What are some good-aligned uses for a Love Potion?
Improving the happiness of both parties in the initial discomfort of an arranged marriage.
>>46919526
Saving a marriage
>>46919526
Destroying it.
Using it as the catalyst for a divination spell to find the creator, so they can be punished for making it.
Such an enchantment would constitute a violation of The Fourth Law of Magic and therefore would never be Good under any circumstance.
>>46919526
Thinking with your big head.
>>46919526
Turning a prostitute to monogamy.
>>46919526
Drinking it to find a love for doing good.
>>46919526
getting two people to finally open up to each otherI'm assuming by "love potion" you mean alcohol?
>>46919526
Helping a genderswapped boy come to terms with her new life by finding her a husband.
>>46919637
>contributing to a mental illness is a good act.
>>46919568
Fantasy marriage counseling was probably a pretty easy job.
>>46919649
She's already genderswapped. The good act is making her accept it.
>>46919660
No the good act would be reversing it.
>how can using will altering magic potion be considered good thing ?
it can't
Make a succubus fall in love with a good aligned character like cleric or paladin, therefore paving the way for her redeemption.
>2016
>still caring about alignments
>>46919656
I figure "Have you tried love potion? Have you tried girdle of goolieflipping?" are the fantasy marriage counseling equivalent of "Have you checked that it is plugged in? Have you tried rebooting it?" in our tech support, solving 90% of cases.
>>46919665
Too tricky. That's end goal of an adventure tier stuff. For a commoner or low-level character, acceptance is better.
>>46919669
Are spells that give people courage evil then?
>>46919526
To lay the dragon
>>46919713
You can get one in PF for 2250 gp.
>>46919757
A potion to reverse the effect, that is.
>>46919725
>you are aware this thing will kill you
>common sense tells you to leave
>bard casts a spell to make you fight it anyway
Yes.
>>46919757
>Implying any commoner will ever own more than 10 gp
>>46919757
>>46919774
How many peasants who earn a couple of coppers a week will ever see one though?
>>46919526
There's no Good way of using a love potion as intended because mind control is bad. Come on, Dingus.
>>46919576
"Love" potions in the Dresden-verse only reduce inhibitions. Much like the noise that is their base. Although you do raise a good point, did the potion Susan drank in in the first novel affect how she felt for Harry?
>>46919828
>Dresden
>>46919526
Stop coming up with retarded questions just in order to justify your constant spamming of some shitty dA OC waifu, you pathetic motherfucker.
>>46919850
Dresden files.
>>46919802
>as intended
Poisons are made with the intention to kill, but many have found more benign purposes as life-saving disinfectants or insecticides.
>>46919660
>>46919665
The good act is to smite the evil creature to be quite honest.
>>46920040
>evil creature
What's evil about being a curse victim?
>>46920040
Being genderbent and made to fall in love with a guy isn't evil.
>>46919526
uuuuh make evil deathknightnazis feel love so they wont do their bissniss?
>>46920053
Ask a vampire or werewolf.
>>46919526
Depends on your definition of good. I mean you might be able to use it to get the leaders of two warring countries to fall in love with each other, ending the war and saving countless lives, but you would still be subverting their will.
>>46919526
Curing Postpartum Depression.
Assuming love potions create platonic love.
If they only make romantic love, its only use is as a non-lethal weapon, and only as a last resort.
>>46920265
Assuming they did not seek out to become one it is still not "good" to kill them. It can be justifiable "necessary evil" to put them down, but the "good" solution of the problem would be to decurse them.
>>46920648
Where I'm from, we call neccesary evils "good".
Otherwise, it's unfair to the people who have to commit them. Not everyone gets to be the ones who feed starving kittens.
>>46919789
How many peasants are genderswapped?
>>46919828
Is there anything that that writer doesn't manage to butcher? He's like a lore-rapist.
>>46920811
>butcher
kek
>>46919526
Take it straight to the dome and feel the love, maaaannnn.
>>46920811
I don't know but I'm getting kind of upset that Peace Talks keeps getting delayed. And to be fair, the first few books were Jim getting the setting fleshed out, seeing what works and what doesn't, and who hasn't tweaked a setting mid game.
If all involved parties have consented to the use of the love potion, then its use is a neutral act at worst. Why would it be used? Maybe two people are in a loveless relationship. Maybe they realize they'd be perfect for each other but there's no spark. Maybe they want to stay together for their children. Maybe it's an arranged marriage. Who cares? The important thing is they're not harming anyone but themselves, and they've chosen to inflict any such harm on themselves. So what's the problem?
