R1M11 Jojolity Delib

Judge Dante (Logic)

Embody Jojolities ask players to “define and reify” the given keyword, and a match as simple as this gives a lot of leeway for how to do so.

In my R1M7 Jojolity delib, I summarized that "the difference between a 6 and a 7 is 'robustness' [the integration of plays and their importance to the strat], and the difference between a 7 and an 8 Jojolity is 'surprising creativity'. [...Meanwhile] a 5 Jojolity can be awarded for '[reliance] on one standout instance without much else in terms of Jojolity.'"

I can see the argument that plays are made that are important to these strats and the argument to give deference to the implementation of Jojolity, netting 6s or 7s. However, I find little framing of the Jojolity and the plays follow rather naturally from the nature of the kit. Put another way, "how much would the strat have changed if a different Jojolity had been assigned?" My answer is "little".

Thomas gets a [4] here; Not only is "initial ranged harassment into melee engagements" the natural playstyle of the kit, the lack of specificity above also results in a lack of coherence and robustness of the Jojolity specifically. Is the storm constant movement? Collateral damage? Overwhelming pressure? I can’t get a clear read, even if I see a few scant ideas.

Similarly, while I have a vague sense of ‘niceness’ from Gloss’s strat, I struggle to point to a particular thesis or even proactive evidence. There’s a line of Gloss “intending on putting their body on the line to protect [patch of flowers],” but this intention isn’t proactively reified in the strat. What active techs are made to maximize their protection? What character writing shows Gloss engaging with this desire to protect? There’s something here, but even if there is a thesis, I don’t see it borne out: [4].

The Jojolity works within the bounds of these strategies, but the strategies don’t try to excel in completing the Jojolity.

Judge Cereza (Ceep)

I don’t have all that much to say. I think that what’s here is ‘fine’, but I’ll give Gloss a 4/10 and Thomas a 5/10. Gloss’ Jojolity plays were unclear besides being fairly nice, though I think the overall flavor was of high quality. Thomas in some ways has an ‘easier’ Jojolity, so I’m hesitant to give him too much of an advantage; he didn’t play especially aggro or had much to hammer home his overall gameplan. In both, the lack of clarity of the overall thrust of the Jojolity makes it unclear what I should grade, and it is not immediately obvious.

Judge Raiden (Coop)

Equally underwhelmed in these as I was with the Quality of both strategies. Outside of some minor narrative bits I really can’t find anything in this strategy that supports or defines what “liberation/protection” is for Gloss - she gets a **3**.

As for Thomas, while there is never a central thesis for what embodying the storm here is exactly, I can at least see how various plays here tie into that. Mainly the constant barrage and chaotic, “unpredictable” movement of Thomas and his blades and also his attempt at tearing up the terrain. I don’t think the latter of these would be particularly useful or effective given that it’s a D Power Stand, but it’s something at least. Thomas gets a very low **5**.