As the title says.
Edit 3: the thing that inspired me to post this was a comment under the kcd2 trailer wishind that they would alter the lockpicking system, among others. This post is ment to provide my opinion regarding lockpicking ON CONTROLLER.
Edit 4: some people leave comments referensing the ease of lockpicking on pc and the horror and carnage on controller. This is my first ever post. Is it common for people to leave opinions on a subject without reading the whole post.
I've seen many posts here critisising the lockpicking system. I do understand the people who don''t like lockpiking in this game. During my first playtrough I got absolutely demolished by Pesheks quest due to my inability to lockpick(for context, I play/(d) on ps5/(ps4)). It was so bad that I did not touch it for most of my playtrough at all.
I remember when during the end of the playtrough i was doing the Lady Stephanies quest and got stuck on the part where you get the gemstone from the chest. I think I spent an hour trying to open the damn thing and looking at tutorials.
But then I somehow got it. From there I started to use lockpicking, though still avoiding it like the plague if I could. I quickly got really good at it. Now I'm able to open any chest extremely fast. Even the very hard ones (of course dependant on the position of the sweet spot. Fuck it when its on the outer edge.)
When I played skyrim again I realised that I hate its lock picking system. Breaking dozens of lock picks to find that sweet spot on a master lock. Compared to kcd where if you are good enough you can open any lock at level 6 with the help of some wine. I apreciate the fact that its fully skill dependant. The skill level of lockpicking mostly affects the size of the sweet spot and subsequently the speed at which you can open the lock.
On critisism that I have of the system is the fact that you cant even try to open hard and very hard locks before a certain skill level. For example merchant chest are unavailable to try until level 15 iirc, or 6 if you pick luck of the drunk. I like kcd because of the freedom of oproach that it provides. I think it would be better if you could try any lock you want to, bit at a low skill level the sweet spit would be microscopic on the hardest locks.
I understant that that solution would slightly contradict the narative of Henry being a skilles peasant at the start, but I want to start my ratay robbing spree as soon as I get out of the ptsd enduced fever dream in the mill.
Edit 1: I want to add that my perception could be biased since I rarely see people talking about lickpicking and the few times I do is in old posts. Considering how many people mention their "business trips" to ratay and sasau I can guess that many people are good at lock picking.
Edit 2: I want to clarify that ive not experienced many different lockpicking mechanics. The first ones that come to my head are skyrim, kcd and thief simulator. In my experience the overwhelmingly most common one is the skyrim/fallout on.
Also I im not very familiar with lockpicking irl but isnt skyrim pretty accurate with how you would look at it from your perspective. U dont see anything happening on the inside and have no knowledge of where the sweet spot would be.

First of all, sometimes we are warranted to assume something and be disapointed when it isnt the case, this is also not about retroactive changes to weapons and co, its about "how it got released, and what the community gaslit themself into believing it was gonna be".
This is also gonna be a bit unstructured, so sorry for the read.
Time and time again by now, we see the community see an announcement, and decides "its gonna be X surely", only to be disapointed when it isnt X, but Y instead. Even with very little evidence towards X being ever the intention, this community has the tendency to still gaslight themself into believing its gonna be X
We saw it with Democratic detonation, we saw it, to a lesser extent, with polar patriots, we see (or saw it seems to have stopped) with people gaslighting themself into believing the ilumintes are gonna be added ANY MINUTE NOW...
DD is a prime example of this, the warbond trailer focused on explosions, the name has Detonation in its name, the preview has a person wielding grenades on their armor, and one with a balistic body armor. The design and weapons shown where very clearly explosion themed. Not fire
Yet the community at large gaslit themself into believing it was gonna be "the fire warbond", with stuff like "90% fire damage reduction" primaraly due to the design of a single armor. And when it, inevetibly, wasnt a Fire warbond people rioted....
Which is amazing given we already HAD a Fire warbond essentialy.... Steeled veterans gave us the incendiary breaker, the incendiary grenade and heck, evne the liberator concussive(or explosive liberator how it was called at launch) fits the theme somewhat, at least visually. the Effect florish on the selection is also flames rising from the ground.
Same with polar patriots. While i can undestand the outrage here a bit more, as they did focus on the spiked shoes in the trailer, it was also, at least to me, pretty obvious they wouldnt make a Armor passive that would litteraly be useless on 90% of maps like "no sliding on ice" or that would invalidate a booster essentialy. by the same vein, why did people nto latch onto the "spiked" handguards the heavy armors have, somehow not a single one clamoured for and hoped for "more melee damage"... Because the community only wants to see what they WANT to see, and gaslight themself into believing what they think is true is true.
People also then decided that "well its snow themed(its polar, not snow themed) so it has to have some cool snow effects or weapons right?" which, inevitable, it didnt and made people even more mad.(i write inevitably because most ideas thrown around where "cryo bullets" or "ice beams" and co, and thats just really not fitting into HD2 as a setting imo)
The incediary impact is a PERFECT example, it makes perfect sense to be in a polasnow/cold themed warbond, as you would want something with heat in those scenarios.
The tenderizer in its current look also fits better into it(even if not perfect) then another Black gun(but fair, they messed up and advertised it a certain way and forgot to update the texture, so thats a loss for me), as black is about the WORST color you can pick for a gun in a snow/ice enviroment, even the kodiak armor isnt black but a darkish light grey.
ok i kinda lost track
Anyway. The communtiy needs to stop taking a minor detail somewhere and constructing their own narative from it when it just isnt supported by anything else. And if you do that still, at least dont gaslight yourself or others into believing its gonna be true

So as much as I love the newer assassin's creed games, I cannot really overlook the issues it has. I really hope the points below will be improved upon in red.
-NPCs that are not absolutely brain-dead. So in my recent reply of the Witcher 3 I've noticed just how alive the npcs are. Sure they might use the same assets and voicelines for some npcs, but they really bring something to the game. The npcs in the mosr recent ac games are just... Disposable. Like they're mot even needed with how little they add to the experience. Another good example is RDR2. Red needs to improve ai, have NPCs chat about world events and such and not be total braindead fools.
-Interesting open world. So its no secret that red will be an RPG. And RPG usually have expansive open worlds. Great RPGs not only have big worlds, but also very interesting. Games like Skyrim, baldur's gate 3 or the Witcher 3 all have some of the best open worlds out there. And that's because the devs put a lot of efforts into them. Environmental sory telling, well structured world design, interesting locations and secrets, all of those were barely a thing in the most recent AC games. The open worlds are big, but they feel almost AI generated. Random ahh bandit camps mostly. Take Skyrim for example. Run into a random cave, then you see some dead bodies. You loot them and find a letter. That letter says that they were hired to dig there and this is their big shot. Explore some more and you find another letter. "These foolish villagers fell for it, they're gonna come here in hopes of getting paid, but they don't know that we shall drink their blood. I await you, brothers. And tonight we shall feast". Vampires. You just uncovered a cult of vampires, and now you can investigate further to put an end to their villany! That's just one example. There's nothing like that in the recent ac games!
-Decisions that actually affect the world around you! The addition of dialogue choices made me hopeful that we'd have witcher 3 branching naratives, vut that proved to not be the case. Both odyssey and Valhalla sorely lacked that. If you're gonna add them, do something meaningful. Or don't do it at all!
-better quest structure. This was obvious especially in Valhalla where 90% of the game you were sieging castles and killing folks! They need go to do better!
-improved stealth that allows for creativity. Mirage was a step in the right direction but it suffered from the clunkiness of valhalla's engine! I want something like Unity. Where you could do some insane plays if you were good enough.
-better voice acting for all characters. At this point I'd even take something like Skyrim where there were very few voice actors that all played multiple roles, but hey at least they were good at their job. In the new games, outside of rhe leads and few side characters, everyone sounds like a fucking idiot. I've not seen worse voice acting in any game I've played! The leads are amazing, but this is not gonna save the game when 95% of the kther characters sound like they're trying to voice act badly!
-more motion capture and better animations. Another thing that's pretty lame in the recent games is how bad most kf the cutscenes look. They're not motion captured outside of a few scenes. And it really shows.
I think red has been cookin6for a while and it's literally the most anticipated assassin's creed game of all time! They really need to hit the nail on the head and not skimp on quality!
It's clear they can. Just look at the older games! They just need stricter quality control!

If the original PS1 trillogy got remade what features would you keep and what would you change?
-Obviously the core story should remain the same but with some up to date narative tweaks (Teresa's "death" should be handled better for example) and expanded character backgrounds especially side characters like Girdeaux or omitting some altogether like Erikson in SF1.The boss and mini boss fights should be reworked to become more complex with a hidden gimmick or just to be more challlenging (the iconic ones like Girdeaux for example should retain the original idea but be more polished ). I feel like the remake should only add content since there are no redundant levels in my opinion.
-Make it a single game (like with Crashes N'sane trillogy) with the same number of missions maybe add some new ones to expand the story.
-The parallel missions in SF2 where Gabe is at the mountain while Lian is at the air base is a great idea that can be implemented to add a couple more levels.Maybe in SF1 have a stealth section with Mara trying to capture Phagan at the Pharcom Expo Centre or her escape from the agency after that.Jenkins having his team attacked in DC and even playing as one of the CBDC agents it can be tied up nicely if they were some of the men that end up crashing with Gabe at the start of SF 2.
-Give the player an option where possible to remain undetected for as long as possible like in Rhoemers stronghold and make it impact the current level.For example guards being more or less hostile maybe even some different level routes and radiotraffic depending on the agro state and have it transfer to subsequent level to make it matter (not like in Rozovka where you remain undetected but in the bunkers it doesn't matter because ups the silent alarm has been trigered and the base is on alert anyway)
-Keep the game third person only that means no first person aiming and no auto lock as that would make it too easy today.Update the map to make it useful for orientating for a change😁.
-I personally love the mission briefing screen before the levels and would be very happy if that esthetic (the bluish colour outline that is also in the pause menu) could be preserved maybe have someone do a voiceover reading the text.Radiotraffic should stay it's a nice touch and it feels like you have a team behind you.
-The weapons are great they have the variety and are fun to use but i could see them being rounded up with some more realistic sounds.Maybe cut the weapons that seem repetitive like the Falcon in SF3 (we already have the shotgun and .45) or combine some of them into one like the sniper and nightvision sniper could be just one gun.There is no need for an inventory system or upgrades of any kind to weapons during the game.
-Flak jackets should stay and somekind of an indicator for headshots since they are the core mechanics of the game.Box pickups i would be ok to be mainly abandoned maybe have a new weapon introduced that way could be cool as homage to the original.The dying animations specific to the way killed are fun (choking from a gas grenade or shotgun like weapons pushing henchmen back is always satisfying).Both Taser variants should stay but maybe the long range one should be nerfed to balance the gameplay😁.
-Soundtrack is awesome and an integral part of the experience it should only get an upgrade in terms of quality no need to fix something that isn't broken.Voice acting and the lines in general obviously should get a fresh coat of paint but if possible like in the case of Gabe (John Chacon ) at least the VA should remain the same .
-The obejctives in the levels should remain linear but the player can tackle them in any order when possible and should be encouraged to explore the level to get some rewards for doing so a new weapon,easter egg or piece of dialog.Not to come across wrong the game should not become some open world game but rather just use the maps to their full potential.
Let's give some ideas to potential game developers so that they have a broad outline of a finished product and no excuses not to remake SF😁

