EUPHORIAN'S PROFILE

When you grow up you realize that you don't have to dress like a freakshow to get attention.

lolwut? Yeah, I know. I think they all know too. That just happens to be the route the choose. It's a social signal. You don't like it, but that doesn't mean it's -invalid- or anything. It works.

I like your assumptions about how the adult world works, too. Yes, we are all just autonomous robots acting out the will of our mighty upperclass overlords. That's exactly it.

Of course, I know there are exceptions. But currently? Most people are trapped by the system. They need money to live. Job gives them money. Boss gives them job. Most people don't see an alternative.
Do I think you're robots? No. Do I think business would prefer you be 100% efficient, never stopping to rest, talk, eat, etc, and never complaining or making any mistakes? Yes, of course they would. But that can't happen, and that's why there aren't robots working everywhere (yet...).

Dressing like a freak is inherantly counter-productive in the greater society.

There are a few problems with this bit here. Firstly, is that 'freak' is a matter of opinion.
Secondly, and much more importantly, if you're going to bring up the issue of productivity, we may be here a while, because that's going to get us into a whole mess of politics (being, how should we live?)- and thereby, what is productive? Productive according to who? If 'greater society' doesn't have one goal that we can be productive towards, how can we be counter productive?
Most people don't know why they're living. Many consider their job only semi-productive- In the sense that it gives them enough monkey to keep living a while longer. Does it help them with their personal goals? Maybe if it's a job they really like, at first, it does. But not for long.
We can't agree on what is 'right' or what we should work towards, so these are things are people should decide for themselves. That's what I believe, anyway.
If someone else decides it, who decides who decides. And that'll just spiral upwards into chaos. Does that make any sense?
Lastly, exactly how is that 'inherently counter-productive'? Is it because it's distracting? Is it because it means the people dressed like that are going to spontaneously go off and cut themselves, disturbing whatever's going on? Hell, someone could go nude, and still be as 'productive' as someone wearing jeans and a t-shirt.

Who knows, maybe part of that spike collar could come in handy if someone needs a thumb tack.


You play by society's rules and everybody is better off. Social conformity is an advantageous group evolutionary trait.

Aaaaand you just crossed the threshold. Let's go.

"Social Conformity is an advantageous group evolutionary trait."
It would be better if everybody functioned identically.
How far are you going to take that? Where's the line of cut-off, where you say, "Okay. Stop. We're similar enough."
Or is there one? Would it be best if we were clones of each other?

We could use the same medicine for everyone
We have all the data on everyone perfectly
We know each other's though patterns.
Hell, we could figure out Nature vs Nurture.
We know all of our limits.
It would be great, if we were all exactly alike.

Plus we don't have these 'freakshows' running around, right?

Wait, wait, wait, do you REALLY think you would enjoy everyone being the same? If the world was under your almighty sway right now, would you snap your fingers and make that happen? Let's have six-billion Kentons running around. Or whoever- you pick someone. See how that works out.

I can tell you. It doesn't work out well. I don't feel the need to get into the specifics, but if you prefer it, I may. It will not be friendly. It will not turn out too differently from the world today. Some Kentons will be poor. Some Kentons will be rich. Some will starve, some will grow fat. It's a zero-sum game, that's just a principle of the nature of the world.

Yeah, except you killed diversity. What food do you like? Let's say you like waffles. Well, suddenly there's going to be a HUGE spike in the price of waffles. Let's say you can't stand dairy products, well milk's just going to sit there and be 2 cents a gallon.
Economy goes wacko, because the supply and demand for everything are distorted to one individual need.
Give it a few years, it balances out. All dairy product production things have been transfered to waffle-making. But pretty soon, you might run out of batter, I mean, six million Kentons that all prefer waffles? There's going to be some strain there.

Socially... Oh dear (I'd rather not even get into personal relationships). Everybody thinks and looks just like Kenton. Just like eachother. Socially, that's going to be incredibly boring.
"So did you hear, the price of waffles has gone up again."
"Yeah, I did hear. That sucks."
"Yep"
"..."
"..."
You need diversity in both economics and social interaction. Otherwise, it just doesn't work.

This discussion here, for instance is born of the major differences in our views of the world. If there wasn't anything to discuss, because we don't have differences of opinions, this forum wouldn't need to exist. Neither would a lot of things. Obsolete~

But there, I said it, the key word. And it's come up before. Opinion. We need opinions. Robots don't have opinions. And when everybody thinks just like each other, that opinion becomes some sort of fact. When everybody thinks just like each other, opinions die out.

