We've issued a clarification on our policy on AI-generated work.
Our mod selection process has completed. Please welcome our new moderators.
The regular administrative staff are taking a vacation, and in the meantime, Biigoh is taking over. See here for more information.
A notice about Rule 3 regarding sites hosting pirated/unauthorized content has been made. Please see here for details.
Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com.
Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.
The rules regarding NSFW links have been updated. See here for details.
For what it's worth, I really appreciate the amount of thought you put into this. 🫂
It's always strange in quests how the player character's thinking is depicted — the QM has to come up with a post hoc narrative justification for why the player character did what they did, without leaning too...
Oh, I actually fully agree with you; that's pretty much what I was saying previously. It's just an issue of language/communicating the idea. Like, I would say that a moral atrocity that is justified is no longer truly a moral atrocity, and that it would be clearest (to me at least), instead of...
Ah… sorry for misunderstanding. So if I were to try to understand better, your real position is that
is not actually wrong for Velvet, since we have the good reason of the worms, but the real issue is that, first, she pretends that her reasons for killing are not actually for power, and second...
I don't have a strong opinion on appeasing Smiles specifically, so I won't deny that it could've been a terrible idea from the outset. However, I would caution against using absolute terms to dismiss the question entirely. Is Velvet killing someone "just" to gain power acceptable? Consider the...
[X] (THRONE) You will try to change things.
I feel a similar feeling as the Twilight-swap vote. We're already in a sort of bad ending, so we ought to seek situations with greater "variance". Hoping that the princesses can fix things isn't certain either. In other words,
LET'S GO GAMBLING
LET'S...
Props for the lore-accurate swear. :V
Random thought: With access to the royal treasury, I eagerly await the vote on whether to embezzle or not! :V (Hay, we already have control over the Bureau's budget.)
I know there's no italicized text saying this, but my interpretation of the update is that we straight up cannot go on the expedition anymore. Or, at least, it now makes no sense roleplay-wise for Velvet to abandon an explicitly given duty like that.
A bit dramatic, but now the choice of...
Ah… how noblebright. It makes me think that some kind of "go back in time to the beginning of the quest and redo everything with your memories intact" due to some Secret Histories nonsense would be a very !!FUN!! effect. :V
I forget whether OurLadyOfWires goes back through old pings or not...
I may not be the ponyindividual you wish to see, but I apologize for my absence nonetheless. 😇 In classic fashion, once the backlog became unmanageably large, I just kept putting it off until, well…. Nevermind that; here we are now, with me all caught up.
@OurLadyOfWires I provide my usual...
Delayed reaction, but if I may be contrarian (with all the reactions of relief to the "In which obsession becomes a virtue" extra) for a moment: the ponies of the previous age were ponies, just like us. To be charting a different course than they has me wonder if we truly know better, or if...
Ah… my heart. 💔
I will say that this option is "safer" in that there is less chance of things getting worse, as is often the case with inaction; things will stay as they always were. (I mean, we should heed what the QM's said about suspicion and needing to sink AP into getting mirror Twilight...
Oh yeah, I think this is legitimate, in that, in my view, the strongest (meta?) argument against this is that Velvet is an unreliable narrator. The update explicitly says
We've been arguing over the ethics for pages and pages, but Velvet herself has seemingly given zero thought to any bad...
…huh, I'm not too late. And the thread has really gone while I was gone. I've said (1, 2, 3) most of what I wanted to say before. People don't seem to be incorporating the uncertainty of outcomes in their calculus or incorporating that much nuance into their views. But I guess that's arguing on...
We never met Sunset Shimmer :'(. And honestly, I kind of assume her track is a multi-action one, and we only have one left. Regardless, I think it would be one of these:
[] They are young and impressionable. Thankfully, you are a responsible adult. (Hang out with Rarity and Fluttershy, your...