Esquestria: The House of the Sun - A pony cultist experience

[Cochimetl]

Well, you're to late for that pal!

Click to shrink...

I am not. I feel you'd be right if Devour won, if she hunted down and ate her father because she hates him, but it didn't.

 

[Arrkhon]

I am not. I feel you'd be right if Devour won, if she hunted down and ate her father because she hates him, but it didn't.

Click to shrink...

True, instead she will eat someone she doesn't know letting her ignore any fallout of their death, after all it it is easier to not self-identify as a monster when you can just avoid any suffering your acts cause

 

[Pittauro]

Ugghhhh



No Hill? No Rich? I'd take the risk and delay of Windy at this point.

...Whats the point of even doing the sacrament like this?

Only the sunk cost basically, I've been drained of all enthusiasm.

Can't even get hyped about Mareinette because there will be the same -or more! - pushback later, unless she is like explicitly stated to be sugar-spice-and-everything-nice~ified.


Are these people going to keep to their ideals when it comes to the other sacraments? I've not seen them argue against taking a lesson from Biddie, even though he of all Names should not get a chance to influence Velvet for the worst.
At least Our Lady is honest! The only Name that wouldn't commit atrocities is probably DoA.


And on that point...


Well, you're to late for that pal!

Click to shrink...

I think you're missing the point, or alternatively you just don't care for it.

Not picking Velvet Hill or Spoiled Rich, but still doing the sacrament with a criminal is basically Velvet recognizing that she has a NEED for that power, enough to commit an immoral act, but that she'll try to pay the lowest cost possible for it.

You ask what's the point of doing the Sacrament like this? Easy. We're doing the Sacrament because we want to befriend Mareinette, remove her as a potential threat AND an ongoing cost (in terms of rebindings), and we also want the Sacrament Power and grail 5.

If you wanted the Sacrament because you wanted to read the story of how Velvet is going to enjoy killing and eating her father, or the mother of her daughter's close friend... well, I DO understand that. Part of me definitely wants to read the Velvet Hill scene.

And when you talk about ideals in relation to our "other" sacraments...

Well, Personal Lantern is about as bad, really, but we're presumably going for Baldomare's.

Biedde's Edge doesn't really take morality into consideration, it's just a fight to earn the right to it, basically. To earn his acknowledgement.

What we're doing with Moth is evil and manipulative. We already accepted that, and we basically committed to do it a couple turns ago anyway, and basically everyone is in agreement on doing it next turn. We decided we need it enough to be worth the "morality" cost... and admittedly Spoiled Rich is disliked enough that most of us don't really feel sorry for her.

...at least yet. We'll see if we change our minds after doing this. the "Mothed" choice is locked at Acquaintance, NOT enemy or stranger, which kinda seems to imply she at least won't outright hate us for it? Then again this is mostly just a guess.

Wolf never really gained enough traction to be a serious option.

The way I see it, the only sacrament that might ACTUALLY have a choice of being picked in the next few turns, that MIGHT be argued to be comparably evil, would be the Winter one. I'm not sure I agree (by all accounts EiB is a painless, almost gentle death), and in some ways the fact we don't get to pick nearly makes it feel more... natural? But it's three deaths compared to one, and we can't mitigate the evilness of the act by picking "more deserving" targets, for as much as that can help...

True, instead she will eat someone she doesn't know letting her ignore any fallout of their death, after all it it is easier to not self-identify as a monster when you can just avoid any suffering your acts cause

Click to shrink...

That's at least partially the point, yes.

The victim not being directly connected to her, while also being a "bad" pony, allows her to not feel as much guilt and rationality and justify the action taken.

Not going after Hill is really just justified because why would you want to cause more chaos Equestria-wide? If Velvet did it, it would just be to indulge in her hate, no other possible valid reason.

If we go for Spoiled Rich, it's a more personal kind of evil. It's going for someone who trusted you, and not only you betray them but ALSO kill them (and eat them) right afterl.

If we're going for a stranger... well, that's Velvet going "I decided I have to do this, what's the most efficient way to do it that will let me live while being able to convince myself I'm not an horrible pony for doing this?"

 

[Alan975]

The victim not being directly connected to her, while also being a "bad" pony, allows her to not feel as much guilt and rationality and justify the action taken.

Click to shrink...

