Oh Yes WTNV Actually Went Into The Horror Territory.

The stereotype of the ugly, unfuckable feminist exists for a reason – because it’s still the last, best line of defence against any woman who is a little too loud, a little too political. Just tell her that if she goes on as she is, nobody will love her. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve always believed that part of the point of feminist politics – part of the point of any sort of radical politics – is that some principles are more important than being universally adored, particularly by the sort of men who would prefer women to smile quietly and grow our hair out

If you’re a feminist you’ll be called a man-hater. You don’t need rebranding (via nothingman)

LET'S GO WE FINALLY GOT HIS NAME!!!

I know it has some deep meanings but it's funny his name is just literally cicada

Also the ep47 name is Lament of My Wingless Body,i wonder if it was hinting us his name.To think asagiri had already named him but just decide to tell us on a random day lol.It can be about the episode but i don't remember details about it.

oooo this is cool!! i didn’t know he was given a name, thanks for the info :D

the episode name could mean many things. i haven’t put too much thought into it until now actually.

id assume a wingless body would be a metaphor for possibly someone not being able to escape something? kind of an opposite to the phrase "spread your wings" as a way to motivate someone to move/change?

in lament of a wingless body could be grieving the time she couldn’t escape? in reference to yosano grieving the past (possibly grieving shunzen here)?

or lament of a wingless body could be her grieving shunzen(which you said means cicada), like you had said! i like this idea a lot actually

and here i was, thinking i'm immune to deranged baseless ranting.

so, within the BSD plot we're informed/led to believe that the 5 in question points to Decay of Angel (5 stages etc), with some extra Buddhism to pitch the idea to Fukuchi. The name itself is a reference to the Decay of the Angel book, which in itself is part of a series. One of the key characters, apparently, is a young manipulative sadistic orphan. In lieu of reaching 0% coherency, my suggestion is for the reader of this post to skim the synopsis with the idea of Touru <=> Fyodor, weaving in the vague theoryspace of Crime and Punishment being some form of resurrection, if only as the other way to look the same through the years. As a bonus, it would implicitly answer 'why not just put him in a box, forever', and if he's 2nd copy of (mafia) Dazai, where did the equivalent of the latter's suicidaility go? Is the stated end goal a red herring? Is it because he *can't* off himself? Or is that the red herring and it's actually just extension of C&P's 'specialest boy' angle? Is the sword Kladenets bit foreshadowing that the sword Bram was impaled on WOULD work? AAAA---

On top of that, the namedrop suggests Yukio Mishima exists in BSD (similarly to how ppl go 'Meursault? ah, Camus probably exists') - which also adds the possibility of 'fake reincarnation' leveraging some third party. …in fact, as i'm typing it, we are at ch112. At this point:

Sigma failed to die at the casino/interplay of All Men Are Equal and Sigma's ability means they'll wake up whenever it's plot-appropriate

Gogol failed to be sawed in half

Bram failed to die from having the sword pulled out (in anime) / the coin is still in flight (manga)

Fukuchi failed to die(?) as per the 'two hours later' (in anime) / the coin is still in flight (manga)

Dostoy [COPIUM OVERDOSE]

at this point i want Fukuchi to be k, let's see what themes of the story will do with a traumatized vet.

also: yep, the Untold Origins play sounds as ridicious as last time. Are we sure this isn't a mix of introducing idea of ability users = bad (but also: 'fallen' angels hiding in the normie populace), while Dostoy is tooting his own horn? I'd rather if it wasn't tho, and at least pulled double duty re: Fukuchi. Then it makes more sense to use theater specifically.

re: stars/singularities, isn't it stated… somewhere… that it's possible for one ability to into a singularity, by itself? As in, a star collapsing into a black hole?

Fourth (Third is here):

Tumblr

あり^^

Third (Second is here): Second (first is here): There are a few things that just won't leave my head, I had to write them down (my friends

last but not the least

I've been reading bsd writers' works

I strongly recommend you do the same, they're absolutely magnificent

Sometimes you can even see obvious references

Like this one

I was reading Doppo's River Mist and other stories

I think Dead Apple is mostly inspired by it

one of the stories is named The Stars

it's about two stars in the sky who are in love, and come down to earth to talk in the garden of an author, in form of humans

Look at this part

sounding familiar?

No?

Ability Users are Fallen Angels,

Abilities themselves are Fallen Stars

It's even true scientifically

Remember the 'Singularity' mentioned?

Astronomically, a singularity can be formed by two gigantic celestial bodies (such as stars) crashing into eachother, resulting in the corruption of matter, forming something with infinite mass and zero volume, which we call "singularity" (yeah my study field's math/physics lol)

that's what was done in Dead Apple

Combining two stars

I love Kafka

…and just like that, sins make sense. in fact, to the point where we can speculate sin resistances showcase what ideas would throw them off (tvtropes' Armor Piercing Question), ranting at a persona 4 boss-style. In other words, one could think of it in terms "what arguments could be used to talk down a sinner corroding over This Specific Idea". In case of base ego - their core/driving issue. …which would conviniently explain why their EGOs are conspicuously given LobCorp risk levels, and now the base egos are all zayin - too closely tied to the host with all their complexities, as opposed to going all-in on a specific idea.

to check is this out, i'd like to cross-reference it with people who have thought way more about characters than i did.