Hello, everyone! I'm working on my graduation project for my master's design course and I've decided to develope a display typeface. Earlier I was straight up going for inspiration derived from Abbas Kiarostami, the legendary Iranian filmmaker, and provide the typeface the characteristics derived from his filmmaking style and approach. For example, how he depicts contrast between life and hope, works on the separation and amalgamation of truth & fiction, uses reconciliation b/w tradition, uses disruptive style of naration etc. translating to contrast heavy, serif display typeface with modern connotations. But it would just come off as an experimental way of learning the type design discipline and would not necessarily solve any problem and work towards any gap that is not realised yet or worked upon. With context to cinema, typography has been a mostly ignored part of its entirety and is used for opening credits, title and post credits description. Some attempts have been made by early designers like Saul Bass, Dan Perri, Pablo Ferro, Maurice Binder etc. to make the opening credits speak for the movie before the audience gets into the film but all their work was addressed on a custom requirement, setup up by the filmmakers. Every film would need a different style of typography and a typeface designed with a general idea would not work for all or even a specific section of it. I'd request for help and suggestions which can help me identify a need in this related domain that can be solved by a newer refreshing typeface. All kind of suggestions are welcome and as we say in design, no question or idea is stupid.

Hello, everyone! I'm working on my graduation project for my master's design course and I've decided to develope a display typeface. Earlier I was straight up going for inspiration derived from Abbas Kiarostami, the legendary Iranian filmmaker, and provide the typeface the characteristics derived from his filmmaking style and approach. For example, how he depicts contrast between life and hope, works on the separation and amalgamation of truth & fiction, uses reconciliation b/w tradition, uses disruptive style of naration etc. translating to contrast heavy, serif display typeface with modern connotations. But it would just come off as an experimental way of learning the type design discipline and would not necessarily solve any problem and work towards any gap that is not realised yet or worked upon. With context to cinema, typography has been a mostly ignored part of its entirety and is used for opening credits, title and post credits description. Some attempts have been made by early designers like Saul Bass, Dan Perri, Pablo Ferro, Maurice Binder etc. to make the opening credits speak for the movie before the audience gets into the film but all their work was addressed on a custom requirement, setup up by the filmmakers. Every film would need a different style of typography and a typeface designed with a general idea would not work for all or even a specific section of it. I'd request for help and suggestions which can help me identify a need in this related domain that can be solved by a newer refreshing typeface. All kind of suggestions are welcome and as we say in design, no question or idea is stupid.

Quran

"They [jinn] made for him [Sulaiman] what he willed of elevated chambers, statues [icons of beings], bowls like reservoirs, and stationary kettles. [We said], 'Work, O family of David, in gratitude.' And few of My servants are grateful." (Quran 34:13)
Famous Tabi'i: That was allowed in their Shariah
Shariah changes, but shirk does not. Possession of statues isnt shirk because Sulaiman had statues.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Ahadith

Narrated by Aishah:
"Allah's Messenger returned from a journey when I had placed a curtain of mine having pictures over (the door of) a chamber of mine. When Allah's Messenger saw it, he tore it and said, "The people who will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection will be those who try to make the like of Allah's creations." So we [Aishah] turned it [the curtain] into one or two cushions."
(Al-Bukhari 5954)
It was narrated that Aishah said:
The Messenger of Allah said: “The people who will be most severely punished on the Day of Resurrection will be those who imitate the creation of Allah.”
(Sahih Muslim 2107)
It was narrated from Abdullah ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah said:
“Those who make images will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them [image-makers]: 'Bring to life that which you have created.'"
(Al-Bukhari 7558 & Muslim 2108)
Said bin Abu Al-Hasan reported:
While I was with Ibn Abbas, a man came and said, "I earn my livelihood from making images." Ibn Abbas said: "I will only tell you what I heard from the Messenger of Allah. I heard him say: "Whoever makes an image will be punished by Allah until he puts life into it, and he will never be able to do that." After hearing this, the man became upset. Ibn Abbas then took pity on him and said, "If you insist on making pictures, I advise you to make pictures of trees and other non-living objects."
(Al-Bukhari 2225)
Abu Hurairah narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Some of the Fire (in the shape of a long neck) will come out of the Fire on the Day of judgment. It will have two eyes which can see, two ears which can hear, and a tongue which can speak. It will say: 'I have been left in charge of three: Every obstinate oppressor, everyone who called upon a deity besides Allah, and the image makers." (Jami at-Tirmidhi 2574, Hasan (Darussalam))
Narrated by Jabir:
"The Messenger of Allah prohibited having images in the house, and he prohibited making them." (Jami at-Tirmidhi 1749, Sahih (Darussalam))
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Drawings

It was reported from Aishah Umm al-Mumineen that Umm Habeebah and Umm Salamah mentioned a church which they had seen in Ethiopia, in which there were images. They told the Prophet about it, and he said: "Those people, if there was a righteous man among them and he died, they would build a place of worship over his grave and put images in it. These will be the most evil of creation before Allah on the Day of Resurrection." (narrated by Al-Bukhari 427, Muslim 528)
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said:
"This hadith indicates that making images is haram."
Al-Nawawi said:
"Our companions and other scholars said: making images of animate beings is extremely haram and is a major sin, because severe warnings have been issued against it in the hadith. Whether the image is made to be used in a disrespectful fashion or for other purposes, it is haram to make it in all cases, because it implies that one is trying to match the creation of Allah, whether the image is to appear on a garment, carpet, coin, vessel, wall or whatever. With regard to pictures of trees, camel saddles, and other pictures in which no animate beings appear, these are not haram. This is the ruling on making images."
It was reported that Abu Hurayrah entered a house in Madinah and saw somebody making images in it. He said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say: [Allah says:] "Who does greater wrong than one who goes and creates something like My creation? Let them create a seed or a small ant!" (al-Bukhari 7559, Muslim 2111)
Al-Nawawi said:
"Concerning the words of Allah. “Let them create a small ant or a seed or a grain of barley!” means, let them create a small ant which has a soul and moves by itself, like this small ant which was created by Allah. Or let them createa grain of wheat or barley, i.e., let them create a grain which is eaten as food or which can be planted so it will grow and which has the characteristics of a grain of wheat or barley or other seeds which were created by Allah. This is impossible, as stated above. None can bring forth living vegetation out of nothing except Allah, may He be glorified.
Abu Juhayfah: "the Prophet forbade the price of a dog and the price of blood, and he forbade tattooing and asking to be tattooed, and the consumption or paying of ribaa, and he cursed those who make images. " (Narrated by Al-Bukhari 2086)
Imam al-Tabari: "...those who make figures in order that they may be worshipped besides Allah, and this is unbelief (kufr). As for those who do not make them for this purpose, they will be guilty only of making a representation (suar)."
Abd-Allah ibn Masood said: when the Prophet entered Makkah [at the Conquest], there were three hundred and sixty idols around the Kabah. He started hitting them with his stick and saying, “Truth has come and Batil (falsehood) has vanished. Surely, Batil is ever bound to vanish”
(al-Bukhari 2478, Sahih Muslim 1781a)
Abu’l-Hiyaaj al-Asadi said: "Ali ibn Abi Talib said to me: Shall I not send you on the same basis as the Messenger of Allah sent me? Do not leave any statue without destroying it, and do not leave any built-up grave without razing it to the ground. (According to one report: and do not leave any picture without erasing it). " (Sahih Muslim 969a, 969b)
Ibn Taymiyah said:
"The command is to destroy two types of images: images which represent the deceased person, and images which are placed on top of graves – because Shirk may come about from both types."
Ibn Taymiyah said:
"The reason why al-Lat was worshipped was the veneration of the grave of a righteous man which was there."
And he said:
"This problem [veneration] which is why Islam forbids [images], is the reason why so many of nations have fallen into committing Shirk to a greater or lesser degree."
Ibn al-Qayyim said:
"Tamaatheel is the plural of Timthaal (statue), which refers to a representative image."
One of the stated principles of usul-u-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) is that if anything directly leads to haram, it is likewise haram. In other words, Tasweer [image-making] was forbidden precisely for the reason that it was a means leading to shirk.
Ibn al-Qayyim said, describing how the Shaytaan plays with the Christians:
"He plays with them with regard to the images which they have in their churches and which they worship. You cannot find any church which is free of these images of Maryam, the Messiah, George, Peter and others of their saints and martyrs. Most of them bow to these images and pray to them instead of to Allah. The Patriarch of Alexandria even wrote a letter to the ruler of Rome supporting the idea of bowing to these images: (he said) Allah commanded Moosa to make images of cherubim in the Tabernacle; and when Sulayman the son of Dawood built the Temple, he made images of cherubim and put them inside the Temple. Then he said in his letter: this is like when a king sends a letter to one of his governors and the governor takes the letter and kisses it then touches it to his forehead [a sign of respect], and stands up to receive it. He does not do this to venerate the paper and ink, but to venerate the king. In the same way, when one bows to an image, it is to venerate the person represented by the image, not to venerate the paints and colours.
This is exactly the same as the example given to justify idol worship."
And he said:
"In most cases, the reason why nations fall into Shirk is because of images and graves.”
Making images is a way of falling into Shirk, because Shirk starts with the veneration of those who are depicted in the images, especially when people have little or no knowledge. The evidence for this is:
Ibn Abbaas said: "The idols of the people of Nuh were known among the Arabs later on. Wadd belonged to (the tribe of) Kalb in Dawmat al-Jandal. Suwaa’ belonged to Hudhayl. Yaghooth belonged to Muraad, then to Bani Ghutayf in al-Jawf, near Sabaa’. Ya’ooq belonged to Hamadaan. Nasar belonged to Humayr of Aal Dhi’l-Kalaa’. These were names of righteous men from the people of Nuh. When they died, the Shaytaan inspired their people to set up idols in the places where they had used to sit, and to call those idols by their names. They did that but they did not worship them [idols], but after those people died and knowledge had been forgotten, then they started to worship them. " (al-Bukhari)
Prohibition of images is because:

• it implies that one is trying to match the creation of Allah.
• it is an imitation of the kuffar.
• it is a means of veneration and falling into Shirk.