[Need to add here, not ranting at you just got fired up]
This is what I meant to point out, what I kinda-sorta-maybe buried in ugghhhh

Velvet being a contradictive and hypocritical monster is great! I love that! People acting as if that issn't what they're voting for is grating!

Taking out Hill or Rich got talked up as some kind of irredeemable or inherently corruptive option, as opposed to some random that Velvet has no motive to go after?

The less said about the "Just find a criminal," the better, cuz apparently knowing the face of the target and acting like judge, jury and cook is worse than not knowing it?

If we have to send a Name to go fetch a no-name, then why not go for "Give me a spreadsheet of the vilest bastard in Equestria and a dartboard" if every action has to be made by The Good Velvet (TM)?


How about this, what's the thoughts on the precedent set by Velvet just casually ordering the kidnapping and death of someone without so much as a warrant? No smoking gun?

I'd be fine if the cult Beuro went all police state up in here, so long as that's actually acknowledged and strived towards.


I'm tired and drunk, but not enough to not know that this issn't exactly expertly reasoned, but i just don't get it? If it looks like, talks like and walks like a reactionary self-aggrandizing moralist then is it?


Not to start this again but beyond just wanting to win- and I get that! I promise! - What do they want? Is it a self-captive audience that migrated to QQ of all sites, has persisted so far and is just not interested in the story being told? That has experienced just so many Hours and only now have had the thought that "you know, I don't actually like it when a selfish, conniving, 'Got mine, get fucked', murderer does bad things" ?

 

[Arrkhon]

If we're going for a stranger... well, that's Velvet going "I decided I have to do this, what's the most efficient way to do it that will let me live while being able to convince myself I'm not an horrible pony for doing this?"

Click to shrink...

I am pretty sure she's perfectly aware of the fact that she's a horrible pony already, eating ponies she doesn't know over the ones she does won't change this fact

 

[Shaper47]

Well, Personal Lantern is about as bad, really, but we're presumably going for Baldomare's.

Click to shrink...

Eh, I prefer Personal Lantern.

The Sacrament direction just appears to be so much better then Baldomare's.

Biedde's Edge doesn't really take morality into consideration, it's just a fight to earn the right to it, basically. To earn his acknowledgement.

Click to shrink...

...

It's a Colonel based Sacrament though.

What we're doing with Moth is evil and manipulative. We already accepted that, and we basically committed to do it a couple turns ago anyway, and basically everyone is in agreement on doing it next turn.

Click to shrink...

There's a reason I was anti personal Moth Sacrament and pro Master Sacrament.

Really though we could have just followed my old plan back in the day and gotten our Sacrament from the Master.

This action, this cruelty, it was unnecessary.

 

[frigidscholar]

I was against the personal Moth sacrament fwiw back when there was another option yeah. I'd rather not do Mareinette's Sacrament either but that wasn't really an option with the votes. But picking Hill as the one to sacrifice makes the whole deal personal. Picking him as the one to sacrifice makes it more about picking someone that personally wronged her. Whether it's because she has a massive blind spot or she's just completely ignorant about it, Velvet doesn't seem to know her family does shady, 'evil' stuff. It seems like as far as she's concerned the worst Velvet Hill is in her eyes is a ruthless businessman. So picking him over a random criminal with what she knows at this moment means she's doing it specifically because he mistreated her rather than any other misdeeds.

I don't want Velvet to be vengeful in that sort of way, especially since we just did a vote about absolving Steppes of any wrongdoing in her eyes. I'm fine with her being protective toward her family and making people who would threaten them or her not problems anymore, but going after Hill is a step toward a Velvet that responds to slights or mistreatment with hatred and bloody violence and I'm not for taking another step toward the Wolf.

 

[Talon Tiger Dino]

Not to start this again but beyond just wanting to win- and I get that! I promise! - What do they want? Is it a self-captive audience that migrated to QQ of all sites, has persisted so far and is just not interested in the story being told? That has experienced just so many Hours and only now have had the thought that "you know, I don't actually like it when a selfish, conniving, 'Got mine, get fucked', murderer does bad things" ?

Click to shrink...

The only entities Velvet has purposefully murdered thus far have all taken hostile action against her family or her friends. That's not really a "Got mine, get fucked," sort of murdering. Which is why the Mareinette Sacrament has been such a massive series of ongoing arguments, because this will be the first time Velvet has gone after someone that is not trying to ruin her family or friends.

