confusion is definitely there

Every swing.

Sabine had only seen Stormtroopers cut down by lightsabers a few times in her life.

Once, had been in her earlier days with Kanan and Hera and Zeb on the Ghost. Kanan had let it slip to her not very long ago that he could use the Force and had his own lightsaber, he didn’t say the word Jedi which had confused her at the time since he obviously fit the definition. Not that it mattered that much, she was more concerned about if they were going to boot her off or worse if she failed them on a mission.

Coincidentally, the first of her few failings was the reason Kanan had to use the damn lightsaber in the first place.

She hadn’t seen the last trooper, perhaps because of a glitch in her helmet’s sensory suite, or all of the smoke, or just because she’d shot the trooper once already, center mass, with a Westar-35.

The trooper had staggered up as Kanan came running in, his blaster was overheated and useless from the sheer intensity of the firefight they’d been in. He arrived just in time to watch her turn in surprise at the stormtrooper and take a blaster bolt right to the plastron chest piece.

Beskar armor is tough and E-11s are just light carbines, but the impact knocked her back and down in an ominous spray of sparks while also cracking two of her ribs.

Kanan had swept into action almost instantly, blue plasma snap-hissed to life one moment and in the next the imperial was down with a glowing line through their helmet and chest.

Sabine wasn’t sure if it was her mind trying to fill in the gaps or just misremembering things but she swore she saw Kanan flick his gaze down to his blade before he deactivated it.

The second time she’d seen people killed by a lightsaber was when Kanan sprung from the bacta tank to save the day, she admitted to herself that she wasn’t sure if he’d had that same almost accusing look towards his weapon.

The third time had been with Ezra, running down a hall trying to rescue that dikut Hondo and his piggish friend. That time had been a clear sign that something was up, instead of just cutting through blasters and returning the burning red bolts to their senders Ezra had cut through them like training tatami cutting mats back on Krownest.

It wasn’t very long afterwards that she killed someone with the Darksaber. Unlike Gar Saxon there was no chance to allow the Super Commando to surrender, this was war and there was no room for deliberation.

She’d managed to wrong foot the imperial with a kick before bringing the Darksaber around in a horizontal slash that carved through corrupted beskar armor and deep into the imperial warrior’s chest, burning through bone, through meat and marrow and organs. Even through her helmet filters she could smell vaporized flesh and blood.

But that wasn’t the worst part.

Kanan had once told her that all of your emotions flow into the energy of a lightsaber. What he didn’t tell her she found out then.

When you kill someone with a lightsaber you feel them die, their soul or their Force essence or whatever Jedi nerfshit Kanan would say.

Unlike the detached slaughter of blaster bolt fire a lightsaber forces you to feel the life you’ve taken leave this Galaxy.

Sabine really wished she’d know beforehand.

(So I finally came up with a logical reason for Kanan and Ezra to just cut through the stormtrooper’s blasters. What do you guys think?)





Okay but Clockwork functionally being a cryptid in the Ghost Zone tho

Danny tells one of his ghost friends that he knows the Master of Time and gets basically the same reaction someone would if they said mothman was their best friend

Ghosts make jokes about chugging contaminated ectoplasm and fighting Clockwork behind Walker’s prison at 3 am

There’s a group of ghosts dedicated to proving his existence with a bunch of ‘evidence’ like broken watches and blurry photos of purple-cloaked ghosts that are very obviously not Clockwork

There are conspiracy theory obsessed ghosts who have theories ranging from “Clockwork was a story created by Pariah Dark to keep everyone too paranoid to rebel” to “maybe the real Master of Time was the friends we made along the way” 

oh, shit, people actually asked me to follow up on Preaching The Good Word of A Functional Alignment System, okay

i hope you people know what you’re unleashing here

(whole thing prompted by this right here, notably including the tag #unpopular opinion: the definition of lawful and chaotic has been thoroughly twisted over the years since od&d)

So some of you (the ones who didn’t request this) might be wondering: “Alterz, why would you want to go back to the old alignment method? If people generally agree on the new alignment definitions then why confuse things by trying to change them? Is this just some old system nostalgia?”

Well 1) I’m too young by far for old system nostalgia but more importantly 2) people don’t? agree????? on the alignments???????

And that’s a problem, because the whole point of the alignments is to give some rough guidelines on how any given character is likely to act. It should be inarguable. The very fact that people can have arguments over what an alignment is means that the system has failed.