From the above it is clear that it is forbidden to make statues/images. Whoever does that is trying to match the creation of Allah and thus deserves to be cursed.
The majority of Muslim scholars are of the opinion that this kind of images are haram
Reputable scholars + 4 madhabs: scenery, trees, stars, things without ruh/soul is OK
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Drawings of the body without the head

Ibn Abbas narrates that: The Prophet said: “The image is the head; if the head is cut off, there is no image.” (al-Ismaa’eeli in his Mu’jam; sahih by al-Albani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah 1921 and in Saheeh al-Jaami’ 3864)
Ibn Qudamah said: "If the head of the image is cut off, then it is no longer makruh. Ibn Abbas said: The image is the head. So if the head** is cut off, it is no longer an image. This was also narrated from Ikrimah." Based on that, what is prohibited with regard to drawing is that on which facial features appear in such a way that the viewer knows that it is the image of an animate being.
Musnad Imam Ahmad -> "Image is concentrated in the face area"
But if the drawing is without showing the facial features – such as the eye or nose for example – and it only shows its general shape, then there is nothing wrong with it.
If the drawing/image is without features that show the eye, nose and mouth, then this is not included in the prohibition, because it is not imitating the creation of Allah.
Vast majority of scholars: If something is cut off from an image without which it could no longer live, then it is not a haram image -> Parts of body (hand, ...), sculpt of a hand, shade/silhouette of living being is OK to draw
Parts of body (drawing a hand) -> difference amongst ulama, disagreement is weak (as though its haram)
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

3D (that which casts a shadow):

4 madhab + Vast majority of scholars: haram to carve/scalp a face of living being,
carving/scalping a hand is OK.
Covering face partly doesnt change the ruling.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Children drawing

Controversy = 2D images of a face, body with chest
hanafi, shafi, hanbali: never an excuse to draw a face & Children cannot draw.
The position of the vast majority of classical scholars is based on the fact that there is no distinction in the various Hadiths between a 3D and 2D picture.
Maliki and Imam Malik: prohibition applies only to 3D images with body to them, not hand-drawn pictures. A picture that does not have a body or shadow to it will not be unlawful although somewhat disliked. Its just makrooh. Children can draw in school because its not venerating images. Many said: If there is a reason then its neutral/mubah.
Saudi Arabian Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta: "What makes images forbidden is the fact that they are images of animate beings, whether they are sculptures, or drawings on walls or fabric or paper, or they are woven, and whether they are done with a quill, a pen, or a machine, and whether they represent something real or something imaginary, whether they are small or large, beautified or distorted, or drawn in the form of lines representing a skeleton. What makes them forbidden is that fact that they depict animate beings, even if they are imaginary like pictures of ancient people, Pharaohs, or leaders and soldiers of the Crusades, or like the pictures of Isa and Maryam that are kept in churches,..., because of the general meaning of the texts, and because that is competing with the creation of Allah, and because it is a means that leads to shirk."
The child’s guardian should raise him to keep away from making images/drawings of animate beings, and he should explain to him that this is haraam.
He should look for permissible alternatives that are available, such as drawing vegetables, fruits, trees and oceans, and any inanimate objects.
Children wearing images on clothes: This work is not permissible because it involves printing pictures of animate beings on shirts that children will wear, so the pictures will be openly displayed on the chest of the person wearing the clothes. Prohibition includes all images, whether they are carved, engraved, printed, drawn or taken with a camera, because all kinds of image-making are included in the general meaning of the hadith. There are no exceptions, apart from cases of necessity or need such as photos for personal identity documents, which are essential.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Children playing with dolls

general ruling = One should not own 3D statues of living being
Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen said : "With regard to the issue of dolls that are made of cloth for children, of which the image is not clear even though there are limbs, head and neck, but there are no eyes or nose, there is nothing wrong with that, because this is not imitating the creation of Allah." "“Everyone who makes something that imitates the creation of Allah is included in this Hadith, which says that the Prophet cursed the image makers… and his words “The people who will be most severely punished on the Day of Resurrection will be the image-makers.” But as I said, if the image is not clear and if it does not have eyes or a nose or mouth or fingers, then it is not a complete image, and is not imitating the creation of Allah, may He be Glorified and Exalted.” "
Narrated by Aishah:
" used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Messenger used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for Aishah at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) " (al-Bukhari 6130)
Those toys which are made of wool are not considered to be images, because they do not have a head apart from a piece of wool, and it does not have the features of the face such as eyes, nose, mouth or ears. If an image does not have a head or any facial features, it is exempt from the ruling prohibiting images.
Even if we assume that it is an image, this does not mean that all images are permitted. Rather it is an exemption from the prohibition for a legitimate shariah purpose, which is to teach girls how to care for babies and to develop maternal feelings in their hearts, in order to prepare them for the future.
Most of the scholars have exempted the making of girls’ toys from the prohibition on making images and statues. This is the view of the Malikis, Shafis and Hanbalis. Al-Qadi Iyaad narrated that most of the scholars said that this is permissible, and he was followed in that by al-Nawawi in his commentary on Muslim. He said: “Exempted from the prohibition on making images that have a shadow are things that are used as toys for girls, because of the exemption that was narrated concerning that. This means that it is permissible, whether they are toys in the shape of people or animals, three-dimensional or otherwise, and whether they are supposed to represent real animals or not, such as a horse with wings…
The majority of scholars quote as evidence for this exemption the hadith of Aishah in which she says:
“I used to play with dolls in the house of the Prophet. I had friends who used to play with me. When the Messenger of Allah came in, they would hide themselves, then he would call them to join me and play with me.”
According to another report, she said that the Messenger came back from the battle of Tabook or Khaybar, and there was a curtain in her alcove. The wind blew and lifted the curtain, showing some dolls with which Aishah was playing. He said, “What is this, O Aishah?” She said, “My daughters.” Among them he saw a mare with wings made of leather.” He said, ‘And what is this that I see in the midst of them?” She said, “A mare.” He said, “What is this on it?” She said, “Wings.” He said, “A mare with wings?” She said, “Have you not heard that Sulaymaan had a horse with wings?” She said, the Messenger of Allah smiled so broadly that I could see his eyeteeth.
The Malikis, Shafis and Hanbalis interpreted this as an exemption for making toys because of the necessity of educating girls in how to bring up children. This interpretation is obvious if the toy is in the form of a human, but it is not obvious if it is in the form of a horse with wings. Hence al-Halimi used this report and others to support his argument. He said: “There are two benefits of that in the case of girls, one immediate and one which comes later. The immediate benefit is that they have fun, which is one of the most effective means of child development. If a child is well taken care of and feels happy and content, his development will be stronger and better. That is because joy energizes the mind, which in turn energizes the soul, and that has an effect on the body and produces physical strength. The benefit which is seen later on is that through that (play), the girls learn how to deal with children, love them and feel compassion for them, and that becomes second nature to them, so that when they grow up and see for themselves the things they used to play at, they will find that the compassion they used to play at is something very real indeed. Ibn Hajar quoted in al-Fath from someone who thought that making toys was haram, and that it had been permitted at first but was then abrogated by the general prohibition on making images. He responded by noting that the abrogation could have been the other way round and that the permission to make toys came later, on the grounds that in the hadith of Aishah about her toys, there is the indication that this happened at a later date, because it mentions that this happened when the Prophet came back from Tabook. So the apparent meaning is that it happened later on.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Owning 2D painting

Large group of scholars within 4 madhabs + many seniors from hanbali:
owning picture ≠ creating it
Its permissable to own, if picture isnt placed on a place of veneration -> OK to have on a background, carpet, cushion, ...
Main proof:
Aishah Narrates:
"he Prophet entered upon me while there was a curtain having pictures (of animals) in the house. His face got red with anger, and then he got hold of the curtain and tore it into pieces. The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Such people as paint these pictures will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection ." So Aishah cut it [curtain with pictures] up and covered two pillows/cushion with it."
(Al-Bukhari 6109)
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger saying:
"Angels [of mercy] do not enter the house in which there are portraits/pictures"
Opinions of the salaf:
- placing it in the center of attention is haram
- placing it in the center of attention is makruh, not haram -> Worst-case scenario = angels do not enter a house. Its OK to have it in the background/floor.
Number of ulama + Imam Al-Nawawi: All images always haram
At that time Sahaba used byzantine gold dinars and sasanian dirhams. These coins had images of emperors on them.
Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan minted first islamic coin with his image on it when some of sahaba were still alive.
Many explicit narations from Sahaba & Tabi'un where they distinguish between creating and owning image - having an image is not problematic if you are not venerating it.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Photos

unanimate

Photos + movies = ijma (consensus) that its halal because its just capturing & preserving light. Owning unanimate photo is OK