Opinions and the differences of them, different viewpoints, experiences, etc, are what make for growth and discussion. "I think God exists" "Yeah, so do I." "Same."
Is considerably less productive (in terms of social interaction and growth of relationships) than "I think God exists" "No, he's definitely not real." "But what about.............?"

Perhaps we should have opinions, but shouldn't be allowed to express them anyway but verbally? But what good does that do? The world is then still locked in a state of monotony and stagnancy.

Opinions lead to disagreements and differences and all that other "counter-productive" stuff, yeah. But they will also change the world for the better, and be "productive".
If everyone was the same, and conformed, opinions would die out.

This is, of course an extreme case.

"Social conformity is an advantageous group evolutionary trait."
Social Conformity- This refers to the collective population as a group becoming a unanimous division of units. Conformity- the same- Unanimity. And in unanimity, there is no difference of opinion.
Advantageous- As I have already said, we as a whole have yet to decide on what is "right" or how we should live, so we cannot yet define productivity. Similarly, we should ask, "advantageous for what purpose?" What purpose? Same as the productivity question.
Of course, when we all think the same way, then we might agree on how to live. Hmm... Let's test that. So, Kenton(s), how should we live? Why not outline the best way to live right now? Everyone thinks just like you, so what you say is automatically agreed upon by all.
But how do you know it's "right"? There is no other voice to tell you it might not be the best.
Group Evolutionary Trait- With its place in this statement, this contradicts itself. Traits and such things evolve in a group just as they do in an individual. This concept is called Social Darwinism. You've probably heard of it. Then you know of Natural Selection, survival of the fittest, yes? That is evolution's moving force to weed out the inferior.
When everyone is the same, there is no inferior, however, so you just murdered Natural Selection, thereby capping your potential at its current limit. Until you become different, you will be again, stuck in stagnancy. There will be no development, so you better be damn sure you got -how to live- right the first time. Savvy?

It might be "advantageous" up to a point, but when a diverse society can keep evolving, it would someday surpass your unanimous one.

Well, is that a big enough wall of text? This is getting interesting, let's keep this up.
Epic battle begin; your move.

Huh. I like it.


A fool I've played many a role
In play I play, I act- it's dull.
But to play than act,
I find it fact
To play is gay, to act is lull

But a fool is now, it dawns my part
I play, I dance, I mock, I'll start
To be fooled and fool
For I a fool cool
And preform laugh's forgotten art.

Ohhh boy. I'm a terrible writer, especially when it comes to dialog, and all my characters become flat and the same. And hi. My NPCs often have more personality than my main characters, even though my main characters are the ones that I've planned out for such a long time, even checked out against cliche lists and other character profile sheets numerous times.
Well, whatever. Haven't seen this one before. I'm going to pass on my main character this time, I've done him far too much, and he bores me now. Let's see... Let's do the "antagonist".

Basic Statistics

Name: Rylyn Lionheart
Age: 29
Nationality: Rosarian
Socioeconomic Level as a child: Royalty (that's a socioeconomic level, right?)
Socioeconomic Level as an adult: Royalty still. Or rich, however you want to put that.
Hometown: Iithan City
Current Residence: Iithan Castle
Occupation: Prince/Residing Lord
Income: Undefined (as he is not paid for being prince, just gets whatever he wants)
Talents/Skills: Chess, battles of wit, strategy, politics and war
Salary: Same as income? o.o?
Birth order: Elder
Siblings (describe relationship): Iris, the princess. Friendly and supportive to outside perspective, but in actuality, there is very little trust or communication between them. They do not feel strongly for each other negatively or positively.
Spouse (describe relationship): None
Children (describe relationship): None
Grandparents (describe relationship): Deceased, never knew them
Grandchildren (describe relationship): None
Significant Others (describe relationship): Nope
Relationship skills: Formally raised, his acquaintances being his underlings, he is lonely, and bad at expressing his feelings. However, he has a deep consideration for the feelings of others.