@lu-is-not-ok Land of Illusion: Gloom dmg down => Gloom on skill. Gloom as cost. More misery would be like pissing into the ocean. Wrath dmg up => from your writeups one gets the impression he's intensely not questioning about whether or not what his family is/was harming him. Upon being presented with list of grievances things done to him, specifically framed as "how is that kind?", i'm expecting some kind of meltdownception as a reaction. Especially in the context of 'not miserable over being disowned anymore, is is actually an improvement' Envy dmg up => one of the most striking bits when being introduced to EGOs is just how in your face the flavor of 'Hong Lu is hiding Issues' is. Thus, anyone noticing/bringing to attention (ie. forcing a reaction) should make the situation spiral out of control. If played out properly - by making the guy too busy venting to do the gloom-sinking-drowning routine on the party

Roseate Desire (shared with Ishmael): Lust dmg down => same as before. Already having fun, rampaging corrosion(?) continues Wrath dmg up => works only if you're right i.e. Pink Shoes corrosion is straight-up overtaking him in a "pleasant toy for others" sense. So to get him to stop, an appeal to indignation over this treatment would work, combined with… Pride dmg up => …appealing to Hong Lu knowing better how should he move, regardless of the consequences to the current puppeteer (wih Ish the angle would be somewhere along the lines of 'don't you have survivor(s) to hunt down?')

Dimension Shredder (shared with Yi Sang): Wrath dmg up, Lust dmg down => lines imply he's… having fun, all things considered? Pride dmg down => opens a rip and just walks into it. This is very safe. Envy dmg down => Wayward Passenger moves around, without accomplishing much. Bringing to attention W Corp's inaction to their plight should bring results.

@delusinalandpassionate La Sangre de Sancho: Wrath dmg up => makes no sense unless you grab that "to escape one's unfavorable circumstances, or to even reject one's own true nature" from the writeup very hard and declare she killed Sancho and may or may not be actively suppressing it. Lust dmg down => as mentioned above, because DonQ is already indulging encouraging to do so won't change behavior. Gloom dmg up => just the 'suppressing misery because HEROICS!!!' bit, again.

Fluid Sac (shared with Faust): if the concept is indulging in one's misery, resist+ are covered. The fish is fishy, so rest depends on one's read of Ichthys' core idea. dmg up => can't continue if she is forced to react (Envy)/abandon current pursuits (Pride)?

Lifetime Stew (shared with Sinclair): what is even the idea of this thing, other than Stone Soup* if it's 'to make the bestest soup ever!!!', to explain how it can require both Lust alone from Don Quixote and Wrath/Lust/Gluttony from Sinclair, then Sloth and Gloom weakness would mirror despondence/just following recipe & frustration over not getting it perfect/not being able to enjoy it? *Terms and Conditions apply Telepole (shared with Faust and Heathcliff) electrodoggo's theme is 'being controlled', yes? As such, it is reacting to external impulses (Envy dmg down). All three play along because they more-or-less agree with them, so to speak (Pride dmg down). Gluttony dmg up here being appeal to stop, because it'll kill them (glut-as-survi), and Sloth dmg up as leveraging exhaustion caused by this behavior

as a sidenote, doggo made no sense until i got to write down '(electrical) impulse = impulse (to act)'

when checking against canto 1~4… Suddenly, One Day: push forward the idea of chopping his arm off permanently (as seeing with other IDs, for extra zing) to settle the spiral of uncontrollable mutations stressing him out, which makes them go faster What is Cast: matter of preventing a repeat from the past by having outside influence (Envy) remind of negative consequences (Gloom) Branch of Knowledge: same as Rodion; Wrath would be aforementioned self-defiance, Pride from calling out how well making dicey decisions worked out last time.

…a lot of base egos have Envy dmg up. sus. i mean, corroded units straight up have these resistances, yeah? If it's not dealing with base EGO corrosion equivalent, alternatively these could be an out to sinners turning into Peccatulums, which would implicitly explain what's up with Invidiae - if the proposed solution works, either the target reacts to getting talked out of it or doesn't and turns.

Lu's Guide to Sin Analysis

Welp, since my brain is too focused on having K Corp Hong Lu go full unga bunga in Mirror Dungeons to write full analyses, I decided I might as well give something else to all the people starving for Limbus Theory content.

So, here we are. A basic guide on how I approach the Sin Analysis portion of my analyses, covering my personal interpretations for each Sin, as well as how to use those when analysing both E.G.Os and Identities.

That way, ya'll can dabble in doing some of this on your own when I'm too busy grinding my way to 400 hours of play time on Limbus to write up full analyses.

Sounds good? Awesome. Under the cut we go, wheeeee!

Sin Interpretations

Let's start with the most important part - the Sins themselves.

I want you to take a moment and think about your own associations with those Sins. Perhaps your immediate thought is to take the words used literally. Maybe you immediately think back to the Biblical ideas of the Seven Deadly Sins. Mayhaps there's some other media you know that also uses Sins in some way, which you subconsciously default to when thinking about them.

Whatever those associations are, I want you to throw them away.

That's right. Whatever is telling you that Lust = Horny, Wrath = Angry, Envy = Jealous, etc, etc? Throw all of those preconcieved notions away.

This is the biggest mistake I see people make when trying to analyse Identities and E.G.O based on their Sins - they assume that those Sins have the same meanings in the context of Limbus as the popular, more common interpretations of them.

And while, sure, some of them can definitely overlap with what one would expect them to be, I think relying on those during analysis instead of trying to understand what the game itself is trying to tell us by using those Sins as symbols is doing its storytelling a massive disservice.

Do I think my personal interpretations of the Sins are a 100% accurate reading? No, of course not. I can't see into the mind of Kim Ji-Hoon or whoever else at Project Moon might have been the mastermind behind deciding what Sins connect to what. I have no way of knowing what exactly they intended here.

However, I do wish to believe that my interpretations not only strive to meet the game's storytelling on its own terms, but also hopefully make further analysis based on those interpretations a bit easier to wrap one's head around.

...God I really need to stop writing massive preambles and just get to the fucking point.

So let's actually get to The Fucking Point. Sin Interpretations, one by one. Let's fucking do it.

Wrath

The flames of revolution burn bright in the face of cold winds.