If you look in the alignment section on the more recent D&D editions, they literally have to go into detail on each alignment to explain what each one means. Worse still, for a system theoretically set up as a gradient, the different alignments are basically buckets and it gets really confusing if a character doesn’t neatly fit into one of those buckets.

Some examples from characters I have actually played: a mercenary who I labeled as neutral because I could make equally compelling arguments for why he should be lawful neutral, chaotic neutral, neutral good, and neutral evil. A hermit who at any given time was chaotic neutral or neutral good, but could never reliably be described as chaotic good.

Under the system I’m about to provide you, the mercenary is inarguably chaotic neutral and the hermit is unambiguously lawful good. End of sentence, all cleared up.

Keep reading

My dear lgbt+ kids, 

Some of you had questions about bi- or pansexuality, so here’s a quick FAQ! 

“What’s the difference between bi and pan?” 

Bi means “attracted to two or more genders”. 

Pan means “attracted to all genders or regardless of gender”. 

“Those definitions are a bit confusing to me!”

That’s okay, there’s nothing embarrassing about asking for clarification! 

I’ll use some examples to explain them further: 

Bianca is attracted to men and women. She identifies as bi. 

Billy is attracted to men and nonbinary people. He identifies as bi, too. 

Polly is attracted to people of any gender - except for men. She could identify as poly (attracted to multiple genders) or as bi (two or more genders!).  

Penelope really doesn’t care about gender. She’s attracted to people, not specific genders - Penelope is pan. 

Pete is attracted to girls. And boys. And agender people. And nonbinary people. And.. Oh, they are attracted to every gender. They are pan! 

“Isn’t bi only for people who like girls and boys?”

Back when people weren’t really aware that nonbinary genders exist/that gender is a spectrum and not just two set categories, bisexuality was often defined as “attracted to girls and boys”. But nowadays we, as a community, are aware that gender and attraction is not as black and white as people used to believed and so the definition of bisexuality got broader to be more inclusive.

That’s why we now define bisexuality as “attracted to two or more genders”. Those genders can be binary or nonbinary! 

Long story short, bi can mean “I like girls and boys” but that’s not the only possible meaning. Remember: Labels are made for people, not the other way around. 

“I’m dating a nonbinary person, does that mean i have to identify as pan?” 

No. People can date nonbinary people and identify with any label. 

“Technically i fit the definition of pan but i feel more comfortable with the label bi. Is that okay?” 

Yes! Your label is yours and only you can decide which label is the right one for you. 

Many people feel this way because they used the label bi before they learned what pan means and now are already out as bi or already feel so comfortable with the label bi that they don’t feel the need to correct it. That’s fully okay! 

Other people prefer bi because the term pan is less commonly known and they prefer to not have to explain their label over and over again. That’s okay, too! 

“Can i be bi/pan and asexual at the same time?” and “I met someone who identifies as bi/pan and asexual! Is that even possible?”  

Yes. Some people are romantically attracted to two, more or all genders but feel no sexual attraction. That’s not a contradiction! 

A term to describe that is “biromantic asexual”/”panromantic asexual”. However, some people prefer to just say “bi asexual” or “pan asexual”.  

Some people also experience fluidity in their level of attraction and might sometimes feel no sexual attraction and at other times feel attraction to two, more or all genders. That’s another possible explanation why someone might identify as bi/pan and asexual. 

“Someone told me pan people are also attracted to animals and now i feel gross for using the term.” 

That’s just something people say to insult lgbt+ people or to paint them as evil. Neither gay, bi nor pan people are attracted to animals. 

“Attracted to all genders” (obviously) means “attracted to humans of all genders.”. Don’t let any lgbt+-phobes run a perfectly harmless label for you, my dear. 

“I’m bi/pan and currently in a girl/boy relationship, am i still lgbt+?”

Yes! People who identify as bi or pan are part of the lgbt+ community, no matter who they date. You don’t need to be in a same-sex relationship to be allowed to identify as lgbt+. 

You are not “betraying” or “invading” the lgbt+ community. I know you’ll sadly encounter people who say such mean things but they are wrong. Your idenity is valid regardless of your relationship status or dating history. 

With all my love, 

Your Tumblr Mom 

y’all: manorian is true love 

me, an intellectual: manorian is true lust 

if you have bad intentions towards me, please stay away, i’m tired.
if you are confused about your intentions towards me, DEFINITELY stay away.

