A Budgie

I did a question! Q: So, Hoid can't physically hurt someone, but does this ban extend to mental harm and harm through inaction? A: No. Hoid can mentally hurt someone, or allow them to be hurt, but when considering physical trauma he gets nauseous, to the point he can be incapacitated.

Here's more from today's game.

*hugs* I'm sorry to hear that.

Last time I went through the cards, I didn't see that, but we need that card. It's good. Actually, we'll probably gain like a pile of new ones when Oathbringiner comes out.

*headpat* I'm sorry to hear that. I hope you get your friend back soon.

One thing: what's Oathbreaker?

*bows

More:

Some screengrabs from the game:

I'd think that the cosmere stuff would be on tumblr. I mean, most of that sort of thing- the unsavory side of a fandom- is focused there. I've been on there a few times to look at fanart and most of it is pretty normal, some of it pretty damnation amazing, but I've seen one or two more questionable things. Less then I would have expected though, funnily enough. I've heard stories of authors trying to find some nice fanart of some of their characters and really not liking what they saw. On the shard though, everyone is really nice. I mean, there was an entire thread about what seperates us as a fandom, and one of the major points was that most people are really nice, there aren't really many actual flame wars, etc.

@Orlion On a Cob fandoms can also mean something else: if a book or something has a reputation for having a terrifying fandom, they might not want to get into it since they'll be potentially associated with all of that.

So...today I was talking to someone who read Sanderson books, (but didn't know about the cosmere), and I asked him if he had read the later Mistborn books. He told me that he hadn't, because he won't read any non-traditional style fantasy. And that just...kinda got me thinking. I mean, it's okay to have preferences, but I don't think that people should just not read an entire genre because they don't think they'll like it. Come on, if he enjoyed Mistborn 1 he'd probably enjoy the later ones. So I just think that people should be more willing to try things than they are. What do you lot think?

Aw, I'd love to come, except...I have no money and I'm really young.

‘That that had that that ten times but had had had had only thrice. Increased had had usage had had to be overlooked, but not if the number exceeds that that that usage.’‘Take the first had had and that that in the book by way of example,’ said Lady Cavendish. ‘You would have thought that that first had had had had good occasion to be seen as had, had you not? Had had had approval but had had had not; equally it is true to say that that that that had had approval but that that other that that had not.’ ‘So the problem with that other that that was that…?’‘That that other-other that that had had approval.’

That's fine. Happy to help.

Oh no, they still use horses for traffic control and such here. You know, since you can't really use cars or anything, and it's good for them to be higher up for protection etc.

*hugs* I'm sorry to hear that.

*hug* I hope you get better.

What the fig for me. Oh, and thank budgies.

*hug*

One thing I think is that quite often death is simply used as a story device. Oh, main character is sad. Why? Because their parents died and oh no how tragic. Oh, I want to put in something that'll provoke a reader/viewer reaction. What should I do? I know, I'll kill off a beloved character. Sometimes a death is put in not for the characters, but for the viewers. It'll be used to establish the character, or something similar, and will be important for a short time, and will only be mentioned or crop up when it's convenient. Anyway, I think your argument is quite good, although I think maybe instead of providing one long example, you could provide two or so and shorten the explanation. That's just what I think though, I'm not completely sure. And talking about stories where this is done, one I know does it well is called Undertale (a videogame which I haven't actually played, but seen my friends play it enough and talk about it that I know pretty much the entire storyline). Here be spoilers for it, of course. This one takes the issue that, in a lot of videogames, the entire point is to kill the bad guys. They have no names or personalities, they're just the things you kill to win. But in this game, the monsters you have to kill are actually people too. Trying to kill them all results in the characters fighting you in revenge for their dead friends and family members, with one of them even knowing that you are just playing a game, and that they're nothing to you. The entire point is to make you think about the culling of nameless bad guys in many games.

Um...good luck?

*hugs* Hey, I'm sure things'll get better. You can do this!

Okay, so I plan to go to the Perth one. I'll have to go through the list of unasked questions, if I don't come up with any of my own before then.