴏʟᴄᴀɴᴏ) ɪɴᴅᴏɴᴇsɪᴀ

ᴛᴜʀǫᴜᴏɪsᴇ ɪᴄᴇ: ʟᴀᴋᴇ ʙᴀɪᴋᴀʟ-ʀᴜssɪᴀ

sᴜᴘᴇʀᴄᴇʟʟ sᴛᴏʀᴍ

ɢʀᴇᴇɴ ғʟᴀsʜ sᴜɴsᴇᴛ

sɴᴏᴡ ᴄʜɪᴍɴᴇʏ: ᴍᴏᴜɴᴛ ᴇʀʙᴜs-ᴀɴᴛᴀʀᴛɪᴄᴀ

sᴋʏ ᴘᴜɴᴄʜ

sᴛʀɪᴘᴇᴅ ɪᴄᴇʙᴇʀɢs:ᴀɴᴛᴀʀᴛɪᴄᴀ

ʟɪɢʜᴛ ᴘɪʟʟᴀʀs

sᴀʟᴀʀ ᴅᴇ ᴜʏᴜɴɪ (ʀᴇғʟᴇᴄᴛɪɴɢ ᴅᴇsᴇʀᴛ) ʙᴏʟɪᴠɪᴀ

ᴍᴀᴇʟsᴛʀᴏᴍ

ᴇʏᴇ ᴏғ sᴀʜᴀʀᴀ:ᴍᴀᴜʀɪᴛᴀɴɪᴀ

ғɪʀᴇ ʀᴀɪɴʙᴏᴡ

ᴘᴏʀᴏʀᴏᴄᴀ (ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴇɴᴅɪɴɢ ᴡᴀᴠᴇ) ᴀᴍᴀᴢᴏɴ ʀɪᴠᴇʀ-ʙʀᴀᴢɪʟ

ᴀᴜʀᴏʀᴀ ʙᴏʀᴇᴀʟɪs

ɢʀᴇᴀᴛ ʙʟᴜᴇ ʜᴏʟᴇ:ʙᴇʟɪᴢᴇ

ʀᴀɪɴʙᴏᴡ ᴇᴜᴄᴀʟʏᴘᴛᴜs ᴛʀᴇᴇs

sᴛᴏɴᴇ ғᴏʀᴇsᴛ:ᴍᴀᴅᴀɢᴀsᴄᴀʀ

ᴄᴀᴛᴀᴛᴜᴍʙᴏ ʟɪɢʜᴛɴɪɴɢ (ɴᴇᴠᴇʀᴇɴᴅɪɴɢ sᴛᴏʀᴍ) ᴠᴇɴᴇᴢᴜᴇʟᴀ

ᴍᴀᴍᴍᴀᴛᴜs ᴄʟᴏᴜᴅs

ᴡʜɪᴛᴇ ʀᴀɪɴʙᴏᴡ

ᴜɴᴅᴇʀᴡᴀᴛᴇʀ ᴄʀᴏᴘ ᴄɪʀᴄʟᴇs

ʙɪᴏʟᴜᴍɪɴᴇsᴄᴇɴᴛ ᴡᴀᴠᴇs

ᴍᴏʀɴɪɴɢ ɢʟᴏʀʏ ᴄʟᴏᴜᴅs

ᴠᴏʟᴄᴀɴɪᴄ ʟɪɢʜᴛɪɴɢ

ɴᴀᴄʀᴇᴏᴜs ᴄʟᴏᴜᴅs

ʀᴀɪɴʙᴏᴡ ᴍᴏᴜɴᴛᴀɪɴs:ᴄʜɪɴᴀ

ʟᴇɴᴛɪᴄᴜʟᴀʀ ᴄʟᴏᴜᴅ

The “pacing” of a piece of media comes down to one thing, and one thing only, and it has nothing to do with your personal level of interest. It comes down to this question alone: Is the piece of media making effective use of the time it has?

That’s it.