Wrath is the Sin of self-righteousness and defiance. To act with Wrath is to decide that one deserves better, that things around then should bend to their will, and then take matters into their own hands. It's the Sin of deciding one has the right to change something simply because they don't like the current state of things.

There are many ways one can act because of Wrath. It can show through trying to rebel against authority, to subvert one's fate, to escape one's unfavorable circumstances, or to even reject one's own true nature. To act with Wrath is to stand up for oneself and tell reality "No, I refuse!" loud and clear.

A common misconception of Wrath is the idea that anger is an inherent part of it. While it's true that those feelings often coincide with defiance, they're not required for one's acts to be fueled by Wrath. Some can be Wrathful while being completely calm and collected, as their acts of defiance could be more on the quiet and simmering side.

Likewise, being quick to anger isn't always a sign of Wrath. It's very possible for someone to have a short temper, while also being fully accepting of the reality they live in (Ryoshu, I am looking directly at you), thus lacking Wrath.

Lust

One's base insticts go all the way back to that genetic code.

Lust is the Sin of self-indulgence. It's the Sin of letting one's own desires and whims dictate one's actions. It's also the Sin of seeking personal fulfillment above all else. To act with Lust is to give up one's self-control and let one's instincts and wants guide them.

Unlike what the name and symbol might initially imply, Lust can include many different types of desires, not just the carnal.

Likewise, acts of Lust can be just as varied as one's desires. Satisfying one's most basic of needs, searching for a form of spiritual enlightenment, or even just saying the first thing that comes to mind because one feels like it are just a few examples.

Sloth

A stone will not care for what happens to it, nor the world around it.

Sloth is the Sin of apathy and resignation. Unlike other Sins, which mostly show through one's direct actions, Sloth can also show through inaction.

To act with Sloth is to ignore reality, to let oneself go along with whatever is happening with barely any complaints. As such, Sloth is commonly associated with blind obedience or unwillingness to act out.

Due to its nature as a Sin of resignation, Sloth can be seen as the direct opposite of Wrath, the Sin of defiance. This creates a unique situation where the inclusion of one can drastically shift the context of the other if both are a part of the same Identity or E.G.O.

Gluttony

Plants never stop waging wars, always wanting just a little bit more.

Gluttony is the Sin of hunger, and it's unique from the other Sins in that it equally represents two different ideas of that hunger, which can appear together just as often as they can be completely seperated.

The first type of Gluttony is one of the starving hunger of survival. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do anything for the sake of scraping by and living to see another day.

The second type of Gluttony is the hunger for more, or in other words: greed. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do everything for the sake of this idea of "more". To gain more wealth, to find more recognition, to make more progress.

Both of these types of Gluttony are unified in one main point - they are, by definition, endless. The struggle for survival never ends, unless one fails to survive. Likewise, there is no finite "more" that greed is reaching towards, it's a neverending process of one-upmanship.

Gloom

When a wave of emotion rises, many will be swept away in its wake.

Gloom is the Sin of dwelling on feelings. To act with Gloom is to be guided by one's negative emotions, to buckle under stress and let it control one's mind and actions.

While sadness, grief, and depression are the states of mind most commonly associated with Gloom, and are often a part of it, they're not inherent to it. The only "requirement" here is the experience of severe emotional duress, and acting out in direct response to it.

In a way, Gloom is the Sin of losing control over oneself, not dissimilar to Lust. However, the main difference here is the cause of losing that control. Gloom is the loss of self-control due to being overwhelmed by negative experiences, while Lust is the loss of self-control due to seeking out positive experiences.

Pride

Be careful, for that double-edged sword may cut you as well.

Pride is the Sin of ignoring consequences. Acts of Pride are all actions taken because of the belief that their benefits outweigh the cost in some way. While the most common way this can present is through actions that benefit oneself at the cost of others, it's not the only way Pride can manifest.

One can be Prideful when believing the benefit to many outweighs the consequences. Likewise, refusing to acknowledge the harm one brings to themself because their actions benefit them in some other way also counts as Pride.

The idea that Pride is inherently tied to selfishness or self-confidence is another common misconception. In fact, Prideful acts can manifest just as often from a lack of self-confidence or a misguided selflessness. Rather, one could interpret Pride as a form of willful ignorance, in a way.

Envy

Thorns don't go out of their way to harm, they merely react to your touch.

Envy is the Sin of reaction and retribution. It's the idea of doing something because of what someone else has done. By definition, one cannot act with Envy without some form of provocation.

Like is the case with many other Sins, acts of Envy can take many forms, from taking revenge to following orders. The main connecting idea here is letting oneself be influenced by another person, whether it's being coerced, provoked, ordered, or otherwise manipulated.

Out of all of the Sin misconceptions, seeing Envy as inherently tied to jealousy might be the worst one of all. While acts done out of jealousy would likely count as acts of Envy, they are but a miniscule part of the sheer scope that Envy represents.

...

Alright, so you know what each of those Sins means. Now it's time to figure out how to Actually Apply Them.

Sin Affinities in the context of Identities

The main way Sins play a role in a given Sinner's Identity is through their Sin Affinities. Mechanically, these are the Sins attributed to each of their skills, signifying both their type of Sin damage and what Sin resource they generate upon being used.

However, this is Project Moon we're talking about, and these fuckers can't keep their gameplay mechanics seperate from the story to save their lives.

So, this begs the question: what can we learn about a Sinner's given Identity through their Sin Affinities?

Here is the method that I believe works best in my experience:

The Sin affinities of each of an Identity's skills represent a different layer of their psyche and motivations. I'm going to try to show what I mean by using base Identities of the four Sinners who already had their own Canto.

Skill 1's Sin Affinity is the surface level motivation of the Sinner's actions. This is the most obvious and "shallow" reading of them and their actions, and also likely the one the Sinners themselves are most aware of.