>>46921035
Defiance of the divine will of the God/Goddess of Love.
Whatever is spawned from the unsanctioned union will likely be the next fantasy Hitler.
>>46920754Me. It was my own fault. Never be rude to an adventurer, especially not one with a caster in the party.
>>46921168
God/desses of love are usually depicted as terrible people anyway. Capricious, random, care less for compatibility, long-term stability, and happiness than their own whimsy. I'm happy ending their tyranny.
>>46921168
Voldemort?
>>46921254
Suddenly, a lot makes sense.
>>46919526
There are none, you mewling wretch. Love is the greatest sin.
Using it on yourself to help bring happiness to your arranged political marriage
>>46919526
If the drinker and the soon-to-be-beloved both consent to it, it's certainly non-Evil. If that occurs as part of some overall Good action, then I'd say it's a Good use. For example, actors who intend to earn money for charity through their performance want to be more convincing.
>>46921236
hitler was the product of a single mother household though
>>46921753
sorry meant for >>46921168
>>46919725
Means are neither good or evil.
It's the ends you use them for.
>>46921886
Source on this? I think I like it
>>46922031
The Redeemer (of Necromunda)
>>46920702
>Where I'm from, we justify anything we like by saying that we're right.
So like everywhere else, then?
>>46919955
What an incredibly disingenuous argument, thanks for reminding me that this is /tg/. Insecticides and anti-bacterials are poisons being used EXACTLY as intended, just in low enough doses that they aren't also killing the humans using them. If your setting has love potions that coincidentally also cure acne if applied topically, that's great, but don't compare 'niche curious side effect' to 'exact same effect on a smaller scale'. You're an idiot, anon.
Give it to two people who already like each other and want to be in a relationship.
Love potions themselves are neutral at best and evil at worst. The forcibly manipulate someone's feelings is pretty anti-good, unless manipulating those emotions somehow causes a greater good to occur, somehow saving lives and the like.
>>46921886
That's not true at all!
>>46919526
Diluting it among the drinks of every participant in a peace accord, so that each person will feel a hearty respect or grudging admiration for their former foes, as well as a willingness to make concessions that won't screw one country over more than the other.
>>46919637
>>46919660
magical realm aside, forcing a straight dude to fuck other dudes wouldn't be good aligned, even if he's currently anatomically compromised.
>>46922461
Manipulating emotions is kind of inherent in mammals, though. I guess that's different from purposefully doing it with a potion. I mean, that takes forethought and planning and shit.
>>46919576
There are laws of magic?
Causing a chain of events that allows Chronenburg Rick and Morty to find a good home.
Making a young red dragon fall in love with an adult gold.
>>46919576
You mean it would never be Lawful, but it could be Good.
>>46924375
Isn't that like the first step that leads to the apocalypse or something?
>>46924421
Magically depriving someone of their free will is not a Good action, Anon.
>>46924516
It totally is if the being in question is an extraplanar Evil creature. They're irredeemably Evil and they're also made of Evil. Slaying or neutralizing them will always be Good. The method of execution doesn't matter because there is no rational reason to be merciful to Devils and Demons. No one is obligated to spare pure Evil any form of suffering. All that matters is that Evil was smote.
Putting a Helm of Opposite Alignment on a demon is no worse than cutting it down with your sword. It's arguably better as it leaves a Good being in its wake.
>>46919526
Making a homosexual man or woman fall in love with a person of the opposite sex, thus curing him or her of his or hers mental illness.
>>46924475
Only if they're both male.
>>46924649
That happens in real life though with closet cases. They end up loving their spouse but aren't really attracted to them.
>>46919828
So it is just the name of a drink?
>>46920702
>Otherwise, it's unfair
Fuck you. It's exactly fair, and people who don't have the fortitude to accept the harm they do shouldn't be talking about "necessary evils". If you're unwilling to face the reality of your actions, if you have to pretend they weren't REALLY bad in order to sleep at night, then you are, by definition, unqualified to judge them.
If you've gotta kill somebody to make the world a better place, then by all means do it, but don't take pride in the killing, and don't pretend you can ignore what you did because you had a reason for it. Too many people have hard-ons for making "tough choices", and too few for decency.