So, for example, things which are NOT a example of bad pacing include a piece of media that is:

A slow burn

Episodic

Fast-paced

Prioritizing character interaction over intricate plot

Opening in medias res without immediate context

Incorporating a large number of subplots

Incorporating very few subplots

Bad pacing IS when a piece of media has

“Wasted” time, ie, screentime or page space dedicated to plotlines or characters that are ultimately irrelevant to the plot or thematic resolution at the cost of properly developing that resolution. Pour one out for the SW:TCW fans.

The presence of a sidestory or giving secondary characters a separate resolution of their personal arc is not “bad writing,” and only becomes a pacing issue if it falls into one of the other two categories.

Not enough time, ie, a story attempts to involve more plotlines than it has time or space to give satisfying resolutions to, resulting in all of them being “rushed” even though the writer(s) made scrupulous use of every second of page/screentime and made sure every single section advanced those storylines.

Padding for time, ie, Open-World Game Syndrome. Essentially, you have ten hours of genuinely satisfying story….but “short games don’t sell,” so you insert vast swathes of empty landscape to traverse, a bunch of nonsense fetch quests to complete, or take one really satisfying questline and repeat it ten times with different names/macguffins, to create 40 hours of “gameplay” that have stopped being fun because the same thing happens over and over. If you think this doesn’t happen in novels, you have never read Oliver Twist.

Another note on pacing: There are, except arguably in standalone movies, at least two levels of pacing going on at any given time. There’s the pacing within the installment, and the pacing within the series. Generally, there’s three levels of pacing–within the installment (a chapter, an episode, a level), within the volume (a season, a novel, a game), and within the series as a whole. Sometimes, in fact FREQUENTLY, a piece of media will work on one of these levels but not on all of them. (Usually the ideal is that it works on all three, but that’s not always important! Not every individual chapter of a novel needs to be actively relevant to the entire overarching series.)

Honestly, the best possible masterclass in how to recognize good, bad, and “they tried their best but needed more space” pacing? If you want to learn this skill, and get better at recognizing it?

Doctor Who.

ESPECIALLY Classic Who, which has clearly-delineated “serials” within their seasons. You can pretty much pick any serial at random, and once you’ve seen a few of them, you get a REALLY good feel for things like, for example…

Wow, that serial did not need to be twelve episodes long; they got captured and escaped at least three different times and made like four different plans that they ended up not being able to execute, and maybe once or twice they would have ramped up the tension, but it really didn’t contribute anything–this could have been a normal four-episode serial and been much stronger.

Holy shit there were WAY too many balls being juggled in this, this would have been better with the concepts split into two separate serials, as it stands they only had four episodes and they just couldn’t develop anything fully

Oh my god that was AMAZING I want to watch it again and take notes on how they divided up the individual episodes and what plot beats they chose to break on each week

Eh, structurally that was good, but even as a 90-minute special that nuwho episode feels like it would have worked a lot better as a Classic serial with a little more room to breathe.

How in the actual name of god did they stretch like twenty minutes of actual story into a four-episode serial (derogatory)

How in the actual name of god did they stretch like twenty minutes of actual story into a four-episode serial (awestruck)

If you’re not actively trying to learn pacing, either for literary analysis or your own writing…honestly? Just learn to differentiate between whether the pacing is bad or if it just doesn’t appeal to you. There’s a WORLD of difference between “The pacing is too slow” and “the pacing is too slow for me.” 

“I really prefer a slower build into a universe; the fact that it opens in medias res and you piece together where you are and how the magic system works over the next several chapters from context is way too fast-paced for me and makes me feel lost, so I bounced off it” is, usually, a much more constructive commentary than “the pacing is bad”. 

This is a very specific rule that has been taken dramatically out of context and is almost always used incorrectly.

“Show, don’t tell” applies to character traits and worldbuilding, not information in the plot.

It may be easier to “get” this rule if you forget the specific phrasing for a minute. This is a mnemonic device to avoid Informed Attributes, nothing more and nothing less. 

Character traits like a character being funny, smart, kind, annoying, badass, etc, should be established by their behavior in-universe and the reactions of others to them–if you just SAY they’re X thing but never show it, then you’re just telling the audience these things. Similarly you can’t just tell the audience that a setting has brutal winters and expect to be believed, when the clothing, architecture, preparations, etc shown as common in that setting do not match those that brutal winters would necessitate. 