Gregor's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him being constatly haunted by his trauma, with much of his cynicism and dark-ish sense of humor being shaped by his war experiences. Rodya's Skill 1 is Gluttony due to her tendency to value material goods and love for food, which are signs of her greed and will to survive respectively. Sinclair's Skill 1 is Pride due to him taking many actions (such as sharing his father's secrets or giving Kromer his basement key) for their immediate benefits, without considering the consequences. Yi Sang's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him falling into deep depression and letting the trauma of the past shape his current actions.

Skill 2's Sin Affinity is a deeper motivation of the Sinner's actions. It's delving deeper into their psyche to see what guides them in less obvious ways. This Sin Affinity can also have noticeably closer ties to the Sinner's background in one way or another.

Gregor's Skill 2 is Gluttony due to him being driven by the will to survive, most notably expressed by him leaving the rest of the veterans to escape the war and try to live after it ended. Rodya's Skill 2 is Pride due to her fully believing in what she does working out in her favor, completely ignoring consequences on the way. Her killing the pawnbroker is the biggest example of an act of Pride, as she fully believed that it would help her neighbourhood despite the consequences that murder would bring. Sinclair's Skill 2 is Wrath due to him not accepting his circumstances. His want to defy his future prosthetics procedure is what eventually led him to agreeing with Kromer, and his will to defy her is what drove him through the events of his chapter. Yi Sang's Skill 2 is Envy due to his passive nature and how easily he lets other people dictate his actions. It's especially notable in how after the League fell apart, he would have been willing to do anything Gubo told him at that moment.

Skill 3's Sin Affinity is what I would like to call a Sinner's Core Sin. It's the true main reason behind their actions, and has a much closer and direct tie into their past than the other Sin Affinities. In a way, this is the deepest layer of their psyche.

Gregor's Skill 3 is Sloth as his resignation to his circumstances is what colors much of his past. He learned that resistance is futile early in life, and it shows. Though he didn't want to fight in the war, he felt like he had no choice but to. All of his life, he simply listened to orders without complaint, unable to see a way to change his situation. Rodya's Skill 3 is Wrath as her self-righteousness and defiance is what drove her actions at the deepest level. She first joined the Yurodiviye because she wanted to bring change the state of her neighbourhood, and likewise left them when she no longer agreed with how they did things. Her murder of the pawnbroker was her biggest act of defiance, of taking matters into her own hands and trying to bring change to her reality at all cost. Sinclair's Skill 3 is Envy as much of his actions were dictated by other people. Social pressure was what led to him first breaching the trust of his family, and Kromer's coercion and manipulation is what then led to his family's death. In a way, you could also interpret Sinclair's arc in Canto III as one big act of Envy, as he finally tries to take revenge on Kromer for what she has done. Yi Sang's Skill 3 is Sloth as his apathy to the reality around him is what led to him ignoring the warnings signs of the League falling apart, and the resignation that followed could have resulted in him helping Gubo and the New League out with their horrible plans had there not been an intervention. It's only by the end of Canto IV that he finally manages to break out of this state for long enough to stand up for himself and decide to keep on living.

So, that's the basics of Sin Affinities when it comes to Identities! Now, some of you might be asking, "Hey Lu, what about Sin resources needed for Passives?", and my answer to that is...

Honestly, I don't entirely know! I do think there probably is some reason beyond pure gameplay mechanics... Buuuuut I don't think their importance is as major as the main Sin Affinities of a given Identity, especially since there isn't a single Passive that is activated by a Sin that the given Identity doesn't have any Affinity to.

Sin Affinities in the context of E.G.Os

Alright, so, when it comes to E.G.O, we run into some additional complexities. Unlike Identities, which can usually have their Sins Analysed with minimal additional context, E.G.O Sin Analysis has to be done under a specific angle.

This is because while Identities represent the Sinner as a whole person, E.G.Os represent a specific singular part of that Sinner.

Base E.G.Os usually seem to tie back to a specific event or action or some other thing in that Sinner's past. Likewise, E.G.Os derived from Abnormalities represent the ways that Sinner connects to that Abnormality's own themes.

In a way, the game's worldbuilding even acknowledges the fact that a Sinner can only use the E.G.O of an Abnormality they relate to in some way, as Dante's Notes describe the process of the Sinners using E.G.O as trying to make the Abnormality's emotions and identity their own.

That little tangent aside, there are two main things to analyze sin-wise when it comes to E.G.O - the Sin Affinity, and the Sin Resources necessary to use that E.G.O.

An E.G.O Sin Affinity works similarly to an Identity's Sin Affinities - for a Base E.G.O, it's the main Sin that action manifests as. For an Abno-derived E.G.O, it's the Sin that contextulizes the way the Abno's themes connect to the Sinner in question.

The Sin Resources an E.G.O needs is where things get fun. These are what a Sinner needs to be able to use the E.G.O, both mechanically AND story-wise. The Sins here represent what a Sinner has as their motivation and drive to fully reflect what that E.G.O represents. For Base E.G.Os, it's why they took the actions they did. For Abno E.G.Os, it's why they connect to that Abno's themes and why they're able to relate to it.

Now... There is one more thing about E.G.Os that I don't really talk about.

Sin Resistances.

The reason why I don't talk about them... Is because I have No Fucking Clue how to interpret them. There has to be some importance to them (Hong Lu being weak to Wrath in all of his E.G.O thus far, I am looking at you), I just don't know what it is. In fact, I doubt we even have enough information available to us right now to be able to say for sure.

I don't know how to end these posts dear fucking lord-

So uh. Yeah. That's. Everything that I think is important to mention on the topic of Sin Analysis and how I do it. If I ever change my mind on something or have an epiphany regarding one of the things I currently have no idea about, I'll probably reblog this post with an addendum or something, but until then...

Uh. Yeah. Hope this helps the people who wanna get into analyzing Limbus stuff but don't know where to begin. Or just people who wanna understand the method to my madness a little bit better.