Psych Terminology: Words that begin with Schizo-

Schizophrenia - severe psychotic disorder that causes alterations in perceptions, thought, and behavior. This is the word you probably mean, as it’s the most commonly used.

Schizophreniform - a psychotic disorder that’s basically schizophrenia-lite. Not as many symptoms required, and you can’t have had it for more than 6 months.

Schizoaffective - basically schizophrenia AND a mood disorder (depressive / manic or hypomanic episodes) at the same time.

Schizotypal (Personality Disorder) - a personality disorder that involves difficulties with social interactions and odd & eccentric beliefs and behaviors. 

Schizoid (Personality Disorder) - a personality disorder that involves being detached from and lacking a desire for social relationships. 

None of these words mean having “split” or “multiple” personalities. That’s dissociative identity disorder.

All Four Possibilities:
  1. Izuku Midoriya is a Griffindor – his bravery is what allows his body to leap into the fray without much thought, even if it means breaking his bones or risking his life in the process.
  2. Izuku Midoriya is a Ravenclaw – his tendency to take careful notes and think through actions enables him to instantly call upon information, logically deciding what are the most useful tactics to help him overcome whatever obstacle he is facing at the time.
  3. Izuku Midoriya is a Slytherin – his habit of breaking his bones to overcome obstacles, even when only training, plus the fact that becoming the number one hero is the entire reason he tries so hard at everything that he does, shows how strong his ambitions are.
  4. Izuku Midoriya is a Hufflepuff – his instinct to think of how his failures would let his friends and mentors down, and his need to encourage his friends even when they are acting as his opponent and it might cost him victory, shows how he is willing to put his own ambitions on the back-burner for the sake of supporting those he cares about.

Please discuss.

upbringing + what you strive for
  • Aries IC + Libra MC: You had parents who probably drove you to be independent. They wanted you to not need them, they wanted you to be assertive. Compromise may have been a struggle for you, and now you strive for equality.
  • Taurus IC + Scorpio MC: You had parents that probably gave you a very nice home. Lots of decorations and lots of food were provided to you. There was a sense of shallowness in your childhood that you wanted to escape, and now, you want to find the secrets of the world.
  • Gemini IC + Sagittarius MC: You might’ve struggled with communicating to your parents, so communicating became very important to you. Troubling communication made your restless in your childhood. Now, you want to learn and share everything you know.
  • Cancer IC + Capricorn MC: You may have been overly clingy in your childhood, even though your parents provided you with everything you needed. You constantly felt anxious of being the best in your family due to being provided. You now want to be responsible and hard-working.
  • Leo IC + Aquarius MC: In your childhood, you may have wanted to stand out and to be constantly in the spotlight. You wanted attention and love, but you weren’t provided with enough of this. Now, you want to be independent and help others around you, rather than help yourself. 
  • Virgo IC + Pisces MC: You were given the harsh realities of the world at very young age. You were surrounded by the many stresses of a certain parent, or you were exposed to the diseases of the world. Due to this, you want to be a helping, compassionate, healing hand to to others.
  • Libra IC + Aries MC: Your parents probably told you to follow instead of leading. You always had to play “nice” with the other kids, and you got in trouble for asserting yourself. Now, you want to lead others and create your own path.
  • Scorpio IC + Taurus MC: Your childhood was probably secretive. You looked to be approved, but instead you were manipulated by members of your family and you did not get the love you wanted. Now, you try to make and seek your own comforts, since you lacked it in your childhood.
  • Sagittarius IC + Gemini MC: You might’ve had a strict teacher-student relationship with one of your parents. One of your parents may have scolded you a lot, and maybe twisted the truth to fit themselves. Now, you have a deep urge to explore and find the truth you never found in your childhood.
  • Capricorn IC + Cancer MC: Your parents were perhaps very cold and harsh to you. Your childhood felt more like a job, and fulfilling your duties was a must. Now, you seek to find the warmth and nurturing you never received with a strong need to provide love and care to others.
  • Aquarius IC + Leo MC: Much of your childhood was spent being part of a large community and in a circle of friends. You never really felt you blended in. Due to this, you now want to stand out and to be recognized, and to have fun in the world.
  • Pisces IC + Virgo MC: Your childhood could be many things, but it was definitely confusing. Family troubles were hidden, and you didn’t know what your family really was. So, you escaped into your little world. Now, you want to find and confront the harsh realities of life, and work hard.