JJOCT7 R4M10 Jojolity

Judge Bishop (Flame)

“Show the strength of your bond!” While I feel both have done really well in showcasing this from how the pair converse as well as how the pairs work in tandem (Jyo carrying Nat around was a great mechanical idea which lends to this, as well as how the two of have clear goals which cover the other), I’m gonna have to give Gallery a **9** as opposed to an **8** like DCH (while I can see theirs getting a 7, I do think Jyo shielding Nat throughout including from the anti-material rifle earns a bump up in score): their relationship was at the forefront of the strategy and permeating throughout the strat as Texas leading the way is important for both the mechanics and the narrative of the strat.

Judge Chaney (Logic)

My fellow Judges gave high Jojolities scores on the basis of Narrative, and although I share their compliments, I tend to hew more to the “mechanical integration” prong than many. Bridghid’s trust in Texas manifests as her doing a lot of the legwork, a framework which does raise the “counterfactual” question given the sheer action economy of Texas’s kit. There's a few instances in strat of the two working together (e.g. their joint wallbreaking), and I would have loved to see the narrative comment on them in real time, for example.

Nonetheless, the amount of flavor text is “mechanically sufficient,” acting as a floor. I’ll give it a strong [7], knowing full well that I am the lower bound of the bench; go look at your 9.

The narrative prose of DCH’s strat is somewhat thinner, more fun bits of flavor than a narrative arc, but it’s well appreciated nonetheless. However, Nat’s growth is more told than shown, and thus Jyotsna’s commentary on it isn’t as foregrounded narratively or mechanically. Of course, the ranged Nat does things at range while the melee* Jyotsna does things in melee, but the reification of the Jojolity is thinner than I would have liked. A light [7].

Judge Wilson (Alpha)

Now we move to everyone’s favorite category, JoJolity!

I’ll admit that I’ve tried to make my JoJolity delibs as long as possible, partially out of a want to recognize good writing when it isn’t already discussed in quality, but I’ll flip the coin and admit that, in the early stages of T7, I’d asked Logic for help in how to inform my JoJolity delibs from what I wrote in quality.

I feel that this is a disservice to the community, so I’ll apologize for that as I am, rather than as I was.

So, I’ll start with the idea of Implicit and Explicit Trust. The former is the ‘show, don’t tell’ sort of method to writing, where it’s character actions on display rounding out their relationships for the viewer or reader; Explicit trust is more of the opposite, wherein characters may have a long conversation about their trust, how far back they go, or just a simple line of, ‘I trust you’.

Now how does this relate to showing the strength of your bond? You tell me, reader. It’s more important for you to realize it than for me to tell you what it is. (unless it’s a bomb, then it’s WAY more important for me to tell you what it is before you make us all realize it.)

Starting once again with Disaster Child’s Hegemony, we have the narrative bases I refused to touch in quality. Nat and Jyostna here have a solid understanding of one another, with Nat playing much the same game as the star student to a teacher, and Jyostna responding as a parent.

This also extends into the mechanical interpretation of the strat, what with Jyo pulling Nat out of the way of oncoming bullets or otherwise trying to shield her from harm, while Nat is consistently proving herself to Jyostna in turn, even if she’s not meaning to. It carries the feeling of a young bird finally leaving the nest, and Jyo… well, could be prouder, but she’s more than fine witnessing Nat’s growth.

The pair play off of each other quite well, but I’ll admit that more could’ve been done to integrate it into the strat at large; while the chunks that are there are good, I’ll admit that the mechanics likely would’ve been better served by more interplay.

More also could’ve been done to earmark those sections. Mind, I’m not saying it wasn’t, but some parts are italicized that are differently italicized in other parts, some parts are sectioned in ways that make it look like they’re part of the mechanics, and it trips over itself in the reading, at least to me, with the formatting errors surrounding it.

Still though, I believe this deserves a 7.

Now let’s head on over to Goats With Rabies! The plan here is set up from the beginning and rolls forward from there- Texas takes point while Brighid covers her rear and takes up most of the defense. This does, of course, include throwing Outlando D’Amour every which way to make terrain impassable for people, bullets, and everyone who thought they had a chance of creeping up on them.

Now, to get to the micro, this strat depends on that bond of trust holding through, and it pours into the mechanics. Texas isn’t focusing on defending herself because Brighid has that, Brighid isn’t focusing on turning the place into a smoking pile of rubble because Texas has that- it’s both a very good use of kits and skills and a layered narrative driver.

Moving back to the macro, it makes itself visible in more major plays, especially so with the handling of Zafar or the means to get there. Going back further, Brighid’s absolute use of environment to seal off potential counters from just about any angle at the stairs or elsewhere puts that same sort of thinking into practice.

I’ll give this side another 8. Great job, folks!