I'm gonna go to sleep now, cause it's 4 AM already and I spent like the whole fucking night writing this post.

Would it make sense for clapper to have antenatal/postpartum depression vibe? not bulimia, as the brain+spinal cord in the sack implies a fetus, along with no overtures to the idea of eating (nary a gluttony in sight, canto IV says hi). There is A LOT of mechanical weight/attention to the sack. Even the egg form is all sac, basically. Like, why go out of your way to modify wrath/gloom resistances and tie them to something breakable? (not complaining, spicy design.) Wiki goes into extensive detail about it's skill rotations, and without major interruption it's roughly: Blood Sac counter goes 1->3, then Blood Cannon, then it moves to Fluid Sac. Without blood, it heals.

Hence, despair/madness as a byproduct of creating something -> JUSTICE!! for Don, new knowledge for Faust?

Do you do psychoanalyzing on other characters besides Yi Sang and Hong Lu? If so I’d like to hear you talk about Don and Faust, and why you think they share 2 egos (Telepole and Fluid Sac)

I mean! I can certainly try! Hong Lu and Yi Sang are just. I guess my field of expertise??? Since I care the most about those two??? But I can certainly try to analyze some other characters, though it might not be able to be as specific and detailed as I am when analyzing my favorites. Hope you understand!

Now then. Let's do this. Under cut we go as usual.

Fluid Sac

Let's start with the one we know less about, aka Headless Ichthys. In fact, we know... very, very little about Headless Ichthys.

Due to Meursault being the one to write the logs about this abnormality, we only get information on its physical characteristics, such as it having lost its head, and that there's something inside its sack that is said to bear resemblence to either a flower or a human nervous system.

That's it. That's all the definitive info we have on this abnormality. We can assume that it has Some religious significance due to its name, Ichthys, being the name of a religious fish symbol, but that doesn't help too much.

There is something interesting I want to note here, and that's the thing inside its sack. The fact that it's unclear whether it resembles a flower or a human nervous system is interesting... Because that mimics what Lunacy looks like. While Lunacy is described as rose-shaped by its Inventory description, the full Lunacy icon can also be interpreted as a brain on a brainstem.

I suppose, if you wanted to dig deep enough, the implications of it containing a symbol akin to Lunacy and having lost its head could could be interpreted as the abnormality being a symbol of a descent into madness. Which, honestly, that's the best I got from what little we have.

Because of just how little lore we have on the Headless Ichthys, unfortunately I can't go too in depth on Don and Faust with it in mind... But I'll still try.

Fluid Sac is a Gloom E.G.O, and though Gloom is one of those Sins I'm not entirely sure of, it does seem to represent taking actions due to one's built up negative emotions.

The main base E.G.O examples we have are Snagharpoon, which has Ishmael follow her compulsion to keep searching for "That bastard", and Land of Illusion, which implies that Hong Lu retreats from reality into his own dream world under heavy emotional stress.

As such, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Fluid Sac signifies something that caused horrible emotional stress to both Don and Faust, which would then kickstart their descent into madness. In more specific terms, this would be heroic delusions for Don and single-minded mad scientist-esque pursuit of knowledge for Faust.

As a brief sidenote, this would align quite well with the visual design differences between the two. Though the E.G.O outfits they wear are extremely similar, all the way down to both of them having green tints in their hair and fin decorations in the exact same spots, there are two notable differences.

One - the shape of the weapon. Don's weapon is shaped like a miniature Headless Ichthys clutching onto a perfectly round sack-orb. It looks almost more like a toy rather than a weapon. Faust's weapon is not only shaped almost perfectly like Headless Ichthys's sack, it also seems to have the same properties, as it bursts during Faust's Awakening attack animation.

Two - the article of clothing that mimics the Ichthys's hand-flippers. For Don, it's a cape-like piece of clothing that looks more like something you'd see on a kid's hero costume. For Faust, it's seemingly anatomically-correct recreations of the flippers that are attached to her jacket.

Both of those I think reinforce the idea of Don and Faust indulging in their methods of madness. Child-like obsession with heroism for Don (using toys and costumes), and endless scientific pursuits for Faust (only someone studying the abnormality closely could replicate its anatomy in this much detail).

It's a bit hard to tell anything from their dialogue lines as they are somewhat generic (my unrelated theory on that is that Fluid Sac is one of the first E.G.Os designed, based on its dialogue lines not having much to do with its abnormality, and due to its attack animations being uncharacteristically sparse in actual frame-to-frame animation), but they do seem to work as good reflections of Don and Faust in general.

Their Awakening lines seem to reflect their general attitudes, with Don's being jovial yet quick to resort to violence, and Faust's being self-assured and seemingly trying to predict all outcomes.

Their Corroded lines on the other hand could be a reflection of their attitudes after their descent into madness began. Don's single-minded "...Crush them." could be a reflection of how she views morality as black and white, and thus believes all that she considers 'villains' should be crushed by her. Likewise, Faust's line here implies that she's willing to do anything, even leave herself completely empty by 'disgorging everything', if it means she reaches what she's looking for.

Looking at the Sin Resources, both Faust and Don require Gloom and Lust to use Fluid Sac, and while Don also uses Pride, Faust uses Envy instead.

I already mentioned what I think Gloom means for Fluid Sac, and I think it being a requirement further reinforces it here. Both Don and Faust need to be acting under severe emotional stress to start their descent into madness.

Lust as a sin seems to represent acting according to one's desires, or more specifically, indulging in them. It also tends to have slight spiritual connotations in Limbus, making it the Sin of acting for the sake of some form of personal fulfillment as well.

Using it for Fluid Sac would make sense with the descent into madness interpretation. For both Don and Faust, their forms of madness are them overindulging in something they find personally fulfilling - heroism for Don, science for Faust.