animate

Most scholars do not place them in the same category as those things prohibited during the Prophet’s time, they say its halal because it just captures light and is similar to a reflection of light (same as mirror and reflection on water).
Salafi + deobandi + ... -> photos/movies are haram -> Photos come under hadith that says angels do not enter a house
Modern maliki, modern shafi, fatwas of egypt, north africa -> OK to display photos.
Fatwas of jodan -> OK but best to avoid hanging -> at max its makruh
Even more conservative scholars: its OK to store on computer because its just emission of light waves. If you print it, then its an image that is haram.
It is clear that image-making is one of the blameworthy actions of the jaahiliyyah which Islam came to oppose. It is well established from clear, saheeh mutawaatir ahaadeeth that it is not allowed, and that the one who does this is cursed and is warned of torment in Hell, as in the hadith of Ibn Abbas which is attributed to the Prophet: "Every image-maker will be in Hell, and a soul will be given to every image which he made so that it might torment him in Hell." (Sahih Muslim).
This applies to all images of animate created beings, humans and others. There is no difference between three-dimensional and other images, whether they were taken with cameras or produced by painting, engraving or other methods, because of the general meaning of the hadith.
The scholars have clearly stated that the prohibition applies to photographs and other kinds of pictures, such as Imaam al-Nawawi, al-Haafiz ibn Hajar and others. The hadith of Aishah concerning the story of the curtain is clear, and what it indicates is that an image which is on a curtain is not 3D, rather it is a kind of drawing on cloth, but despite that the Messenger counted it as trying to match the creation of Allah.
But if the image is originally incomplete, such as a head-and-shoulders picture, and there is removed from the picture that without which is could not live, then it may be understood from the comments of many of the fuqaha that this is permissible, especially if there is a need for such partial pictures. Whatever the case, one has to fear Allaah as much as one can, and avoid that which Allah and His Messenger have forbidden.
Ibn Uthaymeen said, when he was asked about pictures: "making pictures for this purpose is haram and is not permitted. That is because making pictures for memories is haram, because the Prophet said, “The angels do not enter any house in which there is an image,” (narrated by al-Bukhaari), and whatever the angels do not enter had no goodness in it."
This includes all images, whether they are carved, engraved, printed, drawn or taken with a camera, because all kinds of image-making are included in the general meaning of the hadith. There are no exceptions, apart from cases of necessity or need such as photos for personal identity documents, which are essential.
Saudi Arabian Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta: “Making images of animate beings is haram and earnings from doing this are haram.”
When Allah forbids a thing, He also forbids its price. Making images of animate beings is forbidden, as it was reported in the sahih evidence. Therefore earnings from doing this are unclean and it is not permissible to consume them. An exception is made in the case of images that are necessary, such as photos for ID documents and photos used to track down criminals and so on. It is permissible to make these images and receive payment for doing so. The one who is asking this question could work only with pictures of things that are not animate, or he can try to look for another job. Whoever gives up a thing for the sake of Allah, Allah will compensate him with something better.
These hadith indicate that pictures of animate beings are haram, whether they are humans or other creatures, whether they are 3D or 2D, whether they are printed, drawn, etched, engraved, carved, cast in moulds, etc. These hadith include all of these types of pictures.
The Muslim should submit to the teachings of Islam and not argue with them by saying, "But I am not worshipping them or prostrating to them!" If we think about just one aspect of the evil caused by the prevalence of photographs and pictures in our times, we will understand something of the wisdom behind this prohibition: that aspect is the great corruption caused by the provoking of physical desires and subsequent spread of immorality caused by these pictures.
But nowadays, unfortunately, one can even find in some Muslim homes statues of gods worshipped by the kuffaar (Buddha,...) which they keep on the basis that they are antiques or decorative pieces. These things are more strictly prohibited than others, just as pictures which are hung up are worse than pictures which are not hung up, for how easily they can lead to glorification, and cause grief or be a source of boasting! We cannot say that these pictures are kept for memory's sake, because true memories of a Muslim relative or friend reside in the heart, and we remember them by praying for mercy and forgiveness for them.
Taking pictures with a camera involves human actions such as focusing, pressing the shutter, developing, printing, and so on. We cannot call it anything other than "picture-making" or tasweer, which is the expression used by all Arabic-speakers to describe this action.
Among the scholars who have discussed the issue of photography is al-Albaani, who said: "Some of them differentiate between hand-drawn pictures and photographic images by claiming that the latter are not products of human effort, and that no more is involved than the mere capturing of the image. This is what they claim. The tremendous energy invested the one who invented this machine that can do in few seconds what otherwise could not be done in hours does not count as human effort, according to these people! Pointing the camera, focusing it, and taking the picture, preceded by installation of the film and followed by developing and whatever else that I may not know about none of this is the result of human effort, according to them!
Some of them explain how this photography is done, and summarize that no less than eleven different actions are involved in the making of a picture. In spite of all this, they say that this picture is not the result of human action! Can it be permissible to hang up a picture of a man, for example, if it is produced by photography, but not if it is drawn by hand?
Those who say that photography is permitted have "frozen" the meaning of the word "tasweer," restriciting it only to the meaning known at the time of the Prophet and not adding the meaning of photography, which is "tasweer" or "picture-making" in every sense - linguistic, legal, and in its harmful effects, and as is clear from the definition mentioned above. Years ago, I said to one of them, By the same token, you could allow idols which have not been carved but have been made by pressing a button on some machine that turns out idols by the dozen. What do you say to that?"
al-Albani: "I fear one day the salafis will say, photography is not imaging, you just press a button."
It is also worth quoting the opinion of some contemporary scholars who allow the taking of photographs but say that the pictures should not be kept: "The angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or pictures."
According to another fatwa issued by the Standing Committee:
"It is not permissible to make pictures of animate beings using cameras or any other kind of image-making equipment, or to keep pictures of animate beings except in cases of necessity, such as pictures in identity documents or passports; it is permissible to take and keep such pictures because there is a need for that."
It is haram to take a picture of a man because making images of everything that has a soul is haram, indeed it is a major sin, because of the stern warning against that narrated in the texts of the Sunnah; and because it is imitating Allah in His creation of living things; and because it is a means that leads to temptation (fitnah) and that often leads to shirk. The one who takes the picture, the one who tells him to do it and those who help him to do it are all guilty of sin, because they are cooperating in sin, which Allah has forbidden when He said: “but do not help one another in sin and transgression” [Quran 5:2]
Alot of scholars: photography haram because they connect lingustic meaning of hadith-based word image-maker with lingustic naming of a person who takes a photo - image-maker.
Some scholars + Ibn Uthaymeen: photography OK
Both types: hanging photos of animate beings is haram, photos with inanimate objects is OK
Position of Imam Malik: there is no question with regard to the permissibility of taking photographs, for according to that position, painting pictures of human or animal life on a paper or fabric is allowed hence camera pictures would hold the same ruling.
The contemporary scholars have different opinions in this matter. However, it is safer for a Muslim not to engage in photography or to have pictures of living creatures, unless to make identity cards or the like.
Contemporary scholars have differed on this issue:
The position of the overwhelming majority of Indo-Pak and some Arab scholars is that photographs of human or animal life are not permissible for the very same reasons that paintings of these are not permissible. They state that the ruling on picture-making does not change by changing the tool with which the picture is produced. Whether an image is produced by painting it or using a camera, as long as it is an image of a human or animal, it will remain haram. This is more precautious and arguably stronger opinion.
The second position on the issue, held by most Arab Scholars (from all 4 Madhabs) and some from the Indian Subcontinent, is that there is a difference between photos and the prohibited picture-making (taswir). Shaykh Muhammad Bakhit al-Muti’i of Egypt, a 20th Century scholar known for his knowledge and piety, wrote a whole treatise titled al-Jawab al-Shafi fi Ibahat Surat al-Photography in support of this view of permissibility. His basic understanding is that the reason behind the prohibition of painting pictures (in the words of the Hadith) is challenging Allah in His Creating of living creatures. In camera photos, however, one does not produce an image through one’s own imagination; hence one is not challenging the Creating of Allah as such. It is merely a reflection of a living being already created by Allah Most High.

Live Broadcasting

Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani and many other scholars have declared that live broadcastings of images do not fall within the ambit of picture-making (taswir). A picture is something that is permanent and static, whilst the image broadcasted live is not permanent hence cannot be termed a picture. A live broadcast is in reality a reflection of the actual image, similar to seeing an image in a mirror.
Therefore, if an image of a human or animal is broadcasted live, then this does not fall into the unlawful picture-making. It will be permitted to broadcast something live or view a live programme, provided the content of the programme is halal.

Video Recording

According to Shaykh Taqi Usmani, that which is recorded in a videotape or DVD is also not considered a picture. In a videotape, the particles of an image are gathered and then re-opened in the same order to view the image. This is the reason why it is not possible to see the picture in the rail of the tape without playing it.
Therefore, if a permitted and Halal event, such as a lecture of a scholar, is played and viewed on a videotape or DVD, it will be permitted, Insha Allah.
Note that the above discussion does not in any way relate to watching Television. Watching TV and keeping it at home is another matter altogether, for which a separate answer is needed. The many harms and evils of keeping a TV at home are known to all. This answer only relates to the permissibility of viewing a Halal image through a live broadcast or a videotape/DVD.
Shaykh Taqi Usmani sums this up in one of his Fatawa:
“The images appearing on live programs or recorded programs on television are not the pictures in the strict sense envisaged in the A hadith of the Holy Prophet unless they are printed in a durable form on paper or on any other object. But the basic reason why Muslims are advised not to keep TV sets in their homes is that most of the programs broadcast on the TV channels contain impermissible elements.”
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Praying with an a image on a shirt:

Silhouette of living being = OK
Some say haram.
majority: makruh.
generally speaking prayer is valid, but should be avoided.
Prophet prayed, image closeby, after prayer he commanded image to be taken down because it distracte him from prayer -> makruh for images to be at praying place.
Ibn Tayimiyah said: "The correct view, which was narrated from Umar ibn al-Khattaab and others, and is mentioned in reports from Ahmad and others, is that if there are images in it (the church), he should not pray there, because the angels do not enter the room in which there are images, and because the Prophet did not enter the Kabah until the images that were in it had been erased. This is what Umar said: We would not enter their churches if there were images in them."
The later Hanafi and Shafi scholars – unlike the Hanbalis – were so strict that they even forbade praying in a place in which there are any images, even if they are behind the one who is praying or placed on the ground so that he cannot see them.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Exception

Al-Nawawi said:
"With regard to sciences, some of them are a communal obligation, such as medicine."
Imam Shafi said:
"I do not know of any branch of knowledge, after knowledge of halal and haram, that is more noble than medicine."
In our religion it is permissible for women to treat men in cases of necessity.
Narrated by Ar-Rubayyi bint Mu'auwidh:
"We were in the company of the Prophet providing the wounded with water and treating them and bringing the killed to Medina (from the battle field)." (al-Bukhari 2882)
Ibn Hajar said, commenting on this hadith:
"This shows that it is permissible for a non-mahram woman to treat a non-mahram man in cases of necessity."
In a Fatwa issued by the scholars of the Standing Committee, there is evidence which indicates that it is permissible to make pictures in cases of necessity, such as pictures to prove the identity of a person and the like.
As for making pictures and drawing parts of the body separately, such as the head or the chest, many scholars are of the view that it is permissible.
All of the above indicates that it is permissible to use drawing and pictures in studying medicine, etc.
If producing images of criminals is necessary, because of the seriousness of their crimes and to protect the Muslims from their evil when they are known, or for other reasons, there is nothing wrong with that. “…He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under compulsion of necessity …” [Quran 6:119]
Conservative scholars: Childens' toys + educational purposes + ID cards = OK
There is nothing wrong with taking pictures that serve a purpose. There is nothing wrong if pictures taken at the scene of the accident include people who are not involved. But if the pictures are taken by someone using his own camera, in order to keep the pictures for himself, then this is not allowed. It is haram not in and of itself, but because of the purpose, which is to keep the pictures for himself with no need to do so. The reason why you are taking the pictures, on the other hand, is for a legitimate and necessary purpose.

