Thread:Jester of chaos/@comment-31330278-20170530021846/@comment-31330278-20170927011746

1. Sometime i get the feeling writters should use rules of thumb more often. You know it. I know it. I dont understand the people who dont know it. I mean, you need to know the rules before you can play with them.

2. Some people say Naraku was pawn of the jewel. I dont like this line of thinking. Naraku chose to be like this. He cant blame the jewel, or anything else for that matter. I mean, his own body hate him. That means something.

3. The final scene in my zombie story will include an encounter with a raging minotaur. The protagonist group will get to the ghost farm where the minotaur lives after the big bad sended them there (the minotaur scares the zombies. You know how villains "like" to have their soldiers fear anyone but them). In the final battle, one of the following will be killed:

A. The general. His aligment is refferd in DND as "Lawful neutral". His job is to command the group and be the ballance between the criminal and the child. 2 people want him to die for a "dramatic effect".

B. The criminal. His aligment is refferd in DND as "Neutral evil". He's the token evil team mate and commonly used by the general as "a brawn who need to be constantly ballanced". Most people want him to die.

After the final battle, the teenager of the group finds a great dane who become his loyal pet and named "Goliath". Wehter the general or the criminal survive, any of them will sit on the nich of "we should consider eating the dog", each with his own reasons. Who would you like to survive (the teenagers and the heroine will survive either way)?