I do share your distaste for how blandly indiscriminate the prisoner acquisition will be though, but people really seem to think that Axe is going to be bad at finding specific categories of horrible people for whatever reason. I still think she'd be perfectly capable of winding in through every damn building in a city until she finds someone suitably detestable, but others did not. Those persons would have also shot down your dartboard, I'm sorry to say.

 

[Flaregamer82253]

Which is why the Mareinette Sacrament has been such a massive series of ongoing arguments, because this will be the first time Velvet hasn't gone after someone that is not trying to ruin her family or friends.

Click to shrink...

Second as far as I'm concerned. We don't talk about it very much, but right now we are actively taking steps towards killing someone else too.

We will kill Discord, and he's someone we've never even spoken too.

 

[Sveta08]

We will kill Discord, and he's someone we've never even spoken too.

Click to shrink...

Yes.

Yes we will.

 

[Talon Tiger Dino]

Second as far as I'm concerned. We don't talk about it very much, but right now we are actively taking steps towards killing someone else too.

We will kill Discord, and he's someone we've never even spoken too.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough, though Discord is a well-known enemy of ponykind and the Alicorn sisters specifically.

 

[ses]

...at least yet. We'll see if we change our minds after doing this. the "Mothed" choice is locked at Acquaintance, NOT enemy or stranger, which kinda seems to imply she at least won't outright hate us for it? Then again this is mostly just a guess.

Click to shrink...

Not a guess, the Moth target specifically becomes "The Amazing Sir Not Appearing In This Quest", per QM ages ago when asked this question many many times. We don't have to worry about loose ends or whatever.

....did we Moth Sacrament Pinkie and this is secretly an amnesia playthrough?

Personally I think we don't need to do Personal Winter. It's three murders for the sake of a marginal power gain (literally only +1 lore level for All In. We'd be twice as well off.... taking a Risen. If we spent those 3 AP on graverobbing and Risen-making we'd get quadruple the Winter levels for All-In and spend 90 bits fewer. Not much of a payoff for as many murders as we've previously committed combined, all under extreme pressure), and we unlock the Sun-In-Rags expedition that Windy has probably already looted bare lmao.

 

[Earth-Destroyer]

Frankly I find the argument that Velvet is or can even be a good pony, as missing the point entirly. That ship sailed the moment Velvet chose to keep Selene for herself, instead of returning her to Celestia.

To put it simply VELVET IT NOT A GOOD PONY, that decision was made actual years ago both in and out of universe, get over it.

 

[ses]

Frankly I find the argument that Velvet is or can even be a good pony, as missing the point entirly. That ship sailed the moment Velvet chose to keep Selene for herself, instead of returning her to Celestia.

To put it simply VELVET IT NOT A GOOD PONY, that decision was made actual years ago both in and out of universe get over it.

Click to shrink...

The QM disagrees with you

 

[Shaper47]

Frankly I find the argument that Velvet is or can even be a good pony, as missing the point entirly. That ship sailed the moment Velvet chose to keep Selene for herself, instead of returning her to Celestia.

To put it simply VELVET IT NOT A GOOD PONY, that decision was made actual years ago both in and out of universe, get over it.

Click to shrink...

Given how there was nothing stopping Luna from just getting wormed again with that choice I wouldn't say that was the turning point.

 

[Cochimetl]

Frankly I find the argument that Velvet is or can even be a good pony, as missing the point entirly. That ship sailed the moment Velvet chose to keep Selene for herself, instead of returning her to Celestia.

To put it simply VELVET IT NOT A GOOD PONY, that decision was made actual years ago both in and out of universe, get over it.

Click to shrink...

I disagree.
Velvet is not a Good Pony in the sense that she is not a law-abiding, harmony-serving follower of the rule of Celestia. She is a criminal, she is a murderer, she has brought corruption into Equestria.
She is a good pony in the sense that she tries to do the best she can. She's getting increasingly warped through her Lore and Glory exposure, but she tries her damn best.

I'm tired and drunk, but not enough to not know that this issn't exactly expertly reasoned, but i just don't get it? If it looks like, talks like and walks like a reactionary self-aggrandizing moralist then is it?