Comment if you have other resources, blogs, youtube channels, or posts that I should include.
Phantom time

• ! archive Fomenko New chronology complete set
• ! Glitch in the matrix or parallel of history
• !A synopsis of Phantom Time theory in my own words. A short introduction to the work of Anatoly Fomenko
• The world fairs were used as an excuse to demolish America's ancient architectural heritage.
• Ottonian Empire vs Ottoman Empire. The truth about the Siege of Vienna and when did the Roman Empire really fall.
• The Star Fort conspiracy. Some star forts are called "Batteries" why is that?
• The little known "Woman's holocaust" was part of a larger cultural genocide in the 16th and 17th centuries when the old knowledge was wiped out.
• Renowned brain surgeon Dr. Leonard Shlain stumbles into the cultural layer by accident and gives up medicine to become a historian when he realizes our history has been stolen. \(Skip intro 2:19\)
• The mysterious origin of Saint Petersburg. Impossible engineering marvels prove our history has been stolen.
• The linchpin of why phantom time exists. No old books exist! Only dishonestly copied and "corrected" books are used to support the official history. When genuinely old books surface they often contradict the official history and are ignored by the mainstream historians.
• [Introduction to the world wide culture that used to exist prior to modernism that was subsequently deleted by historians. \(Sylvie Ivanowa narrator\](https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/7zvfri/introduction_to_the_world_wide_culture_that_used/)
• The Fate of the "1000 cities of Bactria," Kingdom of Buddhist Greeks. Probable gap in history. Kingdom mysterious disappears only to reappear under a different name when 1,748,000 people died in one hour according to some legends.
• Scythian/Bactrian gold
• American Scythians
• History's greatest con job: the life of Genghis Khan is a work of fiction largely made up by one man named Baavuday Tsend Gun in 1908
• Origins and Spread of the Mongoloid Race
• [Sir Isaac Newton: The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms, Amended \[PDF\](https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/8569t4/sir_isaac_newton_the_chronology_of_ancient/)
• The oldest "clock" in Britain at Wells Cathedral could prove phantom history true.
• ! New Chronology by Nosovskiy and Fomenko Philipp Druzhinin
• ! The cemetery of "longevity" In Turkey ...

Anomalous Soil Accumulation

• Gondola unearthed at Lucknow’s 220-year-old Chhatar Manzil
• The cultural layer above more thousand years Roman villa has grown by only a meter, while the cultural layer of the century and a half building has grown by several meters
• "The chapel provides evidence of Myra’s swift entombment. If the sediment had built up gradually, the upper portions should show more damage."
• Bauman Street, Kazan Russia
• The original streets and houses can be found under present-day Prague *Istanbul Gate Nicaea
• Buried bridge Orel Russia
• Mosaic floor city of Er Rastan Syria
• Buried Barcelona
• ! Apocalypse of the 19th century. The true story of genocide
• the post catastrophe world of Piranesi
• Scratching the surface of the Indian "Cultural Layer"
• The full US capitol building exposed.
• Deadwood Underground
• How Shakespeare Drained Venice- The Merchant of Venice contains not a solitary reference to gondolas or canals, and nor does Othello * [Monastery of Santa Clara-a-Velha, Coimbra, Portugal - c1954 vs now \(Excavated\](https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/c72qkh/monastery_of_santa_claraavelha_coimbra_portugal/)
• ! [Anomalous Soil Accumulation \(Large album\](https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/b8sqw5/anomalous_soil_accumulation_large_album/)
• "Polytechnical Museum" Moscow
• Grant street Hump District excavation:Pittsburgh "1900s"
• Buried Russian Churches; A Look Inside
• The Whitehouse is buried in the cultural layer. On August 24th 1814 Washington DC was sacked by the British and then saved by tornadoes. The storm buried the Whitehouse in mud up to the 2nd level.
• What is under the Washington Monument? An ancient structure resembling a Mayan Pyramid. It was excavated in the 1800s and buried under cement.
• The Arch of Septimius Severus
• Buried Copenhagen part 1
• mudflood in grand rapids michigan
• mud flood in ann arbor mi
• mud flood in holland mi
• In case you're curious, this is one of the ways they employ to sink buildings. Turning the ground into a kind of quick sand and the weight of the building just pulls it down. W their earthquake weapons I imagine they can make entire cities go mudflood.
• Soil accumulation in Ancient Sardis, Turkey - From an excavation in 1911 - (credit: u/Philipp-Dr and Stolenhistory.org - links in comments)
• a collection of capriccio paintings
• Officially In the 13th century people poured 7 meters of dirt over the whole of Prague. Should we do the math? Where is the logic?
• Greek Floor Mosaic uncovered in 2014 in Turkey near Syrian Border
• 4 albums containing hundreds of examples showing an anomalous build up of soil and the necessary re-modeling.
• Moscow in early 1800's oil paintings , everything is overgrown with vegetation
• Napoleon in Moscow paintings
• The Town of Rockwell, Texas
• ! At some point in time, possibly between 1875 and 1905, Chattanooga built up its roads and abandoned the first stories of the buildings in the downtown of the city, turning them into basements. Today, no one knows exactly why or how it happened
• Old Bayfield County Courthouse, Wisconsin built c.1896
• Chichen Itza
• Castle filled with dirt
• Unburying Rome - Italy
• Observing the cultural layer of the Ipatiev House \("Romanov murder house"\)
• Cincinnati, Ohio, Eden Park, old resivoir walls.
• Church of St Sofia, Bulgaria
• Mysterious tunnels discovered in Florida
• Mud flood in the 19th century?
• Omaha Mud Flood: St. Mary Magdalene Church 1920 transformation
• Ancient rail-road tracks unearthed
• An interesting take on the history of canals and "train" Tunnels: Could they hint at something greater?
• "A side walk, curbing and all, found several feet under the surface"-Asheville North Carolina (repost)

Egypt

• Change my view: The floral wreath found in king Tuts tomb is not 2000 years old.
• The Great Tutankhamen Hoax
• til; aerial photography is illegal in Egypt.
• Graffiti and chronology of vintage Egyptian photographs

Europe

• ! Were wars originally more similar to a sports event?
• The Medieval London Bridge \(the one with all the buildings on top of it\) being destroyed. Notice the megalithic blocks?
• Bank of England in ruins by Joseph Gandy
• [The language of the Roman Empire](https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/8jtv93/the_language_of_the_roman_empire/)

Asia

• Discussion; is Japan as we know it a fabrication?
• Utsuro-bune
• Ainu/Japan general discussion

North America

• Thousands of years ago a 'Mystery Culture' dug a massive network of tunnels, cavities, and chambers beneath the city of Teotihuacan. The exact purpose of this ancient underground system of tunnels and chambers continues to elude scholars.
• A man takes very close look at a wall.
• Megalithic structure in Jersey City is 6 times wider than the great wall of China and weighs more than the Great Pyramid in Giza
• The ethereal staircase of Loretto Chapel
• The mysterious helix staircase of the Loretto Chapel in Sante Fe, New Mexico; allegedly built by a mysterious man in the 1870s from an unknown species of wood with no nails and without any obvious means of structural support)
• Toronto
• What do y'all think is goin on with the top of this building?

Russia

• Anomalous Polygonal Masonry in the small town of Chusovoy , Sverdlovskaya District, Russia
• Bathtub \(granite: 196 cm, 152 cm, 53 cm\) m made for tsar Alexander I, Russia 19th c.\[705x555\]
• ! In a bombed out shed south of St Petersburg lies the Tsar bath, weighing nearly 100,000 lbs and standing 6 foot tall it is perhaps the largest single granite work outside of ancient Egypt.
• Moscow 1867 -- Where are the people???
• The empty streets of Saint Petersburg in the 1860s - where is everyone?
• Finding hints in the official narative. "Garðaríki"

American civil War

• Is General Robert E Lee dead in this 1865 photo
• American civil war strangeness continued

People/Pseudo characters

• General Robert E. Lee astride
• In 1819 English academic Richard Whately wrote a book questioning the Napoleon myth.
• Fake Rasputin
• What in the ever-loving fuck is going on with this photograph?
• TIL: Richard Wagners Grandson Wieland claimed that he was molested By Hitler

Archeology

• Çatalhöyük and international relations
• Archaeologists uncover ancient street food shop in Pompeii
• How ancient Greek columns were made: photographer Bonfils inadvertently filmed the technology of building ancient columns by ancient Athenians
• [Hagia Sophia is built on the foundation of an older temple, that is built on the foundation of an even o older temple.
• Year AD J775 ?? Year J788 ? Gravestones in a cemetery in Stratford, CT
• Is it or only me or this structure looks like the frame of an very modern building?
• Mexican temple of Santiago, master builder monks and our failed archaeology

Architecture

• ! "Antique World". Alternative title; "Grand unified architectural style"
• Grand Unified Architectural Style: Antique Africa
• Our architectural heritage restored to it's former glory only after the retreat of the Reds from East Germany.

Technology

• Cast-iron flooring in ancient temples.
• The Autoped was an early motorized scooter
• ! Embed Metallurgical technology that allows create medieval knight’s armor appeared in the industrial era
• ! Is it possible free energy was once a reality ? Or another form of energy transfer at least?
• Interesting analogy
• Free energy capacitors in Bangladesh Mohenjo Daro nuclear strike, just not 3000 years ago.
• Mechanical fish and swan from the 1700s in simulated water of moving glass. Such intricate craftsmanship we cannot reproduce today. The people of the past were much smarter than us. This is technology from the phantom era historians erased from existence.* Despite the general consensus antique corsets were and are not oppressive torture contraptions, but instead highly technical devices that correct posture, and positively effect spine heath.
• We have been lied to about the capabilities, techniques and reasoning of our ancestors.
• 439 year old reservoir dam, outlasts its modern counterparts
• Lets talk about classical architecture. And other global architectural phenomenon, polygonal masonry, impossible craftsmanship, and strange metallic elements
• Steel staircase? Encased in marble?
• Why London Underground is nicknamed "The Tube" The electric city of the 1800s. What powered their electric cars?
• Granite polygons of Kronstadt \(not a single structure within the city is built with granite\)
• Vorontsov palace, window frames hewed from a single piece of ultra hard diabase stone using crude iron hand tools?
• The medici lions at Vorontsov palace. Peculiar holes...
• a collection of lesser known yet stunningly detailed sculptures
• Staglieno Graveyard, Most Beautiful Cemetery in Italy and possibly the world
• Steel beams in antiquities?
• In electronics, porcelain \(and ceramic derivatives\) is widely used for insulating material due to its excellent non-conductivity.
• Anointing oil and oriental wellness. Part 2 Alt title: "Traces of technologically advanced society in east Asia"
• The Ancient Airfield Yundum
• The 100 year old Russian warship still in service.
• Lets talk polygonal masonry

Giants

• ! Skeletons of unusual growth in the Capuchin Catacombs of Palermo
• Peculiar Decorations Of The Medici
• let's find out where the Boyers in Russia came from. Boyar coat -large cloaks of honor passed down through the generations.
• Giant Skeletons in old etchings
• Continuing the theme of mythological creatures representing true creatures.
• giants on the streets of european cities
• giant roman shoe
• giants in the picture of leonardo da vinci*Boyars as decedents of Hyperborean giants; A growth of around 2.5 meters as indicated by the length of inherited clothing.

