Imeeji Idol Productions ([personal profile] idolpro) wrote2022-04-09 03:54 pm
Entry tags:

HEARTFORGE - sensitIV (Session 4)

You are in the heart of a massive forge. In front of you are tools, and your objective is clear - to use them to channel the strength of your heart and create.

What are you creating? Who can say. Only you - and only you'll know if - and when, it's good enough. The stories before you are not yours right now, but you'll make them yours soon enough.

And you will survive.
proceedwithcautus: (it comes with a price)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] proceedwithcautus 2022-04-10 01:18 am (UTC)(link)
I think this host is trying to bully you...
sancrimony: (🕂 195)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:24 am (UTC)(link)
How kind of them to give me such attention.
proceedwithcautus: (i must become)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] proceedwithcautus 2022-04-10 01:30 am (UTC)(link)
I suppose we should give them a good response, then.
sancrimony: (🕈 236)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:36 am (UTC)(link)
I suppose so.

[ . . .

sighs. to the rest of the unit: ]

How shall we do this? Obviously, I have plenty of ammunition for this sort of story—if you all would like to reserve your own resources for the next round, then I can handle this.

Of course, there are six things to provide, and we have six people, so naturally we can divide the workload up as well, if we'd like.
forgottenmercy: (what understanding defies)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] forgottenmercy 2022-04-10 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
I think we should, ah, divide it up, if possible. I, too, have much for this as well.
sancrimony: (☦ 091)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:46 am (UTC)(link)
Then . . . shall we pick straws on who does what?
forgottenmercy: (what understanding defies)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] forgottenmercy 2022-04-10 01:56 am (UTC)(link)
That would, ah, be perhaps fairest...

[too bad he can't rig the straws to make himself get the hardest.]
sancrimony: (â™± 032)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 02:06 am (UTC)(link)
[ wait ]

. . . That's right. This is one of those games. . .
bondsofsuffering: ([Look] the theory of surrender)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] bondsofsuffering 2022-04-10 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
We might as well split them all up. What kinds of emotions or memories do we want for each slot?
sancrimony: (🕂 180)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:46 am (UTC)(link)
[ bitterness says random ]

I think that question should be best left for others to answer.
bondsofsuffering: ([Heh] I found a way)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] bondsofsuffering 2022-04-10 01:48 am (UTC)(link)
Let's at least try so we can all survive, okay?

I don't want to see us hurt because we failed.

[Because he is tired of seeing them all eat shit!!]
sancrimony: (☨ 137)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:53 am (UTC)(link)
................................................................... That's right, this does come with material punishment.

[ GUESS WHO WAS JUST SO ANGRY ABOUT THE PROMPT HE FORGOT ABOUT THAT PART ]

Of course—I shall only do my very best.
bondsofsuffering: ([Sorry] the dead ends as)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] bondsofsuffering 2022-04-10 01:57 am (UTC)(link)
Thank you. It's much nicer to survive with everyone than die together.

[And he is, actually, grateful to be trying at least.]

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony - 2022-04-10 02:08 (UTC) - Expand
outofoffice: (67)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] outofoffice 2022-04-10 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
I also have quite a bit of suitable material.

And--

[ hm ]

--No objections to sharing it, as preserving these stories is a storyteller's whole purpose.
sancrimony: (☨ 111)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:48 am (UTC)(link)
[ —pauses, the bitter sort of DESIRE FOR RANDOM CHAOS TO MAKE A SHITTY NONSENSICAL STORY dying down in the face of genuine curiosity ]

. . . In your opinion, as a storyteller, is even a nonsensical, incoherent story one worth preserving?
Edited 2022-04-10 01:48 (UTC)
outofoffice: (329)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] outofoffice 2022-04-10 01:57 am (UTC)(link)
Ah . . .

For preservation, perhaps not. That isn't to say that such stories have no value; only that they exist for other purposes entirely -- entertainment, or perhaps soothing hurt . . .
sancrimony: (☨ 141)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 02:08 am (UTC)(link)
[ mMMMGHHHhghghhhh ]

. . . I'll take it seriously.

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] outofoffice - 2022-04-10 02:37 (UTC) - Expand
proceedwithcautus: (who could be so cold?)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] proceedwithcautus 2022-04-10 01:41 am (UTC)(link)
Sir, you shouldn't take this on all on your own!

After all, I think we all have things that could suit, and many hands make light work.
sancrimony: (☨ 141)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:49 am (UTC)(link)
Ah—it wasn't a real suggestion. I know how this unit is.

[ it would have been a real suggestion if this unit didn't operate the way it did but ]

That is the wiser choice.
proceedwithcautus: (pic#15360292)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] proceedwithcautus 2022-04-10 01:56 am (UTC)(link)
We're people who understand this kind of story, for better or for worse.

It doesn't have to be all terrible things in the story, though. Everyone can pick something they think they can manage.
sancrimony: (🕈 209)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 02:10 am (UTC)(link)
Mm, of course.

[ with the tone/bond of "that's very nice other sensitIVs should do that in fact" because he does not actually care how much he overshares or overextends himself with this stuff

there's a pause as he realizes something though ]

. . . Well, I'd say I would give it my all, but this sort of story—doesn't need all of my story.

I'll give it my best.

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] proceedwithcautus - 2022-04-10 02:24 (UTC) - Expand
shatteredhourglass: (〇21)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] shatteredhourglass 2022-04-10 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
I'd rather split it up. But I'm not sure what we would be putting in... it sounded like it could just be anything.

[Too much freedom is suffering.]
sancrimony: (☨ 111)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:50 am (UTC)(link)
I suppose it depends on whether we want a coherent story or not.

[ which he would not have cared about but venti mentioned being a storyteller so now he's waiting for venti's onion ]
shatteredhourglass: (〇23)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] shatteredhourglass 2022-04-10 01:53 am (UTC)(link)
Mm... I suppose we could just leave it up to "them" by selecting random memories... then they really couldn't complain.

[The function is right there and even free for today.
Nyx will also wait on what the others have to say, though.]
sancrimony: (â™± 032)

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony 2022-04-10 01:54 am (UTC)(link)
[ wait izanagi reminded him this is a trauma game ]

Ah, wait, wait, wait a minute. We should try, in this game. . .

[ pinching the bridge of his nose. goddamnit ]

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] shatteredhourglass - 2022-04-10 01:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] sancrimony - 2022-04-10 02:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DISCUSSION

[personal profile] shatteredhourglass - 2022-04-10 02:15 (UTC) - Expand