objective quality of a media (show/game/anime/etc) has almost zero meaning compared to: what you go in expecting, what you need emotionally in that period of your life, and how you see it through the lens of resonant thematic elements specific to you as an individual.
Hello! I know your inbox is probably full, but I’m making a fan character, and I think that if you answer this question it could maybe help with her development? So I want to make my new character a Mage of blood, but whenever I look at different analysis of that title they’re generally all quite pessimistic, I know mage’s don’t have to be pessimistic (meulin). Basically, do have any idea what maybe a dorky/enthusiastic/cheery Mage of blood would be like?
My inbox isn’t too bad, though I should prob think about deleting a few things I’ve already answered :p I can certainly share some ideas I have for the interp you’re looking for(albeit, not terribly timely ones u_u).
My dearest, handsome snake theorist! What could you tell us about a Mage of Blood?
Under my read of the Class, a Mage of Blood would be one who “Acts upon Blood with/through Knowledge of Blood, Acts upon themselves with/through Knowledge of Blood, and acts with the benefit of Knowledge of Blood, and the benefit of Blood itself through their Knowledge of it.” So what might that cover?
Of course! Mages are a little bit tough to analyze, but that’s the fun in doing this blog, right?
Last one of the night, go!
Mage
The active knowing Class. Counterpart to Seer. Opposed to Heir.
Actively knows their Aspect, and actively acquires knowledge through their Aspect.
Blood
A very non-combative Aspect. Counterpart to Breath.
Bonds between people. Communion, fellowship. Heritage, legacy. Humanitarianism. The Attachment to Breath’s Independence.
Mages are an enigmatic class right off the bat. They seem to have lived with their Aspect their whole life: watching it works its ways from both an insider and an outsider’s perspective. The Mageknows the ins and outs of their Aspect not exactly because they want to, but because their Aspect permeates every part of their life. This process of spontaneous discovery is natural for the Mage, and can even be quite unwanted on the their part.
Skaia, however, really demands for the Mage’s knowledge. When the time comes, usually between during early and mid-game, all of the experience the Mage has gathered will make itself useful.
Unlike Seers, Mages are not the tactical commanders of their teams. They lean more to the tech wiz or the resident bookworm: quiet, doing their own thing. Just leave it to them and don’t be a bother, they’ll solve it on their own.
A Mage of Blood would be born in a context of pure unity and communion: in a religious comunnity, a big friendly neighborhood, or just a huge united family. They’d be the loner of their group, preferring to people watch than actually interact with their peers. They would see groups begin and end; friendships being built and turned to dust. The Mage of Blood would know exactly what brings people together, and what drives people apart. And when their party starts to suffer from their own individual crises and threaten to separate from or even murder each other, the Mage will know just what to do to keep everything from going down in shambles.
While a bit shorthanded on practical powers due to their non-combative Aspect, the Mage of Blood works wonders in a team. They know just how to destabilize the enemy: kill the strong link, eliminate the moral support, goad the strong dumb one into battle first. As said before, though, a Mage is not a strategist: they’re a practitioner of knowledge. They’d be a perfect tactical assassin!
I’d give the Mage good luck, but I don’t think a team with a Mage of Blood needs that much luck, honestly.
If it breaks apart, the Mage will know exactly how much glue to apply to get it back together!
classpect shenanigans for myself
maybe
maybe im a mage of blood? passive knowledge of connections, bonds, and relationships…sounds kind of like me
re-that last post it’s strange to see people interpret kiribaku as “angry boy is physically and verbally mean all the time and sunshine boy puts up with and never fights back uwu” because a) that’s an incredibly unhealthy dynamic but also b) what pair do you think you’re shipping? because kirishima is every ounce as tough as bkg and wouldn’t put up with being treated shitty like that. hell, in canon he’s laughed at and teased bkg many times, joked “that doesn’t sound very heroic” when he’s making stupid threats, with ONE ARM he held bkg back from charging towards deku, doesn’t take his anger seriously when it’s pointless, when bkg calls him Shitty Hair his immediate reaction is “my hair isn’t even that different from yours”. so it blows my mind when people portray him as a pushover who smiles through any bad behavior because of that, but also because the idea that bkg would be excessively rude to kirishima is so fake when he’s in CANON made strides to be a better person when dealing with kirishima. even just watching the money scene from last episode it’s absurd to imply that bkg is horrible to kiri and that it wouldn’t be any better if they were dating – the dynamic of bkg awkwardly trying to cheer up and encourage kirishima is the foundation of his side of the relationship. their friendship alone is incredibly healthy and positive to their development as characters! miss me with that “bkg’s a bad person and kirishima doesn’t do anything to stop it” bs
just moving along like everyone else 