Religion

• Parallels between Shinto and Judaism
• Catholics versus Cathars, or how the Cat-lovers competed with the Cat-worshipers

Geography

• Samandar, the second capital of Khazaria thought to have been destroyed 1000 years ago, was marked on European maps of 300 years ago at the site of modern Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan
• Judia is the ancient capital of Thailand. Maps and engravings show this
• Lakes Urmia and Van were connected on the old mapsThe medieval ‘New England’: a forgotten Anglo-Saxon colony on the north-eastern Black Sea coast
• Australia could be something else...
• ! Continent of North America does not exist... or could it be a part of Asia?
• 17 maps of the World, Poland, Italy, Rome, Northern Europe and Germany \(1557-65\)
• 17th Cent. map \(Willem Blaeu\) indicates Tartarians settled in N. America
• why would maps of Africa from 1800's show more uncharted territory than those made in 1500's?
• Pompeii on maps from 1570?
• Clear evidence for the supposition that Giovanni Battista Piranesi was recording what he saw in the minutest detail and was not illustrating fantasy as is often claimed* Old newspaper articles on Chilaga
• Legendary city of Norumbega: could it be Washington, DC?
• Kings of Florida, and vanished white Native American Kingdoms
• ! [Ruins of Old Earth \(Schoenung\)

Meta

• ! StolenHistory.gov

Miscellaneous

• The purposefully forgotten crucifixion of the Antean king Boz
• Three Remarkable and Calamitous Travels through Italy, Greece, Livonia, Muscovy, Tartary, Media, Persia, East India, Japan and various other Districts
• https://www.reddit.com/CulturalLayecomments/lwcuoc/the_unrivalled_maestro_tito_livio_burattini/
• Sultan Suleiman and King Solomon
• The most unusual icons of the “Holy Trinity”
• The Prussian school: all power to the canon
• 114 years ago: Mammoth Recovered from Northern Siberia
• Why Are There Underground Jesuit Caves in Europe Filled with Egyptian and Islamic Art?
• Inconvenient questions about the war; Just a few queries the world should answer before we do it all once more
• TIL: The basic outline of history taught to every child in America since the mid 1900s was written by prominent communist and science fiction writer H.G Wells in his "The Outline of History"
• Blackened cityscapes of the world
• American cars with their soviet twins. Is there something weird here or is it just me?

Symbolism

• Smithsonian logo

Resources

• ! https://www.davidrumsey.com/
• ! archive Fomenko New chronology complete set
• Best Of CulturalLayer And Resource Guide, Amended- Again
• best links about cultural layer theory?
• Anatoly Fomenko - New Chronology - History; fiction or science? -- A fascinating Russian attempt \(playlist, English subtitles\) at seeking clarity through the distortions of modern "history"
• collection of images i've gathered depicting south american sites before or during their excavation or "reconstruction"
• Huge archive of StaBastion Fort images/pics/designs \(useful resource\)
• "Declassified photos from U2 planes are helping archaeologists unlock the past
• starforts.com
• starforts.org

Heavily moderated

• stolenhistory.net
• stolenhistory.org

Defunct
www.wildheretic.commegaliths.org
Wikipedia

• New chronology (Fomenko))
• Phantom time conspiracy theory
• ! Vérendrye stone (" Jesuit priests concluded that it was written in "Tatarian" writing."..."The Minnesota Historical Society has offered a $1000 reward for the stone's rediscovery.")
• ! Invention Secrecy Act \(1951\)
• Ringwoodite is notable for being able to contain hydroxide ions \(oxygen and hydrogen atoms bound together\) Combined with evidence of its occurrence deep in the Earth's mantle, this suggests that there is from one to three times the world ocean's equivalent of water in the mantle transition zone.
• Hyperdiffusionism
• According to local folklore, the region was inhabited by Caeté Indians, who woke up one day to find their town covered by sand
• Gunnar Heinsohn
• Vitrified fort
• star forts
• Polygonal masonry
• ionic wind
• Sharing this wikipedia page to illustrate how, with the right eye, you can pick apart an mainstream article and get at the meat of whats been hidden.

other subs

• tartarianarchitecture
• Tartaria
• alternativeastronomy mudfossils
• Thunderbolts
• plasmacosmology historicalstreetview
• fringehub
• newchronology
• AlternativeAstronomy
• AlternativeHistory

defunct
homogiganticus
Youtube channels

• New earth
• Wise Up
• Cognitive TV \(russian\)
• Philipp Druzhinin
• CONSPIRACY-R-US
• Deciphering The Devil's Details
• baltimore fats
• Static in the attic
• streets of tartaria
• Colm Gibney
• jon levi

Defunct

• jacksfan
• Curious Life
• Nik research
• Mud Flood Mystery North

Missing/lost and found

• Tartaria Territory or Empire - Mudflood channel we miss youUzbekistan and Maps of Tartaria
• Mudflood channel we miss you

* posting livejournals in the comments

Creating loopholes that can be exploited by bad people
Some laws are designed to have loopholes. In Indonesia for example, importing beef requires licenses. What sort of licenses? Who gets the licenses?
Everybody knows you bribe to get licenses.
The system is designed that way.
Also when we got money from government, the payment is usually cash. I know because I was an athlete. Usually I was told to sign for $500 and got $300 cash. Why is the payment cash?
The problem is easily fixed by just making it wire transfer. In fact, that's how Jokowi did it.
So all these time the payment is "cash" precisely to allow this corruption to happen
Making things that are "obvious" to be unobvious
A woman got pregnant. She accuses a man as the father. Is there an obvious ways to test paternity. Yes. Paternity tests.
It's illegal in French.
Some issues can be resolved easily. It's prohibited.
A woman have sex with a man. Is it consensual? Well, let me give you a sample. Mike Tyson have sex with a girl named Desiree Washington. Danny Masterson have sex with his girlfriend.
Is it consensual?
There are ways society can see whether something is consensual or not

1. Contract
2. Transactions

I mean it's not always that way. But the 2 are pretty strong candidates. If you go to a store and buy stuffs, it's consensual. If you take without paying it's not consensual. It's simple.
In sex, it's not. Contract can't proof consent because consent can always be withdrawn and transactional sex is illegal.
So Mike Tyson, a guy with $400 million dollar that can easily hire very beautiful women to fuck him for $1k go to jail for years.
It's like accusing Bill Gates of robbing banks in traditional way. But rape is not about sex. Rape is about power. Says feminists. Okay, how can many women that wouldn't mind having sex with Mike Tyson for free or paid convince Mike that they won't press charge for rape latter? They can't.
Danny Masterson supposedly have drugged sex with his girlfriend. It's probably untrue. Even if it's true they consented to have sex many times. She lives in his house. How many other women wants to date Danny Masterson and have sex with him without pressing rape charge latter?
I bet many.
Can those women convince Danny that they won't press charge latter? How do they? They can't.
When contract and transactions on sex is legal or enforceable, proofing consent is easy. But somehow people have to prevent obvious ways to proof consent so things become unobvious.
Here is another take. Sex must be based on love not money. Okay, if sex is based on money certain things are obvious. Some women will have market rates. We can talk if the price is enough or not. Etc. We can say if she's getting a good deal or not.
Many women are roughly equally attractive to each other. So a woman that's 7 is probably equally attractive with millions of other girls that's also 7 and probably worth the same amount of money.
But with "love"? How do you make a woman love you? Who knows. Nothing is obvious.
How do you make a woman have sex with you if you know she wants money. You pay. When transactions are clear we know what to do to get what we want. Transactional stuffs are empowering for both buyers and sellers. Non transactional stuffs are empowering for whoever define terms.
So the trick is to prevent obvious things from showing up and then argue about what's not obvious.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-money-did-Desiree-Washington-make-from-the-Mike-Tyson-trial-1?ch=1&oid=76335173&share=ad3e2755&srid=h8Eks&target_type=question&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2-uMzXbOHQceXl9wi3bC4qGpD-_tP4TVlbOLWWKTfmGTHytzmR2sPeCaY_aem_AT2Ym8IGEgNPZhjvEvXdGwZoB9JF-nkNa1c7sPHXpfTSA3Hu_GKVWkA8T5i3bEBzaERtvKg44CXP9ZUpFS3oX0-v
Here is another sample
Patriarchy
Emotional need
Structural oppression
Structural racism
All those are vague idea that you can't even measure.
Why not talk about things that are easy to measure.
Like do rich people have richer children? Both how rich the parents are and how rich the children are can be clearly measurable. We can measure and yes there is a positive correlation.
Do married kids have better emotional need? How the hell to measure that? We can argue argue argue and people can say anything. People can say government infested marriage is important because kids within marriage have better emotional need fulfilled. Can't easy proof or disprove that.
Are black people poorer due to IQ, structural racism, or culture?
We can measure effect of IQ. It turns out that it's positive. We can also measure that Chinese with similar IQ than white earns more money. Chinese literally worship money. It's their culture. I sometimes wonder if Jewish stereotype is true. Maybe Jews love money too but compared to Chinese? Really? At least those jews still like things like homeland countries or whatever. As a chinese, we don't care about our country. Just money and family.
But IQ is called racists. When something can be measured objectively, suddenly it's gone from leftist naratives.

i'm writing my paper 2 in history sl in a couple weeks, and i've gotten constant 5s in the ones i've written because of me using adequate external knowledge but not being analytical enough (i'm facing the same problem in english hl lol). how do i be analytical instead of narative (please provide examples), and are there any reliable places i can find like mock paper 2s that received 6/7s because i want to know what i'm missing
please help <3

I tagged this as a spoiler in full hopes not to mess up anybody's enjoyment of the show, if I messed up, I am sorry, I post on reddit maybe once a 2 year period.
I personaly hate both Deus Ex approach (all of it happened and as a cause it failed) and Witcher approach (lets just try to ignore the events as much as possible and pretend they did not matter). As a Mass Effect fan I loved the idea that your actions, no matter how ultimately small due to game mechanics they seem to be help you create a grander narative that is specific to the individual player.
When I saw the ending and the shot at the lightless NV, I was overjoyed. The show does a remarkable work of avoiding retcons (maybe Shady Sands location, but its highly debatable). To me, I cant realy think of anything that I would immediately though ''Wait this isnt right''. However my absolutely biggest fear for NV overall and the storyline will be ultimately neutered and bland because the show will avoid the stigma of F:NV endings. I am not saying that I need any of them to be canonized, but I hate when a big historical event (which Battle of Hoover Dam is) is just glanced over.
Maybe I am overreacting on this and I must say that I was very happy with the first season. It is a spectacle to be seen and for me is on par and maybe even a bit beyond TLOU. However I couldnt shake the feeling of something missing from the story, for example when Prydwen shows up and Maxson is nowhere to be found. Are there more of them? I dont realy think they are. Did they leave their (arguably) 2nd biggest technological marvel to a chapter splinter for keks while they have their fun? Thats the feeling I cant shake off, because the show would limit the story potential of the games and vice versa. I am eager to hear your ideas on this.