More of a neutral use then a good use
If some cute guy is into you and you want to love them back but you are too jaded to feel anything
>>46924847
It sounds like you just want to make those hard choices even harder for some reason.
>>46919526
Give it to people who hate themselves irrationally.
>>46924847
Better to just cripple and imprison them, yeah?
>>46925624
Fuck you captcha, eating my image
>>46919526
Political sabotage and blackmail to dethrone a corrupt individual in power. That royal that kept crowing on and on about human supremacy and how other races need to be slaughtered to the last? A few sips of love potion and the next thing you know the party "happens" to stumble upon them going to town on a hobgoblin, and wouldn't you know it? They happened to be dragging along a few of the guards with mentions of how they saw a hobgoblin creeping into the castle earlier.
>>46919526
Love potions are very rarely used by Good chemists, usually for the sake of breaking Anime Protagonist Density Syndrome or restoring emotions to those who have psychological issues.
>>46925206
Sure. I want them to actually be hard choices instead of "Muh greater good means I don't need to feel guilt". You're responsible for all the consequences of your actions, not just the ones you wanted. It's impossible to be perfectly good under that standard, obviously, but that doesn't make it acceptable to quit trying or to define your way out of any wrongdoing.
>>46925624
Not really sure where you're going with this. There are cases where one or the other is the more humane option - probably, I'd have asked Ozai which he'd prefer. But I like that Aang stood by his principles, there, even if I don't share them. And I also like that he didn't buy the argument that necessity has anything to do with morality.
>>46926859
"Greater Good" isn't actually the intended purpose behind committing "necessary evils." That's simply a "ends justify the means" ideology.
A "neccesary" evil is one that cannot be done without. It's not optional. It's not something that ends up being slightly more good than bad in the grand scheme of things, it's something that needs to be done because the cost of not doing it would be disastrous.
Someone has to do it.
Why should anyone feel guilt for doing what needs to be done?
>>46927133
>Why should anyone feel guilt for doing what needs to be done?
Because they still did it. Whatever harm it caused that force people to rationalize it as necessary was still done. You might not need to worry about whether or not you're a "bad person" or whatever, but you still owe sympathy and your best efforts at making amends to people who were hurt by your actions. My point is that necessity isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for morality. It's just a valid reason why people might do bad things.
>no midsummer's night dream
>>46927212
That's irrational guilt at that point. If you are feeling bad because circumstances made performing a superficially "bad" thing a necessity, you didn't really have any control over being forced to make that "decision."
If the choice is between "what must be done" and "not doing what must be done", that's hardly a decision to feel guilty about if you choose the former. It's nice to go through the motions and to feel that irrational guilt, since it's much better for someone to feel guilty when they shouldn't than to not feel guilty when they should, but there's no real need to try and conjure up some misattributed guilt just for the sake of feeling sympathy towards people who were hurt. You should feel that sympathy regardless of how irrationally guilty you might feel.
>>46927245
>any of that feyfuckery
>good-aligned
>>46927462
>If the choice is between "what must be done" and "not doing what must be done"
Okay, but my argument is that "what must be done" could be "bombing a village with some innocent people in it", and I think that's something you should feel guilt over even if it really was necessary. It's just that you shouldn't let that guilt stop you. Presumably, the guilt of failure to act would be greater still. Sometimes life sucks and you get put in an impossible situation like that, but you can't get rid of that problem by defining it away, any more than the redefinition of a planet destroyed Pluto.
The correct response to somebody saying, "You killed my family!" isn't "It was necessary, therefore it was a good act." It's "I'm sorry that was necessary." And, to be clear, the post I was responding to originally did literally say that it was good to commit a necessary evil.
Or, the short version - if you're going to judge people for their deeds, do that. If something's evil, and somebody does it, then that person did something evil, even if they ALSO did something good or necessary.
>Evil wizard visits prosperous kingdom
>Wizard curses the king and queen to never feel love for each other again
>Good alchemist dispatches evil wizard (somehow)
>Hears of the curse put on the king and queen
>makes two love potions for the two
>King and queen love each other again
Granted, this is a farfetched scenario. I would use love potions as the most extreme form of marriage counseling.
>>46919526
Repopulating a country ravaged by war or plague.
>>46921886
I always picture Redeemer having Blackadder's voice.
>>46927799
Apologies should not given out so lightly, especially formal ones.