Physical Characteristics:

Height: 5'8
Weight: 153
Race: Human
Eye Color: Burnt Orange/Dark Tan
Hair Color: Red
Glasses or contact lenses? No.
Skin color: White
Shape of Face: Er... How do I describe this? Um. Normal? Single chin, average cheekbones?
Distinguishing features: No birthmarks or deformations or anything.
How does he/she dress? He is not seen publicly or about the palace in anything other than his black and red armor.
Mannerisms: Very polite, considerate and formal.
Habits: Impulsiveness. Does that count? If not, nothing significant.
Health: No significant issues
Hobbies: Chess
Favorite Sayings:
Speech patterns: Nothing special
Disabilities: None
Style (Elegant, shabby etc.): Formal and easy-going
Greatest flaw: Gullibility
Best quality: Considerate...ness


Intellectual/Mental/Personality Attributes and Attitudes

Educational Background: The highest available
Intelligence Level: Not a genius, but very intelligent
Any Mental Illnesses? No.
Learning Experiences: Taking over the throne at his father's illness
Character's short-term goals in life: To cure his father...
Character's long-term goals in life: ...And then kill himself.
How does Character see himself/herself? He is very insecure and lonely, and though he tries his best to please everyone, consistently recognizes only his failures.
How does Character believe he/she is perceived by others? ... Extremely foully. Pretty well explained by the above.
How self-confident is the character? Also well explained by the above
Does the character seem ruled by emotion or logic or some combination thereof? Though he is exceptional at logic challenges and strategy, he is often impulsive (and thereby regretful), so, emotion.
What would most embarass this character? To be scolded by his father (upon his father's salvation)


Emotional Characteristics


Strengths/Weaknesses: Impulsive, gullible, lonlely (weak)-- Quick-witted and considerate (strength)
Introvert or Extrovert? Introvert
How does the character deal with anger? His regret is directed at himself exclusively.
With sadness? His own personal pity
With conflict? He takes steps he at the time believes are right, and later regrets it.
With change? He adapts to changes fairly well and quickly.
With loss? Beyond his father's illness, he has not dealt with loss. He quickly took measures to cure his father immediately.
What does the character want out of life? To be honored, by his father, particularly
What would the character like to change in his/her life? His fathers condition, yes?
What motivates this character? Curing his father (boy this is redundant)
What frightens this character? His own actions, and being rebuked by his father, after his salvation.
What makes this character happy? He is never seen "happy". Chess tends to take his mind off of it.
Is the character judgmental of others? No.
Is the character generous or stingy? Generous
Is the character generally polite or rude? Polite


Spiritual Characteristics

Does the character believe in God? Yes
What are the character's spiritual beliefs? He follows the central relgion of Rosary, but is not a zealot. That is monotheistic, respecting the church and its policies. Nothing beyond that.
Is religion or spirituality a part of this character's life? No.
If so, what role does it play? And it doesn't.


How the Character is Involved in the Story

Character's role in the novel (main character? hero? heroine? Romantic interest? etc.): Initial Antagonist
Scene where character first appears: Western Tower, after the protagonist fights one of the Imperial Guard.
Relationships with other characters:

1. Hale Serif and Reed Calare- He values his advisers' words above all else, sans his desire to cure his father. He respects them more so, but otherwise treats them the same as
2. All his other underlings- Who he is generally polite and considerate to, but consistently distant.
3. His sister, Princess Iris- Who he is relatively ambivalent towards, and unconcerned with
4. Adam, the main character- Who he first meets as an enemy, but quickly sympathizes with and makes an ally out of him. He is unsure what to think of Adam, but places hope in him alone.
5. Adam's father- Who was captured on his behalf. He has enjoyed many a chess match with him.
6. His Father, King Isen- Who fell into a coma. Before, they had been close, and Rylyn enjoyed his leisurely position. He is worried he will displease his father through the reckless acts he undertakes in his name.

I simply don't know if they have that Store Terrain ID command. If they do, it should be fine.

So the first thing you want to do, is go in to the terrain tab of the database, and make 2 types of terrain. Call them whatever you like, make their properties whatever you like. Let's assume it's the first two in there, so their IDs are 1 and 2.

Next is go into whatever chipset is utilized for a stealth mission in the database, and set the terrain of any tile that you want to block the enemy's vision to be Terrain 2. Any tile that they should see through/over/under/around/whatever should be anything besides 2. 1 is probably the safest.

That way you can distinguish between objects that should block and not block the enemy sight by using the Store Terrain ID command, which will store the ID (in this case, 1 or 2) of the terrain of the tile at coordinates Variable X and Variable Y (each being the enemy's coordinates originally) in a variable, that can then be used for a conditional branch.

Does this make sense so far?

If I play a game all the way through once, chances are I will play it all the way through five times.
Getting there once is the hard part. I'm just way more comfortable with what I know, which, sadly, means I don't play many new games.
New to me, rather.

Alternate endings I could care less about. Optional customization is great. Throwing too much on at once is eh. I think that's the mistake that FE9 made somehow. But those things don't make me replay a game. Nostalgia? It's not really that either. Sans the older pokemons perhaps. I just... I know the world, I know the characters, and it doesn't seem so foreign. That's probably redundant. Whatever.