Here we will discuss 4 main issues concerning the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira as narated in the bible:

1. Did Ananias and Sapphira deserve to die?
2. Were the killings of Ananias and Sapphira in accordance with the message of Jesus Christ?
3. Did the killings achieve a greater good?
4. Who killed Ananias and Sapphira?

The Story
Acts Chapters 4 to 5
32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need
5 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.
1) Did Ananias and Sapphira deserve to die?
Remember that they did not commit any crimes, nor did they break any scriptural law.
The religious would say that they deserved to die for lying to the holy spirit. But put yourselves in their shoes, they were talking to Peter so from their point of view they were trying to mislead him and not the omniscient God.
NO, however way you look at it, they did not deserve to die.
2) Were the killings of Ananias and Sapphira in accordance with the message of Jesus Christ?
The is a huge NO. Charity was the main focus of Christ’s message. Love and Forgiveness. He who does not sin, cast the first stone. Turn the other cheek. The killing of Ananias and Saphira completely goes against this.
3) Did the killings achieve a greater good?
The killings terrorized the church. This would have had the short term effect of ensuring that everyone donate all their money 100%. Which means the apostles would have been able to help a few more needy members. But this doesn’t justify killing 2 human beings which could have served as additional help both financially and through free labor.
This communal experiment did not last long either. Christians eventually went back to their homes and lived normal lives, even when threatened by Roman persecution.
Peter’s attempt at isolation did not expand the church. It was Paul’s wild adventures that made Christianity the dominant religion in Europe.
So, NO. Killing Ananias and Saphira did not achieve any good.
4) Who killed Ananias and Sapphira?
Did God kill the couple? The story itself did not say that it was God who killed them. Why would God waste someone’s lives who have not violated any secular or religious laws? Why would God kill people and spoil Christ’s message of love and forgiveness? Why would God use supernatural powers killing people without any long term positive outcome? Without supernatural proof that it was God who killed Ananias and Sapphira, no court on earth would accept that explanation.
Did Peter murder Ananias and Sapphira?

• Evidence A: Peter’s Personality. He had a history of deceit when he denied Jesus 3 times. Worst of all he was guilty of attempted murder when he tried to kill someone the night Jesus was arrested. Thankfully he only managed to slice off the man’s ear. *
• Evidence B: Motive. The fact that the killings terrorized the church suggests that the church have not been entirely keeping up with Peter’s demand for their money. Making examples of Ananias and Sapphira would make a good motive. *
• Evidence C: Hiding the evidence: Peter had the bodies disposed of immediately like animals instead of giving them the proper burial procedures that people deserved. *
• Evidence D: The killings. Both died after being confronted by Peter. It would have been extremely unlikely that both coincidentally died from natural causes.
• Evidence E: Witnesses. Records show that Peter gave Sapphira the death sentence right before she died.

Conclusion: PETER MURDERED ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA

Back in early 2000s I used to watch a tv-show that was dubbed into Serbian as 'How to make...' or 'How it's made'. I can't google it because all the results are either generic or more popular shows.
Every episodes begins with a short intro where a yellow safety helmet and some tools assemble on the screen and the title is shown (I think in English but I'm not sure). The narator says 'How to make...' and adds the topic for that episode (I remember episodes about honey, bicycles, playgrounds, cymbals, glass). Camera then shows the subject of the video with the protagonist, a younger woman/girl named Anna coming into the frame. The narrator says 'Hey, here's Anna!' After that, we are shown the process (for example, a guy melting pieces of glass, then molding, coloring and blowing it to make a cup) with Anna helping and the narrator explaining. In the end they use whatever they made (like they drink from the glass) and Anna looks at the camera, waves (or thumbs up?) and the narrator says 'Bye!' Basically it's in color, nothing is animated (except the intro) and no one speaks except the invisible narrator.

(listened to this one a while ago, but only really felt the need to make this rant now)
Why TF is this recommended so much. Don't get me wrong, I get that people can recommend whatever they want, but this book doesn't even feel like it deserves 1/10th of the love it gets.
First off, the plot is incredibly generic. It felt like I knew everything that was going to happen before anything regarding that plot point was even introduced. Not to mention there felt like there was zero thought in trying to make this story unique. It felt like such a slog going through this book. My thought process the whole time was like "oh wow they did the (cliche story event). Lemme guess they are going to follow it up with (another cliche).... Called it. I just hope they don't do the really cliche (cliche event)...goddamnit."
If anyone here has heard the phrase "being read like a book" in regards to predicting ones actions, it felt like I was constantly "reading this book like a book" if that makes any sense at all.
Next point, writing quality. Absolutely garbage. Felt like it was translated from Chinese to English 15 times over, yet the original language this novel was written in is English. The author hates switching up his adjectives every now and then, so wording just felt so bland and lifeless. The horrendous writing quality combined with the extremely generic storytelling made this book such a slog to get through.
And the final point, the only problem seemingly brought up in regards to this novel, the rape plot. Now I feel like I should prefix this with the fact that I personally don't mind one (obviously I don't enjoy reading about it, but its not the deal breaker for me that it seems to be for everyone else) but it was just done in such a horribly cliche, damsel in destress, type way that I've started to hate it. Plus with how much everyone here seems to hate this plot point, I can't understand why this novel is recommended so much.
Some small things I never really enjoyed as well

• the romance plot: it was so incredibly generic. Probably the most generic thing within novel tbh.
  
• character depth is paper thin: this should be more of a deal breaker for me, but I've read so much trash that this is no longer a deal breaker, just an annoyance.
  
• the dual narrators: because of how the narration works, there ends up being 2 different voices for the same character. Now this might not suck so much if a) they were both of similar skill level in narration, and b) [personal preference] their voices weren't so squeaky that it felt like children were narrating.
  

Anyways the message I'm trying to get across is I really don't understand why this novel gets the love it does. Just doesn't feel like it deserve it tbh.
Tldr: Why people love heaven laws? I think Heaven laws is kina sucky. Plot generic, writing quality bad, rape plot, super cliche romance plot, zero character depth, relatively bad naration.
Future OP here. Did some digging and believe I've come to an understanding in regards to why the reaction to this novel is often so polarizing.
You can tell me if you believe myself to be wrong, but I feel as though it is perhaps the multitude of perspectives this novel can be viewed from makes the reviews regarding this book so polarizing.
While somewhat confusing, people generally tend to have different guidelines in which they benchmark novels, with some genres loving cliches, and others less forgiving with their appearance. And writing style (correction from quality) also varies between different genres, languages, and cultural norms. A single writing style may be questionable to one, but perfectly reasonable to another.
I personally was looking at it from a Western progressionish fantasy perspective, with the focus of the novel being action and adventure. From this perspective, i listed my complaints above and believe they still fit the bill, but I mainly am only mentioning this to point out the multiple different perspectives there are.
The Eastern progression fantasy perspective, with a focus of action and advancement, is another perspective I've found. When looking at it from this perspective (I don't understand this perspective very well so tell me if I'm wrong) the writing style becomes completely acceptable, and the "cliches" I've mentioned before stop being cliches, as there lies a difference in cultural norms. What could be a cliche for an eastern novel could be viewed as new and exciting for a western novel.
Now the most interesting perspective I've seen is the Romance novel perspective, in which this novel is viewed primarily as a romance novel first and an action novel second. From this perspective, while the cliches still exist, they are loved and accepted by the reader, rather than despised. While I have no actual proof the back this up, from personal experience I have found that my wife and her friends love romantic cliche plot points, and almost adamantly search for books that contain these existing cliches. For example, the "enemies to lovers" cliche or the "only one bed" cliche are so overly used, yet are loved according to my wife.
TLDR: because of the multitude of perspectives this novel can be viewed from, with each perspective having their own guidelines in regards to benchmarking their own books, the novel evokes vastly differing emotions between reader to reader, making the polarizing views understandable.
(Copied this from a comment I wrote in response to another user within this post..)

The Book of Mormon gives explicit warnings about wresting the scriptures (e.g., Alma 13:20, Alma 41:1). Growing up in the Mormon Church I was taught that "wresting" involves motivational twisting of "plain" text.
The Book of Mormon claims it is written plainly with a goal of being easy to understand (e.g. 2 Nephi 25:4, 2 Nephi 31:2)
Given what the Book of Mormon says about its plain language, and given the historical narative of a divine tight "translation," it seems Mormon apologists routinely wrest the book. Examples would be arguments along the lines of "skin of blackness" being animal hides, "steel" swords being stone, and "horses' being tapirs.
I understand why apologists wrest the scriptures; they simply have no good options because the book is 19th century historical fiction. But regardless why they do it, it still looks like wresting the scriptures to me.

Hey all,
For a long time I was playing wood elves in AoS until they were unceremoniously cut from their respective book. With the advent of the Old World Im very interested in repurposing my army for it.
One thing that really draws me to the hobbie is writing up the lore of my characters and factions. However I am at a bit of a loss on where to start and any narative faux pas I could stumble into.
For example, how off beat would it be to convert my wild riders into centaurs or use the faun-like elves we got in Skaeth's Wild Hunt as character.
What kinds of forests do wood elves find themselves setting down roots in?
What kind of magical properties could be expected from them?
Why might a new glade be founded in the first place?
Thank you to anyone who finds time to answer any of these questions!

