(12-21-2018, 08:43 PM)Lord Windos Wrote:

(12-21-2018, 08:19 PM)Spiritmon Wrote:

(12-21-2018, 07:55 PM)Dragonstrike Wrote:

(12-21-2018, 07:53 PM)Spiritmon Wrote: Me too. Kinda reminds me JoJo Bizarre Adventure and Persona. My choice would be Chrono Avenger. And yours?

That arsenal wielding one would probably be my personal pick.  Sounds like it'd be a fun time.

You mean Myrmydon? Looks fun too.

And yours @Lord Windos?

I haven't looked into it, but I probably wouldn't want to be a Channeller in the first place. Maybe a Sorcerer, a Druid, or some varient of Shamen if I want to go outside me comfort zone with magic, but not that. I'm more inclined to play Tank classes like Barbarians, War Priests, or anything that can survive multiple hits and live to fight another day, or Support Classes just to help my party members out, and not play really esoteric classes.

(12-22-2018, 04:48 AM)Spiritmon Wrote: Man, that's what I call rough life. And here I thinking Reiner and Arial have a difficult life.

(12-22-2018, 09:34 PM)Dragonstrike Wrote: Made an edit to my last post if you haven't caught it yet, Windos.

(12-22-2018, 10:09 PM)Lord Windos Wrote:

(12-22-2018, 09:34 PM)Dragonstrike Wrote: Made an edit to my last post if you haven't caught it yet, Windos.

Didn't until you mentioned it, so thanks! And have to say, aw...... Weavile gets 1 XP for using his softer side!

Sorry for not posting most of the day, but I'll get started right away! Its just....well, hard to finish this for me, both creatively and intensely. Writing up these big story posts can take hours of work sometimes (And more, when I try and inevitably fail to spell check my work), so its hard to motivate myself to keep things a-going. Still, I'm not going to leave this campaign of my go unfinished, so please bear with me here mates, even if it takes awhile. If anything, just nag at me to post more, and that'll do the trick!

(12-23-2018, 04:10 AM)Lord Windos Wrote:

Spoiler

Quick update for you, Dragonstrike: when I wrote this part of my last post -

' The long and short of it is this: I couldn't afford to let you in on my plans. Not for my sake, not for yours, and.....not for the plans. Because.....*Sighs* ......I couldn't risk you, Weavile, or Kingdra fucking shit up again and ruining my one chance of getting my Lucy back, like back in the Dragon Shrine. '

I meant for those 'Not for....' parts to be taken as more like 'Okay, these are also reasons why I didn't include you, but they aren't the main ones, nor the most important (for a given value), compared to the Big Reason, which is really really shitty but regrettably true, which makes it all the shittier for me and you.' It was meant to convey that Taylor was thinking of everyone's/thing's safety in her decision, but that it wasn't her primary, driving motivation for keeping him out of the loop ('I'm not keeping him out not JUST because I want to keep him safe, but that I think he'll fuck up/could fuck up/fuck things up regardless of quality/not be up to the task/etc. and put EVERYTHING in danger, which also includes him.', in sum) - or at least its not to her consciously, past and/or present.

After all, it HAS been established she's feeling incredibly conflicted and guilty about Reiner and what's happened to him, so that is probably scewing her perspective and reasoning/recollection of past events by a none to insubstantial amount.  Which begs the question of why she's so guilty, remorseful, repentant, and torn up about things in the first place (besides thinking Reiner was gone forever for the longest time, ofc, but she's a tough girl too, so...) as if she wasn't she most likely would have stuck to her original post escape plan of lying about everything to save face/prevent shitstorms (Which would have necessitated a Bullshit Roll for Reiner, btw)......

However, your interpretation of the post intrigues me enough that I'm willing to simply just accept that as the canon context, as it does add a lot of nuance to Taylor that isn't just plainly spoken. SO, Imma ask you this: Would you prefer to go by my definition of her phrasing, or yours?

(12-23-2018, 04:32 AM)Dragonstrike Wrote: Hmmmm...well, tbh, the the use of 'not' in that phrasing was what lead me to interpret it that way.  And while I did raise an eyebrow at first, I figured it could be justifiable, so I tried to think of a way it could be and work that in.

She IS speaking her mind, though, so my interpretation might not be entirely accurate to that.  I could suggest rephrasing it without the use of 'not' to make that a little clearer, though.  Her main reason does kinda cover all three other categories as well, and that could be used in the reasoning to make it a bit clearer.  'Cuz if there's even one major screwup, then they likely both get caught (and probably punished severely for repeat offenses) and the entire plan goes to pot.

And as far as editing my own post goes, it wouldn't be too difficult for me to accomodate for that change/clarification, either.

(12-23-2018, 04:43 AM)Lord Windos Wrote: Alrighty, I'll rephrase/change that portion of the dialogue to be more clear/less misleading , as I don't like it when I do a shoddy enough job of story telling that the player gets the wrong idea entirely of what's happening!

Not right now, though. Its early in the morning for me, and I need to head off to bed now, before it gets any earlier! See you then!