Not to start this again but beyond just wanting to win- and I get that! I promise! - What do they want? Is it a self-captive audience that migrated to QQ of all sites, has persisted so far and is just not interested in the story being told? That has experienced just so many Hours and only now have had the thought that "you know, I don't actually like it when a selfish, conniving, 'Got mine, get fucked', murderer does bad things" ?

Click to shrink...

Let me guess, you've only read the story and not the dicussion in the old thread? I can't blame you, that's a lot of discussion to read, but that would explain your confusion.

We had a nice thing going in SV. The decision was made early on (imo at the point where Velvet could have become a Villain, right after the Luna ritual) that we would try to have Velvet stay moral. To try and do the right thing. When the discussion got heated, it was often about what the 'right thing' was in this context. The thread was acting moralist, and it was great. Great content was being produced, a great story told.

And then everything happened, and that was lost. I assume many of the people that voted that way just didn't follow here? It's the only explanation I see for the last votes to go this way. But that could have been fine.


But then you come in. I don't have to ask myself what you want from this thread, you've made it very clear.

You and @Shaper47 are the closest thing Velvet has to an evil voice in her head, but unlike Shaper, the other voices are starting to listen to you for some god-forsaken reason. We're about as close to letting Velvet EAT A PERSON as we've ever been, and I largely blame you for that.

You're not fitting into the thread cutlure as it used to be, you're the one who tries to take years of story and suddenly drive it into a different direction, and you have the nerve to insult me, saying I don't care about the story?

Well, I suppose part of your insult is correct. You ask what I want?
I want it all back, the way it was. And if that makes me a reactionary, well some things ought to be reacted against.

 

[Solace2117]

I wouldn't say Velvet is good, but I also wouldn't say she's bad. Ultimately despite the My Little Pony background this is still an eldritch horror quest and Velvet is the protagonist. She's come a long way power wise, but compared to the forces arranged against her she's still weak. We got hammered by that fact with the Master. We see it now with Celestia's doom clock and the Mareinette's bindings. Realistically she was always going to slip some, she's a mother who loves her family and friends. Unless she wanted to just die and take the world with her there was no choice. The question becomes how many lines she has to cross and can she step back from them or allow them to warp her view. Does she only do what she's forced to, or does she give in multiple times because it's easier.
Despite what she's done and ultimately will do she still can look for the good in the world and other ponies. As long as that doesn't change she's still holding on.

 

[Talon Tiger Dino]

Frankly I find the argument that Velvet is or can even be a good pony, as missing the point entirly. That ship sailed the moment Velvet chose to keep Selene for herself, instead of returning her to Celestia.

To put it simply VELVET IT NOT A GOOD PONY, that decision was made actual years ago both in and out of universe, get over it.

Click to shrink...

Sorry, Velvet's Level 7 in the Lore of Mothering made her the objectively correct choice for raising an alicorn filly, and she promised Luna's dead parents that she would do what was best for Luna. Celestia's 0 Levels in the Lore of Mothering made returning Selene a bad choice in that lens (and only that lens, it'd probably have been better for Equestria as a whole if Selene had been turned over to Celestia ASAP).

 

[Shaper47]

are the closest thing Velvet has to an evil voice in her head, but unlike Shaper, the other voices are starting to listen to you for some god-forsaken reason. We're about as close to letting Velvet EAT A PERSON as we've ever been, and I largely blame you for that.

Click to shrink...

I'm just going to point out that the personal Moth Sacrament with leash has been expressly stated to be extreamly cruel.

I was the voice against it, I was the one voice saying we should just go get the Master's Sacrament.

I wasn't listened too, on that you are correct but calling me the evil voice. For not wanting such extreamly cruelty, such an unnecessary evil?

You overstep yourself.

 

[Rafuki22]

literally only +1 lore level for All In.

Click to shrink...

Also the power up Winter 5 would grant.

Edit: *Looks up* Also, please don't begin to insult each other by calling the other evil.

 

[Cochimetl]

I'm just going to point out that the personal Moth Sacrament with leash has been expressly stated to be extreamly cruel.

I was the voice against it, I was the one voice saying we should just go get the Master's Sacrament.

I wasn't listened too, on that you are correct but calling me the evil voice. For not wanting such extreamly cruelty, such an unnecessary evil?

You overstep yourself.

Click to shrink...