So it's like the narative is being controlled by Reddit. It's all about weapons.
"I can't believe they nerfed rail gun"
"I can't believe they didn't buff the machine guns!"
Part of the problem is that Weapons are easy to understand. Weapon do big damage. Weapon do little damage. You hate it or love it. You don't need a holistic skill to see that. For those who don't understand what holistic means in this context. It's being able to visualize how various parts of the game are connected. Like changing something small about a Termanid will change player behaviours and indirectly affect weapon balance without even touching the weapons.
So let's just have a little talk about the missions that we play. Because here are some things that are indirectly affecting the weapons you are using and the choices you are making.
1) The Heavy Armor Problem
This one people have picked up on! The "difficulty" occurs from spamming heavily armored targets leading to the necessity of weapons that can pen armor.
Does this have to be the way difficulty is done? Why can we not have a situation where we get ourselves surrounded by more menacing waves of enemies? We'll come back to this because we need to look at some other things before trying to come to some kind of understanding or solution. Which again...is the problem with needing a holistic view. We have to understand a whole bunch of things...or we could just not understand them and say "Weapon too strong/weak!". Our brains like easily digestible information!
2) Endless streams of Breaches.
Yeah. You gotta keep moving. Obviously. But that means you need weapons which also work on the move. You can't sit there with your recoilless rifle or spear. Why else do you have to keep on the move? Because if the bugs get close...you often can't use the recoiless or spear on account of enemies being in the way or staggering you to make you miss your shot. Ignoring reloading for now. This ultimately made the Railgun better and thus we sit their talking about Railguns instead of the possibility that the AI director could be a bit better.
Should their be endless breaches in Helldive? You may say "YES! Because if it didn't. It wouldn't be hard"
And here's where holistic view comes in with not one but two questions
"Can we remove the endless breaching and instead reintroduce a new 'system' which is difficult to deal with"
and
"What makes you think endless breaches is hard? We exploit it. That isn't hard. It's hard if you try to fight fair. But we clearly don't end up fighting fair. We all end up basically cheesing it."
And that's unfortunately the truth when you climb in difficulty. You are no longer playing the game as much as you are exploiting the game. You split up and force the AI director to have to choose who to spawn bugs on (essentially).
3) Inconsistency in enemy types
I'm assuming you've played those missions where you get 20+ Bile Spewers all the time. No sugarcoating my libertea. What is up with that?
When you don't know what to expect. Then you have to account for the lowest common denominator. Thus taking weapons which work for all situations rather than being situational.
The way to solve this is to have better control from the players side on what they can expect. Examples being;
A) Nests have types. This nest is specifically a charger nest. Taking it out will reduce chargers. So you scout the map, find a charger nest, and make a decision to either spend time on it or not. Coupled with trying to make changes to "endless breach". Maybe instead of having breach being the ONLY major threat, you have nests pumping out units when you get near them. On higher difficulties. They'll have more patrols around the nests and pump out more units from the nests. Maybe the nests themselves are where patrols originate from. There's LOTS that can be done here to take the emphasis entirely away from breaches being the problem.
And when you start to localize some of the enemy spawns. Different weapons and stratagems might become more viable without even having to touch them. Different tactics and strategies might become viable as opposed to exploiting the fact the poor AI can't spawn 4 breaches for each separate player.
Two nests together? Which angle do you approach to try and keep the majority of bugs forward facing? What nest types are they?
Just to re-iterate. Right now nests aren't the issue. It's the infinite breaching. That's where the concentration of bugs are. That's what leads to patrols joining the fight. That's what leads to a feedback loop of breach-patrol-breach-patrol. That leads to always needing to move. That leads to needing mobile weapons that can kill the armored units.
B) Mission Mutations
Rather hate the strategem debuffs like 100% increased timer on deployments. Waiting 30 seconds for resupply is zzzz but whatever.
Missions could instead be "Increase in chargers" or "increase in bile spewers". Something to indicate to the player on what gear they could take. Buuuut with mission modifiers like this. You're going to need to adjust the AI. Increased Scavengers/Prey/Warriors or anything that isn't armored will require there being lots more of them and approaching from different angles. With higher concentrations of enemies around objectives. Otherwise it will be too easy. You need to be overwhelmed numerically. That might be a problem for low end computers. So that's also a reason why we'll see more armored units. So.....what can you do?
Seeing that holistic vision yet?
C) Actually have WEAK POINTS.
Helldivers 2 is more like....things don't have weakspots. They have normal spots and protected spots. Big glowing thing on the back of a bile spewer in ANY OTHER GAME would be like "pop this and it splode". Not Helldivers.
But we could have enemy types which require a bit more precision with their aiming without requiring weapons that can pen. The Hive Guard is actually not a bad example here. Obviously you can still pen right through it but with a normal weapon it's still possible. You just go around the side. Sometimes you'll have an ally stand in front whilst someone else hits it in the side.
Is...is that teamwork I see? Is that tactics? Maybe we should have some more of these designs!
Having a bug where it's got 6 legs and you need to detach 4 of them because it's got a really strong body and head. The knees are the weakspots you can to hit to do a quick job but you'll likely need spin it around to be able to get all those weakspots, or have team mates on flanks. You could just pump it full of bullets though. It'll have a lot of health. It's more like a Brood Commander in this regard but more precision is required.
Alternatively or additionally you could have a bug where you want to aim for its eyes. Only its eyes are difficult to see because they are side facing. From the side it's legs typically cover it's eyes as it moves. So you want to remove the legs so you can hit it in the eye or really time your shot and aim well. But if you hit it in the legs it staggers it opening it up to a well placed shot. Doesn't have to be a high tier enemy but you can see how a few of these would be problematic without requiring the player to HAVE TO HAVE big strong powerful armor-penning weapons.
Mix in some of the other points I made (holistic view) and you've got a nice variation of enemy types where you can choose a mission knowing what you are roughly getting into to be able to make more adequate weapon choices and hopefully an AI director where difficulty is only achieved by spamming heavy-armored breaches non-stop leading to cheese split-up-to-do-the-objectives-to-exploit-AI-Director tactics.
This was a very informal post. I know there will be plenty to disagree with. Please note that the objective of this post was not to suggest ideas or say how the game should change. The whole point of this post was to try and get away from the simplistic thought bubble of "The stats on weapons is responsible for everything". The game is more than just weapons alone.

I started playing wrath and glory (Warhammer 40k) a while ago. Save to say it is unbalanced as hell and i wanted to build my own World so im currently modifing the hell out of it to make it more suitable. My world is centered around Steampunk(Blimps and all the good stuff), Shamanism (you can get posessed by a demon, so Exorcists have to come to deposess you), Alchemy (You cast spells using you own humors).
To get to the basics:
I love the w&g mechanic of a wrath die. A special die that gets rolled with the other ones on a check giving you extra effects on a 6 or 1
I like having multiple different sided dice, so a system using some die in combination with a special die is nice because having a dice pool (1-3= no point, 4-5= 1 Point, 6= 2 Points to get above the difficulty number) takes a lot of time when you have to assemble a dice pool of 13 everytime you want to make a test. A 2d6 System would also be nice because its simpler.
I like the "Wrath token" and "Ruin" token mechanic that lets the DM and the Players earn little Tokens to influence the game in a certain way (Adding narative details, rerolling failed tests, etc)
Im looking for brutal and fast combat. The players should be able to take 3 Rounds of hits to be in the dying stage and the enemies around 2 (if the players are very lucky 1). In W&G standard goons can be taken down in one hit most of the time. When you have a player that abuses the system an mixes different abilities hes able to one shot pretty much anything.
I know i pretty much described Savage Worlds but i want to check if there is anything better. What i dont like about SW: Damage numbers are specified by Dice. So a shotgun does for example 1d8 damage. Or a Handgun 1d6. It appears to be pretty random, wich in my taste is more frustrating than fun.
Also the mechanic of drawing initiative as cards: Yes its a fun idea but i dont need more Stuff on the table. So i would probably ditch that.
You all knowing ttrpg beings what is the RPG for me?

The title says it all. I want to actually study how some great authors write. POV, what tense is the narator describing what's going on? What does the author describe explicitly, and what is left to the imagination, and so on.
I do "read" already, not a tremendous amount, but 2 books a month, 24 a year. It's not nothing. BUUUT there's a caveat. It's audio books. Hence the quotation on "read".
I'm willing to buy the book in physical again if I've already read it, but the only really good fantasy books I've read are A song of Ice and Fire.
My question is, could you guys and gals list of some really greatly written fantasy books? It's perfectly fine if the book series would normally get huge negative marks for non writing related issues. Like before I'd recommend A Song of Ice and Fire, I'd preface that with:

the author will never ever finish these books, you will never ever get an ending.

For a lot of people that's enough of a reason to not read the series, I get that. But I don't care. If the books start becoming bad, or if the story drops, or whatever. I'm just interested in books that are masterfully written. Books that you'd think people have a lot to learn from.
A final example, if a bit outside the specific realm of books, but still, character writing. I'd tell people: "Watch Avatar, the last airbender, the 2000's cartoon, not any other version. Then trace out Zukko's ark if you wanna see how to write an incredible character". Yes I am biased :)

I recently played wrath and glory (Warhammer 40k) and really like the idea of the wrath dice. I've also been reading through genesys recently and like the idea of having another way of reading fails and successes. For those that don't know - genesys/starwars has additional narative outcomes on the specialist dice. For instance you can fail a skill check, but still have something advantages happpen. Or you could Succeed and have something bad happen. Example: You stealth past a guard but trigger a silent alarm.
So how to add this to other games? In a 3d6 system like gurps or hero system, you could change one colour of the dice and have that be your wrath and glory dice. But why stop there? As rolling low in these systems is better, you could have it so that 1s are negative and 6s are positive. Where 1s and 6s cancel each other out. Allowing for different degrees of advantage/disadvantage. This would mean still keeping the same colour dice for each character (I have different colours for the characters)
But then I saw another solo recently where you roll a D8 and 2d6 and if both d6 higher than the d8 something positive happens, if both are less, something negative. If doubles > d8 = Positive Random Event. If doubles < d8 = Negative Random Event (solo card fallen - perplexing ruins is where I saw it)
I'm not sure how that would work for 3d6 (ie all lower or higher) but would certainly work for 2d6 games like traveller. Or could even have 2 dice a different colour in a 3d6 game and keep the same odds
For games like BRP or World of Darkness you could just roll another die alongside (wrath and glory die) or for BRP roll a d12 and have the random events happen aswell. Or have both odd mean advantage and both even mean disadvantage
I'm not sure on the probabilities of these btw, but certainly would save rolling on the oracle tables as much and throw in some randomness
I even thought about rolling fudge dice or the genesys dice at the same time, but I haven't got that far in my musings yet and thought I would see what other people think of these ideas