Back

Help Center

Ask questions and help others in this forum.
TOPIC | Transmutation metaplot quandary
1 2
Okay so I have this problem and I am not sure quite how to solve it or where to ask for help on it.

I love the transmutation system, but I am having an extremely hard time coming up with a metaplot explanation for muck that does not make me feel terrible about having to use it.

Specifically, the idea of having Baldwin throw a familiar into his pot and melt a living thing down into jelly sits crooked in my sentimental bits. Recomposing that jelly into a new living thing is a small comfort, I suppose, but the core of it is that a mechanic that requires me to (potentially) destroy a living, unresisting, and ultimately friendly (or at least ambivalent) creature, for purely elective reasons, is not something my extremely soft sensibilities will allow. Even buying muck at the auction house makes me feel kind of bad even though the deed is already done.

My question, then, is this: Has anyone else out there found a way to rationalize the grim implications of where muck comes from in a satisfying, sanitary way? Or at least, does anyone else have this weird, anxious problem?

Thanks! ^^;
Okay so I have this problem and I am not sure quite how to solve it or where to ask for help on it.

I love the transmutation system, but I am having an extremely hard time coming up with a metaplot explanation for muck that does not make me feel terrible about having to use it.

Specifically, the idea of having Baldwin throw a familiar into his pot and melt a living thing down into jelly sits crooked in my sentimental bits. Recomposing that jelly into a new living thing is a small comfort, I suppose, but the core of it is that a mechanic that requires me to (potentially) destroy a living, unresisting, and ultimately friendly (or at least ambivalent) creature, for purely elective reasons, is not something my extremely soft sensibilities will allow. Even buying muck at the auction house makes me feel kind of bad even though the deed is already done.

My question, then, is this: Has anyone else out there found a way to rationalize the grim implications of where muck comes from in a satisfying, sanitary way? Or at least, does anyone else have this weird, anxious problem?

Thanks! ^^;
@skydisaster The devs confirmed that it's not the entire familiar that goes in the pot, just something that the creature offers up on its own, like a clipping of fur or a feather, so the familiars are fine after the process.
@skydisaster The devs confirmed that it's not the entire familiar that goes in the pot, just something that the creature offers up on its own, like a clipping of fur or a feather, so the familiars are fine after the process.
@skydisaster

Sometimes I think of the familiar item as an magical invitation that you can use to summon a single member of that species. This also explains why you can only pair one of each species at a time; the "invitations" are functionally identical.

That being said, melting down only a part of the familiar is the staff-approved version. Why they disappear afterwards? ...Embarrassment?
@skydisaster

Sometimes I think of the familiar item as an magical invitation that you can use to summon a single member of that species. This also explains why you can only pair one of each species at a time; the "invitations" are functionally identical.

That being said, melting down only a part of the familiar is the staff-approved version. Why they disappear afterwards? ...Embarrassment?
@kasael @elfin Those are great starts for me, thanks!
Not entirely satisfying but a really helpful place to start, and thank you!~ :D
@kasael @elfin Those are great starts for me, thanks!
Not entirely satisfying but a really helpful place to start, and thank you!~ :D
[quote name="Kasael" date="2020-01-09 12:55:23" ] @skydisaster Sometimes I think of the familiar item as an magical invitation that you can use to summon a single member of that species. This also explains why you can only pair one of each species at a time; the "invitations" are functionally identical. That being said, melting down only a part of the familiar is the staff-approved version. Why they disappear afterwards? ...Embarrassment? [/quote] My view is actually really similar! The ‘item’ used for both bonding and melting is more like a token or friendship or a summoning whistle. By melting it you’re giving up your right to ‘summon’ that familiar.
Kasael wrote on 2020-01-09 12:55:23:
@skydisaster

Sometimes I think of the familiar item as an magical invitation that you can use to summon a single member of that species. This also explains why you can only pair one of each species at a time; the "invitations" are functionally identical.

That being said, melting down only a part of the familiar is the staff-approved version. Why they disappear afterwards? ...Embarrassment?
My view is actually really similar! The ‘item’ used for both bonding and melting is more like a token or friendship or a summoning whistle. By melting it you’re giving up your right to ‘summon’ that familiar.
mkpoaHZ.png
@skydisaster

My first view is that the familiar goes into the pot and...dies.

My second, less tragic view is that the familiar falls into the pot, but all its hair/scales falls off and it runs away coz 1. It's burning 2. It's embarrassed. 3. It doesn't trust you anymore.
Then the hair/scales would become muck, I guess.
@skydisaster

My first view is that the familiar goes into the pot and...dies.