I'm sorry. I should have specified I view you as the evil voice only when it comes to the Wolf.

 

[Talon Tiger Dino]

I'm still against Leashing Spoiled for Mothing, just let the Sacrament be, "Surprise! Your friend was Mareinette all along, Velvet is just some noble you've never really talked to." The most benign perma-acquaintancing I can think of under the circumstances.

 

[Shaper47]

I'm sorry. I should have specified I view you as the evil voice only when it comes to the Wolf.

Click to shrink...

It cool.

Now that I can understand. I see it as a necessary evil myself but, well, that still counts as evil.

Hang on a minute though...

Do you consider the friendship and love instead of hatred and alienation suggestions I've been pushing to be the evil voice?

 

[Cochimetl]

Hang on a minute though...

Do you consider the friendship and love instead of hatred and alienation suggestions I've been pushing to be the evil voice?

Click to shrink...

No. And I think using the term evil voice was a mistake. Maybe shoulder devil, with you being the shoulder wolf?
I can rely on you advocating for the Wolf. Trying to redeem Evil, Ash and Paranoia is one of the rare instances where that could be good.

 

[Shaper47]

I can rely on you advocating for the Wolf. Trying to redeem Evil, Ash and Paranoia is one of the rare instances where that could be good

Click to shrink...

I wouldn't go so far as calling it redemption.

I just think that hating and wishing to kill part of ourselves when the metaphysics laws of the world contain repetition in a matter directly relayed to a God that hates and wishes to kill themselves is counter productive.

We have to live in the world we create but how we choose to go about that is important. Acting with love, reaching out a hoof in friendship. A small action, a small deed, but it is these kind of choices that define oneself.

 

[ses]

Also the power up Winter 5 would grant.

Edit: *Looks up* Also, please don't begin to insult each other by calling the other evil.

Click to shrink...

Agreed, Rule 1 is very important.

Winter Sacrament gives +10 to winter checks during the Malleary, and +5 to Winter checks during All-In. Befriending Mareinette gives +70 to Grail and Heart checks during All-In, not counting her social specialty bonus, and +40 to Heart and Grail checks during the Malleary.

So 3 murders for +15 total bonuses vs 1 cannibalism for +220 total bonuses (implicitly canceling out befriended marinette AP pre-all in as equal to the winter perk and mansus expedition... i doubt this is true but whatever). This values 1 cannibalism at 44 painless random murders for them to be equivalent morally. It also doesn't include the value of taking a potential Name enemy off the board, which we have valued at 1 Regrettable Action in the past.

I think the Winter Sacrament is worse than the Grail one. I think even contemplating them to be in the same ballpark is crazy. The fact that the Invitation to Dinner prevents an enemy full powered Name matters for the calculus, since that probably matters more than the rest of the benefits combined it's more like declaring 88 random painless murders to be not worse than one cannibalism.

You and @Shaper47 are the closest thing Velvet has to an evil voice in her head, but unlike Shaper, the other voices are starting to listen to you for some god-forsaken reason. We're about as close to letting Velvet EAT A PERSON as we've ever been, and I largely blame you for that.

Click to shrink...

When the alternative plan presented is publicly relying on "We'll just do another Regrettable Action" as the safety net on a kill mareinette plan that absolutely won't work, I think it's pretty reasonable for the "Doing another RA is orders of magnitude worse than Grail Sacrament" idea to gain traction.

 

[Cochimetl]

When the alternative plan presented is publicly relying on "We'll just do another Regrettable Action" as the safety net on a kill mareinette plan that absolutely won't work, I think it's pretty reasonable for the "Doing another RA is orders of magnitude worse than Grail Sacrament" idea to gain traction.

Click to shrink...

As I said, I could stomach it if Velvet did it out of cold necessity.

I think it's not needed. I think we have two separate doom clocks in Mareinette and Celestia, we have to finish the game before either runs ou anyway, and I believe Celestia's will run out before Mareinette's will. I think an unfriended Mareinette might not become a problem before the game ends.

But I also thought that being willing to kill when rescueing Twilight wasn't needed, and I was wrong then. If the decision is "we can't risk All In without Mareinette support", I can live with that.

But if the decision is "Velvet can do this deliciously cruel thing AND get rewarded for it with a Sacrament AND getting Mareinette as a friend? No downsides, full steam ahead on the cruelty train!"? No. The cruelty must be a necessary price paid to be acceptable, not part of the prize won.