To recap:

Violations of Show Don’t Tell:

A viewpoint character describing themselves as having a trait (being a loner, easily distractable, clumsy, etc) but not actually shown to possess it (lacking friends, getting distracted from anything important, or dropping/tripping over things at inopportune moments.)

The narration declaring an emotional state (”Character A was furious”) rather than demonstrating the emotion through dialogue or depicting it onscreen.

A fourth-wall-breaking narrator; ie, Kuzco in The Emperor’s New Groove directly addressing the audience to explain that he’s a llama and also the protagonist, is NOT the same! This actually serves as a flawless example of showing rather than telling–we are SHOWN that Kuzco is immature and egotistical, even though that’s not what he’s saying.

A fictional society or setting being declared by the narrative to be free of a negative trait–bigotry, for example–but that negative trait being clearly present, where this discrepancy is not narratively engaged with. 

(For example: There is officially no sexism in Thedas and yet female characters are subject to gendered slurs and expectations; the world of Honor Harrington is supposedly societally opposed to eugenics, yet “cures” for disability and constant mentions of a nebulous genetic “advantage” from certain characters’ ancestry are regular plot points that are viewed positively by the characters and are not narratively questioned.)

A character declaring that their society has no bigotry, when that character is clearly wrong, is not the same thing.

The narrative voice declaring objective correctness; everyone who agrees with the protagonist is portrayed as correct and anyone who questions them is portrayed as evil, or else there is no questioning whatsoever. For example: in Star Trek: Enterprise, Jonathan Archer tortures an unarmed prisoner. What follows is a multi-episode arc in which every person he respects along with Starfleet Command goes out of their way to dismiss the idea that he should bear any guilt, or that his actions were anything but completely necessary and objectively morally correct. No narrative space is allowed for disagreement, or for the audience to come to its own conclusion.

NOT Violations of Show Don’t Tell:

A character explaining a concept to another character who would logically, within that universe/situation, be the recipient of such an explanation.

An in-universe explanation BECOMES a SdT violation if the explanation fails to play out in reality, such as a spaceship being described as slow or flawed in some way but never actually having those weaknesses. Imagine if the Millennium Falcon was constantly described as a broken-down piece of junk…and never had any mechanical failures, AND Han and Chewie weren’t constantly shown repairing it!

Information being revealed through dialogue, period. Having your hacker in a heist movie describe the enemy security system isn’t “telling” and thus bad writing. Having information revealed organically through dialogue is what “show” means.

The “as you know” trope is technically a Show Don’t Tell violation, despite being dialogue, because it’s unnatural within the universe and serves solely to let the writer deliver information directly, ie, telling.

Characters discussing their own actions and expressing their motivations and/or decision-making process at the time.

The existence of an omnipotent narrator, or the narration itself confirming something. Narration saying “there was no way anyone could make it in time” is delivering contextual information, not breaking Show Don’t Tell. 

Keep in mind that “Show, don’t tell” is meant to be advice for beginning authors. Because “telling” is easier and requires less skill than “showing,” inexperienced authors need to focus on getting as much “show” in as possible. 

However, “telling” is also extremely important. Sometimes, especially in written formats, the most appropriate way to deliver information to the audience is to just say it and move on.

Keep in mind that a viewpoint character in anything but…a portal fantasy, essentially…is going to be familiar with the world they’re in. Not every protagonist needs to be a raw newcomer with zero knowledge of their new world! In most cases, a viewpoint character is going to know things that the audience doesn’t. Generally, the ONLY natural way to introduce worldbuilding in this situation is to just have the narration point them out. (It makes sense for Obi-Wan to have to explain the Force; it would make no sense for Han to explain the concept of space travel to Luke, who grew up in this universe and knows what the hell a starship is. So, if you’re writing the novelization of A New Hope, you need to just say “and so they jumped into hyperspace, the strange blue-white plane that allowed faster-than-light travel” and move the hell on.)