Don's unique Sin requirement here is Pride. I already went into detail on what Pride as a Sin means in Limbus in the Dimension Shredder post, but to recap, Pride represents actions taken for their personal benefits, while ignoring their negative consequences on either other people or oneself.

This very much represents Don's madness quite well. Her heroic acts are rooted in what she personally perceives as doing good, and she completely ignores the collateral damage that she may cause in the process. Her willful ignorance of the harm she inflicts on others is one of the main things that led her to her personal form of madness.

Faust's unique Sin requirement here is Envy. Now, I won't go into detail on Envy just yet, as it's better saved for Telepole, but in very basic summary, it represents actions done in reaction to other people and their actions.

While there is still much we don't know about Faust, the inclusion of Envy as a requirement for her Fluid Sac implies that the root of her madness actually comes from someone else. There's not enough info for us to speculate on more details... but something tells me this might have to do with a certain Faustian Bargain, if you catch my drift.

So, that's Fluid Sac! For something with so little to dissect, it ended up leading to quite a good bit of analysis anyway! Call me Game Theory cause I'm about to put MatPat out of a job.

Telepole

Alright, let's once again start with the abnormality itself - Alleyway Watchdog.

The funny thing is that the Watchdog has the opposite problem to the Ichthys, as while the fish had very little lore, the Watchdog has a decent amount, but it's written by Yi Sang and as such it's hard to tell how much of its logs are facts, and how much is Yi Sang being Yi Sang and projecting onto the dog.

If there is one thing that is a definitive fact, it's that lack of being able to control oneself and being unable to tell who is controlling who is a recurring theme for this abnormality. The fact that it's unclear if the dog is in control of its own actions calls back to it, and the further muddling of what actually is in control of it only further adds to that theme.

It's unclear if the charred person on its back is controlling the dog, or if it's simply along for the ride unable to do anything to stop it, or if it is also under the control of something else. It's unclear if electricity is what is directly controlling the dog, or if it's something Yi Sang is projecting onto it due to his own experiences.

With that in mind, let's look at the three Sinners who have this E.G.O - Don, Faust, and Heathcliff. Now, I won't be looking at Heathcliff's case too closely, since this is meant to focus on Don and Faust, but I will be bringing him up when talking about Telepole on a general level, so that we have the biggest sample size possible.

In this case, having the Telepole E.G.O would imply these three have some issues when it comes to control, whether it's they themselves lacked control in their life, or whether it's their own degree of perceived control isn't as it seems. Since neither of those three have had their Cantos released yet, it's impossible for me to tell what exactly is going on here, but this is something to keep in mind.

Now, let's talk about Envy, as that's the Sin damage that all of the Telepoles deal. Envy appears to represent actions one takes as a reaction to what others do. This can take any form, whether it's revenge or following orders or being provoked or anything really. What's important here is that the action taken is a Direct Response to someone else.

The only base E.G.O that deals Envy damage is Heathcliff's Bodysack, which represents his impulsive and likely violent reaction to whatever Cathy did to him.

This all fits very nicely with the nature of Alleyway Watchdog, and Telepole E.G.O as a whole. The Watchdog's actions are all reactions to something else controlling it. Likewise, those using the Telepole E.G.O have their actions be influenced or even controlled by someone else.

Their Awakening lines (since there's nothing to analyze when it comes to their Corroded howls I don't think) all reflect a certain part of their personality, potentially implying that something about that is due to the influence of someone else.

Heathcliff's line expresses his impulsively violent tendencies, Don's ties back to her blind heroism, and Faust's has a clinical, detached feel to it.

As for Sin Resources, both Faust and Heathcliff use Envy, Wrath, and Lust, while Don exchanges Lust for Gloom.

Envy as a Sin Resource here once again ties back to the themes of control, implying that for all three, the actions they take are not entirely Just their own. Whether it's provokation or suggestion or something else, for all three of them, their actions are being encouraged, if not directly controlled, by someone else entirely.

Wrath is... hard to analyze. Partially because on first glance it seems to act as a shorthand for fire damage, and partially because no base E.G.O deals Wrath damage. My best guess based on other E.G.Os is that Wrath represents actions done out of self-righteousness. It's the "I deserve to do this, I DARE to do this." of Sins, in my opinion.

It's not necessarily tied to literal anger, as its name might imply, but rather a deeper reason that usually leads to anger - that being the idea that something should or shouldn't happen simply because you wish it so. After all, the most common reason for anger is for something to not go your way. Think children throwing tantrums over their toy being taken away, or a gamer smashing their keyboard over getting outplayed.

With all that being said, Wrath being used for Telepole could have several meanings. It could represent defiance, the idea that the Sinners act out because they believe they deserve better than the person trying to control them. It could also represent temptation, falling under someone else's control or provokation due to believing that they deserve something they don't have or to do something they can't without falling for it.

Now onto the more unique Sin resource requirements. Faust and Heathcliff both require Lust, a Sin representing indulging one's desires and seeking personal fulfillment. This would fit both Heathcliff and Faust, as their Telepoles seem to allude to the things they are already impulsive about - mindless violence for Heathcliff, and pursuit of knowledge for Faust. The actions they are being controlled or provoked to do are things they already wish to indulge in. Perhaps in their case, they are specifically being tempted into doing something, rather than being directly forced.

This however, is different for Don. Don's Telepole requires Gloom, which is a Sin representing actions done out of succumbing to negative emotions. This paints the actions she's controlled or provoked into comitting in a different light. Unlike Heathcliff or Faust, she isn't being tempted by personal fulfillment. No, in her case it's an expression of emotional stress. Perhaps in her case the control is much more forceful, causing her to act out, or perhaps her actions are a reaction to something bad happening to someone she knows. Either way, it's quite intriguing to note.