 

[Nevermort]

-snip

Click to shrink...

I am sorry, what? Individual voters have nothing to do with this pivot. If you want to blame anything blame tread cowardliness as a whole. People did not want to take Moth sacrament until threat of Celestia. And people did not want to consider Grail Sacrament until threat of All-in expedition. Velvet is moral only until it is not her hide on the line.

I mean scry for Grail 6 and Heart 6 artifacts, send expeditions and with ability to pass artifacts around it would be like you have multiple Mareinettes running around helping you. Instead we are building prison, sending DoA after criminals, some people want to scry for said criminal and also action to take Grail sacrament itself.

I think the Winter Sacrament is worse than the Grail one. I think even contemplating them to be in the same ballpark is crazy. The fact that the Invitation to Dinner prevents an enemy full powered Name matters for the calculus, since that probably matters more than the rest of the benefits combined it's more like declaring 88 random painless murders to be not worse than one cannibalism.

Click to shrink...

You should also count all ponies that Mareinette will eat after Velvet indicates that it is okay to eat them. We were just shown how she interprets Velvet's actions after all. Summoning her was invitation to the table, sacrament is Velvet as host saying that it is time to start eating.

When the alternative plan presented is publicly relying on "We'll just do another Regrettable Action" as the safety net on a kill mareinette plan that absolutely won't work, I think it's pretty reasonable for the "Doing another RA is orders of magnitude worse than Grail Sacrament" idea to gain traction.

Click to shrink...

I mean we had alternative in sending her to Cadance. We also still have alternative of just extending her stay with a gift.

 

[ses]

I think it's not needed. I think we have two separate doom clocks in Mareinette and Celestia, we have to finish the game before either runs ou anyway, and I believe Celestia's will run out before Mareinette's will. I think an unfriended Mareinette might not become a problem before the game ends.

Click to shrink...

You should have been advocating for a plan that doesn't Soothe the Night in that case, since that eats our resources specifically to defuse the Celestia clock.

I think our chance of outspeeding the Mareinette clock died on Turn 19 when we ended up Dancing With Death. It was on life support on Turn 18 when we Wolf'd the Master and destroyed the Heart Heirloom and generic Heart summon, and then took a deathblow.

There's a QM quote from the Master vote that I think applies here:

I will not offer a hidden bad end. But choices have consequences. So, even if a choice is "lose almost all your agency so Cadance and Shining are safe" I will still offer it, because that is not an IMMEDIATE bad end.

Will picking that option push you that much closer to a bad end? Absolutely. But being closer to the line doesn't mean you have already crossed it. It just means you have opened yourself to losing if anyone gives you the slightest of pushes.

Still, if you ever find yourself in this situation again, I advise you to look at spiderhillian's post rather than Light Seeker's. That will put you in a better mindset to understand that the dangers are real, and that you should be wary of them, because I am not in the business of pulling punches.

Click to shrink...

We already had our pushes from our previous screwups. If we could go back and do some things very slightly differently I don't think we'd be in this situation.

As for the rest of it, maybe have a tiny bit more charity for other people motivations? I was firmly in the "Fuck Hill" camp, but I would absolutely have never even brought up or felt the need to do anything to him if we didn't need to do something horrible to someone in order to not die. I disagree with your moral stance as far as that goes but I don't think it's that far apart that it's worth calling other posters evil.

 

[Cochimetl]

As for the rest of it, maybe have a tiny bit more charity for other people motivations? I was firmly in the "Fuck Hill" camp, but I would absolutely have never even brought up or felt the need to do anything to him if we didn't need to do something horrible to someone in order to not die. I disagree with your moral stance as far as that goes but I don't think it's that far apart that it's worth calling other posters evil.

Click to shrink...

I don't think you're evil. You're not the one going "what's even the point of eating someone if it's not someone we know?".

I voted for Ash. I have no room to call others evil for what they vote for.
Buf if someone consistently advocates for Velvet to do evil because they like seeing Velvet do evil, I don't think it's uncalled for to call this out.

Not that I don't understand it! I like our sister quest on SV, where Emir doesn't give a shit about morals. It's fun to read!
But it's not what I read this quest for. It's not what we've been shaping Velvet with our votes into these last years.