Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A New Hunger Has Been Revealed

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I could see these Inguma trying to get people to put aside differences between humans to go after the "real enemy", though that real enemy is probably going to be Family...

    Yeah, let's just say that their inclusion seems logical as fear of the other is a classic fear, but as an "other" in some ways and one who tries to fight down his culturally imposed fears of certain "othered" groups, they also make me very uncomfortable as protagonists. That said, just because something is my squick doesn't mean I want to stop other people from appreciating it.

    Anyway, if anyone here knows TheKingsRaven's Ride to Damascus Compact, these guys sound just like the Beast that hounded the Freedom Bus in their origin story.


    A god is just a monster you kneel to. - ArcaneArts, Quoting "Fall of Gods"

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by ajf115 View Post
      Sounds more like a Nightmare, if I'm honest. Creating hallucinations of 'clones' that get more real with Satiety Expenditure, Exceptional Success and so on.

      Yeah, I thought about that too. I just wanted it to be a more Physical thing. I'm sure the writers have put some actual thought into it.


      Comment


      • #48
        Considering how the Size-based Atavism works, you could probably have an Atavism for it. Sort of effectively becoming 'more' rather than bigger.

        Comment


        • #49
          Fear of the Other, you say? I have just the gentleman for you.


          Haberdasher's Requiem Conversions and Homebrew

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Master Aquatosic View Post
            I could see these Inguma trying to get people to put aside differences between humans to go after the "real enemy", though that real enemy is probably going to be Family...
            I've already got an idea for an Enabler who targets those who struggle with the desire to engage in taboos (such as closet homosexuals), yet go out of their way to chastise and humiliate those who openly indulge in them. After finally convincing them to give into their urges, the Enabler airs it to the public, thus making them the subject of the same ridicule they subjected others to.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Nyrufa View Post

              I've already got an idea for an Enabler who targets those who struggle with the desire to engage in taboos (such as closet homosexuals), yet go out of their way to chastise and humiliate those who openly indulge in them. After finally convincing them to give into their urges, the Enabler airs it to the public, thus making them the subject of the same ridicule they subjected others to.
              At this point, I think we could really benefit from a Dual Hungers Merit. I think it could give a lot of wiggle room for character concepts: a Beast like the one you described above could be an Enabler/Nemesis, tempting people to break their taboos and then humiliating them as punishment, or a Beast with the Hungers of Transgressions/Ruin, who loves watching people ruin their reputations by giving in to their darkest, most shameful desires.


              Haberdasher's Requiem Conversions and Homebrew

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Nyrufa View Post

                I've already got an idea for an Enabler who targets those who struggle with the desire to engage in taboos (such as closet homosexuals), yet go out of their way to chastise and humiliate those who openly indulge in them. After finally convincing them to give into their urges, the Enabler airs it to the public, thus making them the subject of the same ridicule they subjected others to.
                Yeah, not sure how much I love the idea of a Beast whose entire character concept is stigmatizing homosexuality.


                Just call me Lex.

                Female pronouns for me, please.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by atamajakki View Post

                  Yeah, not sure how much I love the idea of a Beast whose entire character concept is stigmatizing homosexuality.

                  I said 'such as.'

                  And they wouldn't be going after every homosexual, just the ones who try to throw off suspicion by ripping on others.

                  In other words, they'd feed on hypocrites.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Nyrufa View Post


                    I said 'such as.'

                    And they wouldn't be going after every homosexual, just the ones who try to throw off suspicion by ripping on others.

                    In other words, they'd feed on hypocrites.
                    Okay, you said precisely none of that, you just said they feed off closeted homosexuals. Feel free to act defensive, but you could also just apologize and say the base concept was in poor taste.


                    Just call me Lex.

                    Female pronouns for me, please.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by atamajakki View Post

                      Okay, you said precisely none of that, you just said they feed off closeted homosexuals. Feel free to act defensive, but you could also just apologize and say the base concept was in poor taste.

                      I strongly advise you to read my post before throwing accusations my way. I specifically said closet homosexuals who go out of their way to chastise and humiliate those who are openly gay. You can even check my post up there to see that I haven't recently edited it.

                      You must have misinterpreted my meaning.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Nyrufa View Post
                        I specifically said closet homosexuals who go out of their way to chastise and humiliate those who are openly gay.[…]

                        You must have misinterpreted my meaning.
                        You also specifically said that they'd be subjected to the same behavior that they engaged in. Quit while you're behind, Nyr.


                        Resident Sanguinary Analyst
                        Currently Consuming: Changeling: the Lost 1e

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Satchel View Post

                          You also specifically said that they'd be subjected to the same behavior that they engaged in. Quit while you're behind, Nyr.

                          No, I specifically said they'd be subjected to the same mistreatment they gave others. Meaning that if somebody is gay, but refuses to admit they're gay, while at the same time going around and making fun of people for being gay, then the Enabler tricks them into a scenario where they reveal their secret gayness, then displays it for everybody to find out.

                          And that's a bad thing, how?

                          They go around tearing other people down for something they themselves are guilty of, and then when they're on the receiving end of it, that's somehow bad?