Unlike my Fluid Sac analysis, which I could get a little bit more detailed on thanks to touching on a facet of Don and Faust's personalities that are clearly evident, Telepole seems to more so reference their pasts, something that as of right now we simply have no access to.

I expect reaching Heathcliff's Canto will help a ton in this specific case, as it will help analyze the rest of the Telepoles thanks to being able to compare what it seems to reference in his revealed past to potentially similar events in both Don and Faust's pasts.

not what you hoped for OP but it made me realise having a PoV switch right now would be 200% psych and could happen. As in: 'in the narrow room' subpart ends, as we hop to elsewhere and do plot there (Lucy team? Kenji & Tecchou? Mori movement? Atsushi getting to Fukuchi & co, even tho i keep making that call and it keeps proving wrong?) and another subpart, then in 3rd subpart resolve Meursault decisively. Thanks, i hate it.

re: topic (but still not quite): it's been grinding my gears that noone is calling this, but: regardless of DoA resolution, the optics/situation for ability users is terrible. Globally. For the average person this is a broken masquerade scenario - vampires EVERYWHERE in a way that cannot be covered up or handwaved away. If they get to know the details, it would be caused by an ability user (1) being wielded by another ability user (2) using an anomalous object created by another ability user (3!!!). Given that previously ability users weren't public knowledge, populace's 1st contact would be of "they are an existential threat". This makes them convinient scapegoats for both the actual chaos and other assorted problems, real or imagined. At this point 'removing nations'(yes i know it's a coverup, but let's be real: if it worked you could bootstrap any objective with it.) would be merely an assurance that an aggregate database of ability users would be created - which with sufficently bad PR is a very scary proposition, indeed.

as a sidenote, i've once thought myself into an interesting spot: let's take the "What is the opposite of crime?" bit from No Longer Human seriously for a moment; a 'crime' is whatever either law or society deems undesirable action. Because society is made out of smaller societies, and each will have norms that differ slightly (or even conflict with the law/norms of other societies), any given action could be declared a 'crime' by any of the above. Therefore, crime = action. Therefore, the opposite to crime would be inaction. Every living being acts (commits actions?) by the virtue of being alive (breathing, eating, sleeping). Therefore, only inanimate objects do not commit crimes. Now that we have logic'd ourselves to "The sin crime is breathing", the question remains: Do corpses count on the grounds of being alive at some point? Within these parameters, it's actually another question: Are crimes forgivable? Since multiple things can all be called 'crime', despite different severity, the answer would be a binary yes/no.

At which point, the thread splits into two:

1) From a character backstory perspective: assuming he learnt of his ability by killing family memeber(s) accidentally, who exactly could give him forgiveness for it? assuming he does not regret a kill (both in the sense of "can't logic your way out of lack of fucks to give, chief" and "doesn't go into hysterics as seen in other people"), dogma would not give him forgiveness either. Therefore, the answer is: no.

2) From what i vaguely remember of C&P, the entire thing is a setup to do a redemption arc. For a redemption to happen (as opposed to what TvT poetically calls Heel-Face Door Slam), there has to be an underlying assumption - on both the repenter's and the judge's ends - that a crime can be forgiven, with enough work. For Dostoyevsky - you know, the terrorist? - to line up with both C&P and Dostoyevsky - you know, the writer? - or rather, what hazy picture i have of his body of work. For a change to happen, the implicit assumption has to, as well. Therefore, the answer is: no. (as of right now, circa ch107)

…i recall randomly going "wouldn't it be really lulzy if the endgame was NGE's Instrumentality?" but between writing out the above step-by-step, and DoA's objective having to be something to shook Atsushi outside of black-and-white thinking backed by DoA being a treat to ADA… and it's infuriatingly self-defending against that quote you have provided; "define: death"

If we hinge on ability user != ability, and 'ability as an analogy for having thoughts deep/insistent enough to write them down and publish', it circles back to the above, tho without an in-universe explanation. …when is an ability not tied to a user? When it's a singularity. This is the part where once again i suddenly remember i haven't read a single LN and just absorb spoilers like a sea sponge, but: is there some mention (in Stormbringer?) that singularities do not change? In the sense of 'do not adapt to stimuli'? If yes, it would not be a complete sweep as elaborated above, but would still line up with "not acting" in a way. If we tie this to the whole 'god likes order' we breach straight into an entire memeplex of "perfect order = no change" (see also: Shin Megami Tensei's law - aka christian god and angels - factions)

Everyone is in full conspiracy mode since (a little before) the last chapter with the Fyodor ability theories and I'm loving that. That got me thinking:

What was Fyodor's objective again?

Disclaimer, I fully rely on translations, but I cross-checked with two of them so...

special thanks to @ticklinglady for finding these pages!

"... a world free of sin and skill users."

1. A world free of sin

He says he wants to spill the blood of the sinners like 3 times but doesn't really give an explanation of who, what or why.

His definition of "sin" is quite vague, but could be the usual catholic/christian stuff. The one time he identified a specific behaviour as a sin was when the Agency and Port Mafia were killing each other "even though they knew they were being set up to do so" (though he also said Ace breathing and thinking was a crime and said killing Karma was freeing him).

In the Dead Apple novelization (not written, but edited by Asagiri, who came up with the original idea for the movie and gave a whole speech on Fyodor to the writing team), Fyodor does make a speech about the post-dragon red fog surrounding the Earth, transforming it into a "dead apple" by essentially killing everyone and "washing away the original sin of man". The apple motif was a sort of poetic irony.

According to the novelization, this was his true objective at the time and he never mentions the Book, not even in the epilogue, as opposed to doing so in the movie.

This scenario is kind of a contradiction, since the fog would have erased everyone except ability users, though most would have suffered at the hands of their abilities before dying. Said abilities would have then been kept in a collection maintained by Shibusawa, an ability singularity himself, which brings us to...