For that matter, in some media (ie, children’s cartoons) where teaching a moral lesson is the clear intent, a certain level of “telling” is not only appropriate but necessary!

The actual goal of “showing” and “telling” is to maintain a balance, and make sure everything feels natural. Show things that need to be shown, and…don’t waste everyone’s time showing things that would feel much more natural if they were just told.

A few years ago, I went to an anatomy conference and they had a huge 3D printed vampire skull, and these thoughts have been on my mind ever since I saw the teeth up-close. 

The under-utilized potential for this bothers me a lot… like in movies… it’s just bite and done!

What happened to ritual shaving or elaborate skin engraving?

now get ready for Danger Rocks

Please do not lick any of these

1. Chrysotile

aka Asbestos! It heals lung cancer! heals it from 0HP to full health! it causes cancer do not touch do not lick

okay but this is a cool danger rock, it’s a physical carcinogen. As in, it doesn’t poison you into having cancer, it just has little needle-y bits that LITERALLY STIR UP your DNA and break it, and when the cells try to repair their DNA they get it wrong and you get cancer

2. Torbenite

A super pretty danger rock! it’s a uranium ore and releases radon gas for Extra Poison!

3. Hutchinsonite - (Tl,Pb)2As5S9

This danger rock has it all! Lead! arsenic! Thallium! All super toxic! Will legit kill you

seriously don’t lick this one, i’m looking at you, fellow geologists

thallium doesn’t taste like anything so you’re not even getting data, just poisoned

4. Cinnabar (Mercury sulfide)

Can be a very pretty red color! so it was used to make paint. The paint was super toxic.

In addition to being dangerous to your health, it’s also morally dangerous! someone had to mine it (v dangerous) so even owning it feels unethical

5. Stibnite (Antimony sulfide)

people used to make spoons and makeup and shit out of this, the spoons poisoned people who ate with them. It’s kinda pretty but not worth dying over

6. Orpiment  (an arsenic sulfide)

Look how pretty it is!!

“Incorrect handling” WILL poison you, that’s fucking arsenic

Honorable mentions:

I am such a huge horse nerd and I apologize. :( But I’m really tired of seeing girths that are halfway down a horse’s stomach. This may not be interesting to anyone who is not me, but I like to draw fancy saddles and ridiculously long shanks on bits. Also, horses are the only animal I can draw, so I take advantage of that.

Okay, so as promised, let’s talk about plotting sequels. I use the Save The Cat outline a whole lot, because it’s really worked for me, but it’s not without criticisms. With that in mind, just keep in mind all outline formulas are merely guides, and you shouldn’t let them stifle your process. I’m going to frame the following in the Four Act Structure - Act 1, Act 2a, Act 2b, and Act 3, with a defined mid-Act 2 split. If this does not work for you, don’t despair! There are many ways to structure a plot.

Let’s get on to writing sequels. Now, every book has to have its own structure - beginning, middle, and end. You can’t just chop a book in into two or three parts, tempting as that might be, though you can end on cliffhangers (sorta). The most common advice is to take your books and fit them within a larger Four Act structure.

But what this doesn’t mean is splitting, say, a trilogy into Book 1 Act 1, Book 2 Act 2, etc. A whole first book in just Act 1 with no Inciting Event in sight until the end will not hook your readers - and frankly, will bore you to tears to write. You will want to have the same beats you’d normally have for a stand-alone book - but with every sequel, you’ll raise the stakes, heighten the tension, and bring about new realizations to the main characters.

Duologies. This one is going to be a bit easier, because our Four Act Structure gives us a False Victory/Defeat in the Middle of Act 2, so we can adapt this to the climax of Book 1 into that split.

A False Victory climax can be any of the following:

The villain is defeated, only to reveal a bigger villain to fight.

The most critical problem has been solved, but stopping what’s caused it will be even more costly.

The romantic interest has been won - but are they truly the right one?

A False Defeat climax, therefore, would go something like this:

The heroes lost the battle, but discovered the key to defeating the villain - if they can reach it in time.

The protagonist married the wrong man at the alter - only to realize they must rectify this mistake in Book 2.