                          That sounds exactly like what a good Nemesis should be trying to achieve. Exposing their victims to the same abuse they've inflicted upon others for so long.

                          Sorry, but if I'm falling behind in this discussion (I wouldn't call it a debate), I seriously need somebody to clarify why.


                          Also, like I said, I specifically said the phrase "such as" - meaning that closet homosexuals aren't even the primary focus of their targets. They go after hypocrites. Meaning, anybody who tells you not to do something, but then goes and does it themselves when they think nobody's watching.

                          That's what they'd be trying to expose to the public. Not what kind of gender you prefer to involve yourself with.


                          To be honest, I actually expected a reaction kind of like this, when I proposed the character idea. Which is why I tried to clarify my meaning as much as possible. Atamajakki simply misread my post and picked up on something that wasn't there. They even said that my (and I quote) "entire character concept is stigmatizing homosexuality."

                          Which could not be any further from the truth; that is a colossal leap from anything I actually wrote. I'm looking right at my original post, I've read through it more than 6 times. I do not see any connotations that might be considered offensive to people.
                          Last edited by Nyrufa; 10-13-2017, 02:48 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Nyrufa View Post
                            They go around tearing other people down for something they themselves are guilty of, and then when they're on the receiving end of it, that's somehow bad?
                            It is, in fact, generally considered extremely poor form to out someone with the specific goal of seeing them ridiculed and ostracized, Nyr.

                            Applying "exposing hypocrites" to the specific example of internalized homophobia — the example of what this character preys upon that you specifically chose to present — cannot be done without perpetrating the risk of violence predicated upon the knowledge of a person's sexual preference.

                            This isn't "Boss Richman keeps telling his employees to be frugal, but his employees have just learned he spends thirty-thousand dollars a week on decadent secret society bacchanalia," this is "Ted the Homophobe Who Hangs Out With Other Homophobes keeps saying gay people are going to hell and deserve to have the shit beat out of them, but his homophobe buddies have just learned he slept with a dude on his own initiative while completely sober and in control of his own faculties." "The public" is not confined to big-hearted people who will limit themselves to scathing remarks — this is stuff that gets used to fuel mob violence.

                            This isn't a matter of offense, this is a matter of using "exploit and expose the phenomenon of closeted homophobes" as part of the elevator pitch for what is otherwise a fairly standard narrative leveraged by a Beast who feeds from getting people to break their own rules. It's careless and tone-deaf and "I didn't mean it like that" doesn't change the outcome here any more than it does accidentally running over the neighbor kid's pet dog. You lose nothing by apologizing for the mistake.


                            Resident Sanguinary Analyst
                            Currently Consuming: Changeling: the Lost 1e

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Presumably along with the Nightmares of Confinement will be some abilities revolving around exerting social pressure, too.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Satchel View Post
                                It is, in fact, generally considered extremely poor form to out someone with the specific goal of seeing them ridiculed and ostracized, Nyr.

                                Applying "exposing hypocrites" to the specific example of internalized homophobia — the example of what this character preys upon that you specifically chose to present — cannot be done without perpetrating the risk of violence predicated upon the knowledge of a person's sexual preference.

                                This isn't "Boss Richman keeps telling his employees to be frugal, but his employees have just learned he spends thirty-thousand dollars a week on decadent secret society bacchanalia," this is "Ted the Homophobe Who Hangs Out With Other Homophobes keeps saying gay people are going to hell and deserve to have the shit beat out of them, but his homophobe buddies have just learned he slept with a dude on his own initiative while completely sober and in control of his own faculties." "The public" is not confined to big-hearted people who will limit themselves to scathing remarks — this is stuff that gets used to fuel mob violence.

                                This isn't a matter of offense, this is a matter of using "exploit and expose the phenomenon of closeted homophobes" as part of the elevator pitch for what is otherwise a fairly standard narrative leveraged by a Beast who feeds from getting people to break their own rules. It's careless and tone-deaf and "I didn't mean it like that" doesn't change the outcome here any more than it does accidentally running over the neighbor kid's pet dog. You lose nothing by apologizing for the mistake.


                                Even if I did apologize, it wouldn't be sincere. Basically, this is the same scenario as somebody who apologizes once they've been found guilty of a crime. They're not sorry they did something wrong, they're sorry they got caught.

                                But I want to clarify that I don't see my post as being wrong, which is why the apology would be insincere. In my eyes, if you're the kind of person who goes around abusing other people just so that a bunch of a-holes won't turn their attentions on you, then you get no sympathy from me. I have known these kinds of people personally. I have even been the subject of their mistreatments through the entirety of my youth. My own brother was among them!

                                So no, I will not apologize for a character concept that revolves around dishing out a little payback to these kinds of people.


                                What I will do, however, is admit that I could have chosen a better example than closest homosexuals. I just couldn't think of one at the time, so I wrote the first one that came to my head. Thinking about it now, my original post could have made its point just as clearly as if I simply used the term 'hypocrites', instead of giving a specific example. If you'd like me to edit my post to something like that, I'd be happy to do so, before this explodes into something entirely unnecessary.
                                Last edited by Nyrufa; 10-13-2017, 01:51 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X