2. A world free of ability users

I went through the manga and never did find an instance of Fyodor speaking ill of abilities, only ability users. That doesn't mean there is a difference to him in the first place, but it's interesting.

The Dead Apple scenario is to be taken with a grain of salt, but killing everyone doesn't seem to be a problem for him (he kills nearly everyone he interacts with anyway), and this implies that to him every single human is sinful beyond redemption and can only be saved through death. Why he is singling out ability users in that case? seems redundant.

Other instances of him talking about his objective included talking about "the will of the hand of God and Demon", doing this "for the sake of a better world", and saying the death he gives is a form of salvation by severing the influence of sins from the soul. He also talks a big game about God and his intentions (order and stuff), and Dazai likes to point and laugh at him when he does so.

As a bonus, in Dead Apple, Fyodor answered Dazai's question of why he accepted to join forces with him by saying it was "simply to see the world as it ought to be" (and because he wanted entertainment, with Dazai turning out to be that entertainment, as Fyodor was in fact using him the whole time for his own agenda).

now go and apply that knowledge to your theories

An interesting thing to note in regards to the Akutagawa-Tanizaki debate: their viewpoints were likely somewhat influenced by the styles of traditional vs. Western literature. Akutagawa Ryuunosuke tended to be more faithful to the emotional and abstract style of Japanese literature— whereas at the time of this debate, Tanizaki Jun'ichirou was deep in his fascination with the West, which is associated with stories that have more focus on a structured plot by comparison.

The interesting thing about this is that, later in life, Tanizaki-sensei would undergo a "Return from the West", in which his fascination with the West dwindled, and he became more invested in traditional Japanese aesthetics. In a roundabout way, the real life counterparts of Tanizaki and Akutagawa went from being at odds, to ultimately coming to an agreement— though Akutagawa-sensei passed away before he could witness Tanizaki-sensei's change of heart.

In regards to BSD, this could be paralleled with Tanizaki (the bsd character) leaving the Agency, whose members are authors who leaned more towards a Westernized style of writing, and transferring to the Port Mafia, which is composed of authors who were more loyal to the more traditional, abstract/emotional style of literature. But who knows, maybe Asagiri will surprise us.

Reminder that steam is not only "no longer supporting windows 7" ,. they will be actively disabling all clients on this OS by end of this year. No, you can't run offline. No, you can't run the games standalone. The official steam position is go fuck yourself. Their reasoning is due to intertwinement with some google features, which imo is just making it even fucking worse, because why the fuck do google need to be involved in me playing a game I bought in 2013? And why do they get to say I can no longer access this game?

If you want a workaround, hit up this but in future, just use GOG.

This isn't about the OS, so don't even start with me. Deliberately disabling access to items you've already purchased with no recourse is the highest order of bullshit.

re: Fyodor's goals / Logistics of the Book

tl;dr cause can't be assed. The actual end goal is irrelevant. The point of pursuing the book is attaining infinity of power to accomplish whatever, aka. instrumental convergence.

If you had one, what would you do? Naturally fuse yourself with it, without losing agency, while gaining power to warp out of trouble, be unable to lose consciousness, et cetera et cetera. All to make sure whatever you actually write into it cannot be undone.

As a sidenote: that what has to be written on the page (and implicitly, into the book as a lookup system) has to have story-like structure. However, what does it actually mean? What determines if this criteria is fulfilled?

There is an external - and thus ultimate - authority, making the Book mere admin console you can't use to modify the book itself. Outside of inflicting Death of the Author (in which case how Homestuck-y BSD has to get for people to notice....), not too spicy. A call to fanwork-action (already there with general structure & Beast) and/or rebuking externally imposed purpose (which some smaller opponent can set up just as well), sure.

It's in the eye of the writer - that is, if the book's user thinks it's story-like enough it'll works. But also - if something breaks the writer's suspension of disbelief, they cannot pick that outcome (see also BSD Beast?).

The 2nd option has more edge cases that just keep getting more ridiculous, so let's go:

If it's the writer deciding if the story is legit, it implicitly bakes into the new reality author's assumptions how the world works. What if their ideas have no internal sense in a way that can be reconciled; will it disappear in a puff of logic? Does the great winner turn the page and there's just this huge EAT SHIT, like a Junji Ito scarejump?

In Beast, the option of the world being unstable is brought up. In a deliciously meta fashion - because we the readers know it's fictional, there are now too many in the know and thus it in-universe dissolves out of sheer 4th wall break. But what is the in-universe explanation? The above? The existence of an alpha timeline, and this one only exists as long as needed for someone else to do a thing that will Grandfather paradox it out of the timeline? We already know Fukuchi stabbed from the future to the present, and can do so via self-erasing time paradoxes.

But what if the writer is, say, horror-brained and decides the setting should progressively be more terrifying and incomprehensible. In a way that breaks the very laws of physics that enable (human, since the book probably has sanity check of "will this result in an intelligent species capable of writing") existence. Everything is consistent within the framework of "what good horror story should be". By the previous logic alone, it should work nonetheless.

But what if! The horror writer finishes up the manuscript, hands it over to someone that runs on fluffy slice-of-life pieces and have them write it into the book? Maybe changing word choice here or there, without changing the meaning?

But! what! if! The original manuscript is 1) translated multiple times 2) old as fuck? that would mean the text itself is powered by multiple perspectives - of both the OG writer, but also every translator AND every translator's opinion on not only the text, but the text's context!

it just raises too many questions.jpg

I wonder if Teruko stays in her younger form so often to avoid the intensity of her own emotions.

Her devotion to Fukuchi despite his faults -> A childish crush

Her intense pride + rage that she must endure horrors for the sake of national peace -> Constant tantrums that seem disproportionate to the situation

Her sadism going unfulfillled during an interrogation and the storm of emotion that arises from that -> Cluthing Jouno's hand and wailing like the child she is embodying