The hero/love interest/central figure dies - but they’ve left those to take up the charge for them (and perhaps find a resurrection spell out there…)

Basically, the end of Book 1 will likely be the realization they haven’t solved the problem, and the stakes are going to be even higher for Book 2 (world-ending even, figuratively or literally). Book 1, if we’re following the Save the Cat structure, is going about fixing the problem the wrong way and discovering the flaws holding the main characters back. Book 2 will be going about fixing the problem the right way, with the main characters confronting their own flaws in the process.

Examples of duologies include:

Jordan Ifueko’s Raybearer series

Kat Cho’s Wicked Fox series

Rin Chupeco’s Cruel Kingdom series

Melissa Albert’s Hazel Wood series (so far)

Trilogies. The classic structure, not nearly as easy to do as it looks. In order to keep your readers hooked, you’re going to need to raise the stakes, reveal new threats, and bring your book world to the brink of destruction (this can be fantastical or personal). For this definition, I’m talking about trilogies that follow the same characters and same problems. Our Four Act Structure doesn’t bisect so easily into this format, but we can still think of if this way:

Book 1 is bringing us out of the Ordinary World in Act 1. No matter how fantastical things are or how many vampires invade town, your character is still on familiar ground until the climax throws them off the deep end and into Act 2.

Book 2 is going to usually throw characters into unfamiliar territory. The main character is suddenly crowned king, the vampires are on your side against a bigger threat now, or everything you knew about space is tossed out the window. In the first book, the protagonist may have been able to ignore their flaws, but in Book 2 they must reluctantly deal with them, especially if ignoring them starts getting people killed.

Book 3 has to be your banger. Everything is on an uphill rush toward the ultimate climax, where the protagonist must defeat the threat (space aliens, alcoholism, the evil wizard in-laws) or face world destruction (literally, the world will explode, or on a smaller scale, the protagonist’s life will be destroyed). You want to pull out all the stops on this one - new settings, bigger threats, and the ultimate confrontation of your protagonist’s internal conflict.

Now, let’s look at this in the Four Act Structure (keeping in mind each book will have their own structures as well).

Book 1 is your Act 1 crashing into Act 2, your trilogy’s Inciting Event the climax that thrusts your protagonist into a new world. Your protagonist has figured out how to fight vampires - but at the end of the book, super vampires show up. Your magician has stopped the evil spell, but it’s shaken his confidence in magic - and something far worse has escaped out in the world in the process. Book 1 is the Ordinary World crashing into the Extraordinary one.

Book 2, I must admit, is a bit malleable. With this structure, I’ve seen many authors use the False Victory/Defeat mid-point as the ending climax, and that does work most of the time. There’s a lot of crazy fun you can have in Act 2, so don’t feel like you have to cut it short just to fit a certain structure. Book 2 is your Extraordinary world - new possibilities, new threats, new rules.

Book 3 will be Act 2b and Act 3. I recommend this specifically because Act 3 is when your protagonist knows what they’re doing and we’ve nothing more to learn from them or about their world - it’s short for a reason. That’s why I recommend making most of the book fit in your Act 2b structure - the main characters know the right way to do things now, but they still face new challenges and make new mistakes. The fate of the world is at stake, and there’s still a high risk that they will fail. Book 3 is your Ordinary World threatened by the Extraordinary one. Neither might survive the end.

Examples of trilogies include:

Jonathan Stroud’s Bartimaeus triology (and one unconnected book)

V.E. Schwab’s Darker Shade of Magic trilogy

S. A. Chakraborty’s City of Brass trilogy

This isn’t the easiest to parse without details - what I recommend is take your two-book or three-book plans, however vague they may be, and lay them out within the Four Act structure to see what fits and what doesn’t. (Excel is a great program for this, for better or worse).

Still confused? The Four Act structure doesn’t work for you? Need some other perspectives? Here’s some links on other ways to approach writing a series:

Outlining A Trilogy

How to Write a Book Trilogy

Four Ways to Plot a Trilogy

Crafting a Fantasy Saga in Just Two Books

Writing Sequels