If you were forced to kill someone's family, you are sorry that it had to be done, and not that you did it. The key distinction is that your action is blameless, and any reparations would formally come at the cost of those who pushed the situation to where it became a necessity. Anything from your own coffers would be charity.
Performing a necessary evil is good. It is necessary. The evil part is a bit of a misnomer, an unfortunate add-on to distinguish the act from all the other necessary actions a good person might have to do.
>>46927944
That's not going to work, lack of love isn't why the population is low, war and plague is. Deal with the war and plague and the population will fix itself, otherwise you just have thousands of loving couples with babies killed by the plague
>>46919526
Well, if your setting has good-alignment, then it has evil-alignment. Presumably.
And if it has evil-alignment, then it has characters and actions which are inarguably evil. Presumably.
So, a good use for a love potion would be to prevent an evil character from taking an evil action that they otherwise would. Something like drugging up the demons so you can set them up for an ambush, rather than letting them sacrifice a town full of children.
Beyond that rather contrived situation, not really. Fucking over someone's head and taking over their choices is a pretty non-good action, overall.
>>46927528
By fey standards, it was fairly benign.
>>46928913
I was implying the aftermath of a plague or war. Obviously you don't use it during.
>>46928163
Not the guy you're arguing with, but I also disagree. What you're describing is a school of thought known as consequentialism. It defines a moral act as one that ultimately results in a greater degree of good, even if the act itself would be considered immoral. However, the problem with this kind of rationalisation is that it relies entirely on hindsight. The good or evil of an act cannot be judged except by its consequences, which are often outside the control of the actor himself.
The traditional thought experiment for this school is the trolley problem. Everyone's heard of it at some point. A runaway trolley is barrelling down some train tracks towards 4 people who cannot get out of the way in time. You are standing next to a lever that could switch the trolley onto a different track, but there is a single person who would be hit instead. Is the correct choice to change the track so that only one person dies or to leave it and allow 4 people to die, but without any action from you?
Further, and bringing this back on topic, would changing the tracks be a necessary evil, given that it would explicitly result in less death than taking no action? This problem has been debated over since the late 60s and we're no closer to answering it now than we were then, so I'd be interested to hear your take.
None unless you're the kind of tard who thinks Tristan and Ysolde is meant to be a love story.
>>46931078
The fey are still CN
>>46919526
Devising a means of intensifying the more benign effects (empathy, goodwill, protective instinct, lack of aggression), removing the negative effects (confusion, jealousy, obsession, impaired thinking), then aerosolizing the resulting product after reproducing it in great enough amounts to achieve complete global saturation.
Make sure to introduce enough doses that the new mindset stabilizes and normalizes. If all goes according to plan, you should be able to end the spectres of war and murder simply by ensuring that everyone loves everyone.
And I do mean everyone.
>>46919828
so love potions are just molly?
>>46931703
Pretty much. Well, that character's love potions are, but if his apprentice (who has broken the Fourth Law) made one I suspect it would be less benign.
>>46931703
Better than being roofies
>>46919526
giving it to a guy that knocked some chick up and bailed on her.
>>46922031
The Redeemer, hes about as 40k as it gets. great comics.
>>46931838
Why would you want that kind of guy to stick around?
>>46919568
Its not that they didn't love each other, its that their love was destructive.
>>46919576
6 months in the isocubes.
>>46919576
Oh, go to bed Warden Luccio. You have a brain to un-fuck.
>Sincerely, Bob the Talking Skull.
>>46931703
If you have no idea of the pun you just made, you may leave in peace.If not, DAMMIT CARLOS!
>>46919526
Starting a war.
>Hey, Tristan, could you come over here, please?
>>46921753
>Hitler was the product of a single mother household though
Well, that explains Eros, too, come to think of it.Was he Hephaestus' boy, Ares' bastard, or was he another example of deity parthogenesis? I can't remember...
>>46931589
From a purely utilitarian view, I rather not touch the lever at all. The second I touch the lever to save four lives, i am a murderer who chose to kill one innocent to save four others.
Feeding to an evil-doer so they focus themselves onto another person (preferably another evil doer not interested in the imbibed one).
>>46923171
So after the whole SJW dragonspear "IM TRANS" incident recently. I decided I wanted to do a bit of writing to show how to better handle a 'trans' character.
>Elven (or dwarven) clans arrange a marriage of heirs, because they're allies and their wealth goes better together etc.