My second, less tragic view is that the familiar falls into the pot, but all its hair/scales falls off and it runs away coz 1. It's burning 2. It's embarrassed. 3. It doesn't trust you anymore.
Then the hair/scales would become muck, I guess.
@CrystalChrissy thankyou for explaining more eloquently and in more detail what I attempted to say (when you wrote your second, less tragic view)!
@CrystalChrissy thankyou for explaining more eloquently and in more detail what I attempted to say (when you wrote your second, less tragic view)!
qDkA25S.png
@gn0me @CrystalChrissy

Hello! I understand you're having fun, but please keep in mind that FR's rules against obscene and vulgar content include discussion of bodily functions. For that reason, this thread had to be cleaned up a bit. Thanks!
@gn0me @CrystalChrissy

Hello! I understand you're having fun, but please keep in mind that FR's rules against obscene and vulgar content include discussion of bodily functions. For that reason, this thread had to be cleaned up a bit. Thanks!
Tundra with the words 'Love is the Brightest Light'
Volunteer Moderator :If you have any questions, concerns, or feedback regarding moderation, please feel free to use the Contact Us form.
Good lord, what did I miss? o_o;
Actually, please do not answer that; I feel like it was enough of a problem the first time. XD

But yeah, the more-tragic version is the one I am trying to step back from here, and also maybe find a version of Baldwin that is a bit less morally-ambivalent.
Good lord, what did I miss? o_o;
Actually, please do not answer that; I feel like it was enough of a problem the first time. XD

But yeah, the more-tragic version is the one I am trying to step back from here, and also maybe find a version of Baldwin that is a bit less morally-ambivalent.
@skydisaster If you're uncomfortable with how the game mechanics translate to in-universe actions, it's good to remember that we, the players, don't technically exist. Sure, you can make a self-insert, or imagine that the clan leader is making those decisions in-universe, but why would you do that if the implications make you uncomfortable? For example, dragons aren't literally being sold or traded by their friends and family; to them, the Auction House doesn't exist and the Crossroads simply represent how dragons travel from one clan to another. The actual "sale" is a game construct that exists only for our sake. And buying Gems with real-world money doesn't mean the dragons themselves have a Paypal account, right? The beauty of headcanon is making sense out of something hopelessly vague, and Flight Rising lore is so sparse that it's easy to imagine whatever you want. Because it isn't real, you're absolutely free to come up with an explanation that makes you more comfortable than your current idea. Here's my personal thought: the site technically counts all copies of the same familiar as one. No matter how many Sweetpuff familiars you might have in your Hoard, you can only give one to a dragon, and you can only bond with them once per day. Additionally, if you sell off all your copies and buy another Sweetpuff later, it will have the same bond level as all the Sweetpuffs you sold. [item=Sweetpuff] With that in mind, I follow suit and tend to consider them as one creature overall. Most familiars have hair, scales, feathers, or another renewable part that often sheds and regrows on their own. Each Sweetpuff familiar could represent a clump of shed feathers from the same Sweetpuff, which you've collected for Baldwin to safely melt. This would also apply to more civilized familiars like the Beastclans, who could willingly donate their shed scales and the like. This isn't the only peaceful explanation I've heard (I'm pretty sure I saw a thread tackling this exact issue ages ago), but like I said; headcanons are just what make sense to you. If mine isn't satisfactory, consider what you would like to believe, and believe in that. I can't recommend it for real-world issues, but this is a website where people can draw a car on a dragon and pretend they're a sentient car. As far as lore goes, sky's the limit, and then some!
@skydisaster

If you're uncomfortable with how the game mechanics translate to in-universe actions, it's good to remember that we, the players, don't technically exist. Sure, you can make a self-insert, or imagine that the clan leader is making those decisions in-universe, but why would you do that if the implications make you uncomfortable?

For example, dragons aren't literally being sold or traded by their friends and family; to them, the Auction House doesn't exist and the Crossroads simply represent how dragons travel from one clan to another. The actual "sale" is a game construct that exists only for our sake. And buying Gems with real-world money doesn't mean the dragons themselves have a Paypal account, right?


The beauty of headcanon is making sense out of something hopelessly vague, and Flight Rising lore is so sparse that it's easy to imagine whatever you want. Because it isn't real, you're absolutely free to come up with an explanation that makes you more comfortable than your current idea.

Here's my personal thought: the site technically counts all copies of the same familiar as one. No matter how many Sweetpuff familiars you might have in your Hoard, you can only give one to a dragon, and you can only bond with them once per day. Additionally, if you sell off all your copies and buy another Sweetpuff later, it will have the same bond level as all the Sweetpuffs you sold.

Sweetpuff

With that in mind, I follow suit and tend to consider them as one creature overall. Most familiars have hair, scales, feathers, or another renewable part that often sheds and regrows on their own. Each Sweetpuff familiar could represent a clump of shed feathers from the same Sweetpuff, which you've collected for Baldwin to safely melt. This would also apply to more civilized familiars like the Beastclans, who could willingly donate their shed scales and the like.


This isn't the only peaceful explanation I've heard (I'm pretty sure I saw a thread tackling this exact issue ages ago), but like I said; headcanons are just what make sense to you. If mine isn't satisfactory, consider what you would like to believe, and believe in that.

I can't recommend it for real-world issues, but this is a website where people can draw a car on a dragon and pretend they're a sentient car. As far as lore goes, sky's the limit, and then some!
XNtD94z.png

-
Robin Nightmares
they/them/theirs | FR Time +0

+[Wasteland Radio Hatchery]+
-
-
feleV0g.png PmVLgRx.png
-
1 2