>This will only go through if the heirs both agree it
>Both families only end up producing children of the same gender (or no more heirs cause infertility etc).
>Both heirs were raised with the knowledge that it was important to their families. Seeing that it's not going to happen without some personal sacrifices - they decide to go forward with the marriage anyways
>For marriage to be considered 'viable' in local law, and heir has to be produced.
>[potion of gender swap] effect cost ranges from 500g to 2250g.
Works better if they're both boys, because one has to stay the other gender throughout the pregnancy.
>Ends up in a loving stable relationship
They decide to produce more heirs (maybe one goes back to birth gender and other decides to be pregnant this time).
And all of a sudden you have a better story about trans characters than whatever 'her' name is coming up and basically screaming at a stranger "IM TRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANS!"
>>46919757
In truth the effect (for most humanoids) would only cost about 500gp
>>46919776
Any commoner with a single point in a profession or craft (even without considering it being a 'trained class skill') makes around 500g a year. More if it's a human commoner with profession / craft, +2 in int/wis and their free feat on skill focus (craft) or (profession), which jumps it up to about +8 to their role and severely increases their earnings.
>>46937579
Where's the 500gp one?
>>46937533
Ugh, this reminds me of a weird thing my group's forever GM likes to do. Genderswapping and transformation. He doesn't detail it much, so I'm not sure that's actually his fetish or not, but it happens so often I would think it would be. Makes things way more complicated than they need to be.
Most recently, it was a dmpc bard elf who had that as a natural ability. He could just swap his gender whenever. Made for a weird marriage when he kept hitting on my centauress who herself was somewhat of a bard but also the party's only decent fighter (except the dmpc who was such a dex monkey and had so many magical items that he could do literally everything better than her).
Centauress kept rebuffing his advances gently, wanting to stay friends but he seemed to take that as a tease or something because she didn't outright say "hell no" to the idea of getting married. Was terrified to say outright say no because this elf dude was the heir to the continental kingdom of the elves and was a demon magnet, attracting increasingly complex shenanigans until we had to fight a fallen angel who was the mother/father (also genderswapping but usually stayed female whereas the elf usually stayed male) of all succubi and incubi. Just as well, I figured the centaur would probably not want to burn any bridges because the elf was largely responsible for a lot of her success.
The fallen angel uses her op-please-nerf corruption and mind powers to try and bed the elf to steal his soul. Doesn't work because the elf transforms into a girl before things happen.
Eventually time stream gets rewritten by a lich friend of the party's who fucked up his teleport and goes back in time. Fallen angel is powerful enough to know the change happened and so redos things as well to make herself married to the elf for many years before the centaur ever gets born. Elf is now the head of both the elf's continental kingdom and the most powerful regional human city with the fallen angel as his bride.
>>46935664
Inaction is also a choice, and it could be argued that by not pulling the switch you are allowing four deaths in order to save one life-- not murder, necessarily, but a case could be made for criminal negligence.
>>46920068
No but the person who forced them to fall in love is
>>46927906
They're royalty. They probably never loved one another in the first place
>>46939658
Sometimes I wonder how people end up in these kind of games, where the soap opera dial is set to 12 and no one knows how to turn it down.
To execute the Kiss of True Love, of course.
>>46931648
Ok, Albert Wesker.
>>46928138
I had the exact same thing in mind.
>>46931589
>>46935664
The Trolly problem is a more specifically Utilitarian (Consequentialism is an umbrella category to which Utilitarianism belongs) illustration, and in Utilitarianism, the morally correct option is the option that saves the most lives, not leaving the handle alone.
You both fail on a fundamental level.
That said, there are those people who believe that touching the lever makes you personally culpable whereas leaving it alone means it isn't your fault.
>>46922119
>>46921886
I am triggered that they used the word "and" in making the Acronym SLAUGHT, but ignored the words "which", "to", and "the".
That's lazy writing.
>>46928138
For me it was always a lighthearted version of cornholio the cultist from dawn of war.
>>46943136
When a bunch of passive players get together it happens. However, the flip side is that once you actively take charge, most will fall into formation quickly as long as you act confidently. No one wants to hurt anyone else's feelings unless until it gets so grating and horrible that they snap. Luckily that game did not end with anyone snapping but the GM picked up on why we were reluctant to continue after the pixie got pregnant from paladium cat demon spirits and would die unless exorcised or unless she remained as a person-sized pixie for a while.
>>46919604
thanks that actually helps for my new character concept.
secret identitity as a doctor, specialised in couple-therapie
>>46919660
>LOL UR A FREAK
>BETTER ACCEPT DELUSION AMIRITE
Trannies are scum
>>46919526
on a completly unrelated matter, what would be the Craft (Alchemy) Check for a succesful love-potion? 25? 30?
>>46919526
getting a couple that do already have strong feelings for each other to finally fess up
Help shy girls get laid.
>>46945039
Easily in the 30+ range, considering that it's a DC 25 to produce an effect comparable to somewhere in between a level 0 and level 1 spell, and a love potion is likely the equivalent of a 3rd or 4th level spell.
A purely alchemical love potion would likely have a DC of 50 or even 60, considering that an "epic" 2d6 version of alchemist fire has a DC of 40.
>>46952119
I can think of a few cheaper ways to get shy girls laid anon
>>46958113
Alcohol and non-threatening men?
>>46958961
or women
same principal
Use it on something with no emotions at all so it can learn to love, thus triggering a huge character arc where it ends up sacrificing itself to save the party.
>>46958961
It seems like most of the "good-aligned uses for a love potion" can be done easier and cheaper by just using alcohol.
Truly mankind's friend.
>>46959010
Is forcing something to >feel really a Good thing? Especially when many writers out there have deconstructed love as an inherently good emotion?
>>46920603
Shit, that's actually pretty good if the effect is temporary, especially if it can produce platonic love for those the individual is not sexually attracted to. That'd be so hard to keep some soldiers/peacekeepers (as in police equivalent) from abusing them though. You'd have to have like one guy trained for that whose job was to use it and who was vetted thoroughly.
>>46959089
If I had no emotions, and was forced to feel, I think i'd be grateful for the chance to have a new experience.
Even if I hated them and I hated being forced to feel, i'd still enjoy the wonder of being able to do such things for at least a short time.
>>46924516
So if you were trapped in a dungeon by a tyrant while he works on his doomsday spell or whatever it would be an evil act for your party caster to mind control a guard into unlocking their door?
>>46959156
well in that case you're going to give the free will back
>>46959156
I go by the strict rule of "If it was used to solve a puzzle in a Legacy of Cain game, it's evil."
>>46919526
Receive a temporary power up by imbibing it.
What, is nobody else running a game where the power of love is the most powerful thing in the multiverse?
>>46920867
This.
>>46931648
Isn't that how you get Reavers?
>>46919637
>>46919660
>Give love potion to genderswapped boy
>First person she sees is the qt baker's daughter
What now?
>>46919526
Solving the "WHY DON'T YOU TWO JUST FUCK FOR CHRIST'S SAKE" problem once and for all
>>46964005
Yes. Yes it is.
>>46964005
I think the worse effect was not the few people who went mad and murdered everything including themselves, but the fact that the calming effect led to everyone essentially giving up and dying since they had no more purpose.
>>46964437
I banish (You) to /u/, /d/, or>>>/qst/
>>46919555
"We married because of our duty to our families, but we just find each other really... BORING. And we definitely don't want to have to resort to adultery to have kids."
>>46968679
Holy shit it got made
Which is great in general, but now I'll never have the excitement in joining in a mini adventure for a thread or two and that's that.
>>46919599
>prostitution is worse than literally controlling someone's mind
Er, what?
>>46969297
mind controls (usually) doesn't spread disease
>>46920930
going from fantasy kitchen sink all myths are real to read bible to find the answers is a pretty big friggin change. to the point where goddamn hades polytheistic greek god of the underworld was around to guard christian artifacts. or where they go out of the way to say some angels can destroy planets (or was it solar systems) but somehow vampires were a thing that was a threat. Its less the change and more that a) the change was shit when taking into account everything there in the setting, and b) protaganist centered universe and morality all the damn time. I'd read the fuck out of a series that started out with a christian setting where they fuck up demons shit and all that, but you cant make the switch halfway in the series. also the writing is only ok, the main draw was always the crazy situations
>>46919526
Creating a giant orgy.
>>46969155
Wait, someone made a thread based off my stupid idea or moottwo made /quest/?
Also, HOLYFUCK WE HAVE A /QUEST/, can we please banish all quest threads there now?
>>46970943
Actually no, it's optional at this point.
Also nudging an ongoing quest towards there will get you deleted (and possibly banned).
>>46971002
Aww....
