Sinfulwolf

One of the things that drives me crazy is seeing a Master/slave relationship portrayed as Dominant/submissive. The two relationships are NOT interchangeable, at all.
I'm going to post a link to a site that has probably one of the best explanations of the two terms, and I urge anyone who wants to write a real D/s relationship to read this.
A Slave is Not a Submissive
The author uses rather silly gender neutral pronouns, granted, but the definitions are superb.

Heh, I was going for the old fashioned pulling out the soul thing through sex. But that works too I suppose.

I’ve seen it done before. Tolkien did it, and so did Brian Jacques in his Redwall series. I mean, it does let you get a bit more creative and potentially show a bit more of the world. In my personal opinion I always felt it slowed down the story too much. I got pulled out too much to try and figure out what the melody was, and to basically hear a story in the story I was reading. And being a good writer of narrative doesn’t make one a good song writer.

Succubus end?

Succubus end?

That’s fair. It's all what works in the context needed.

Not necessarily. An accident in a substation, or from a transformer (the electrical devices, not the robots in disguise), can cause from very very serious wounds. However, I don’t know all the specific details of your particular case. I just wanted to state that electricity, even by accident, or perhaps especially when it’s an accident due to the massive amounts of power that’s in certain devices, can make messes.

They can, from what I’ve learned from my father who works as an underground electrician. Not only can burns be nasty, but he’s had groundhogs get decapitated when they get into substations. Electricity moving through the body can cause both entry and exit wounds, and those wounds can go quite deep. While not always visible on the surface, it certainly can be.

Wouldn’t someone who feels they are doing the right thing, and agree with what is happening even is it gets a bit “messy” actually be the people who believe the ends justify the means? Someone who’s more along the psychopath route, it almost feels like the means are the goal, and less about an end state.

Move along, nun-thing to see here ….

They can, from what I’ve learned from my father who works as an underground electrician. Not only can burns be nasty, but he’s had groundhogs get decapitated when they get into substations. Electricity moving through the body can cause both entry and exit wounds, and those wounds can go quite deep. While not always visible on the surface, it certainly can be.

It was a nun? Oh dear oh heavens me! 

Yep, sometimes it’s a clean electrocution, other times, we’re tossing the nun into the woodchipper.

Yep, I’ve plenty of stories about instant BBQd squirrel bits.  So high voltage can most definitely do interesting things.   In my story case, I simply needed a murder, and the killer knew what he was doing, so it was relatively clean, so to speak.

They can, from what I’ve learned from my father who works as an underground electrician. Not only can burns be nasty, but he’s had groundhogs get decapitated when they get into substations. Electricity moving through the body can cause both entry and exit wounds, and those wounds can go quite deep. While not always visible on the surface, it certainly can be.

Googled it up, there’s no DSM for psychopath, instead, the psychiatrists would label an individual as having “Antisocial personality disorder”, rather vague, though a psychopath, “A "psychopath" is someone whose hurtful actions toward others tend to reflect calculation, manipulation and cunning; they also tend not to feel emotion and mimic (rather than experience) empathy for others.”
An example, a psychopath CEO has no issues with doing layoffs, as they can’t empathize with the employees being laid off, however, what they’re doing, reducing overhead, is in the better interest of the shareholders.  So, I’m guessing there’s a degree to the psychopath.  Some are more goal orientation, don’t care about busting rules/hurting to make the goals.  And some went further, enjoyed the busting/hurt, and therefore enjoy the means as well as the goals.   Not absolutely certain without becoming a psychopath myself.

Wouldn’t someone who feels they are doing the right thing, and agree with what is happening even is it gets a bit “messy” actually be the people who believe the ends justify the means? Someone who’s more along the psychopath route, it almost feels like the means are the goal, and less about an end state.

Just to throw in some thoughts. A human antagonist will almost always believe they are doing the right thing. However, they don’t need to be sympathetic for it. There are many examples in history of people that were downright vile doing what they thought was a good thing. Beliefs of superiority due to race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. have led to many atrocities that were supposed to be for the right reason. While some of these people are universally hated, some are heroes or villains depending on who you ask. Winston Churchill for example. Often seen as a hero by the media, but I’m sure the Irish and Indians have much different views on him. Or Sir John A. MacDonald. One of the leading figures in the formation of Canada as a nation and the first Prime Minister. However an alcoholic and involved pretty firmly in the Residential Schools.
If not human though, minds work in different ways. A few examples have been brought up such as Jaws, or the Raptors in Jurassic Park. These though are primal creatures acting on instinct. Slasher villains such as Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers are often supposed to be embodiment of evil but they are really mostly instinctual and primal. Characters like Pinhead from Hellraiser though have objectives and goals though they are clearly not of the moral variety.
My current story my villain is a demon. He has plots and schemes that involve the destruction of many lives in one way or another, and he’s not sympathetic to the pain he causes as that stands in his way. However, he just just go off destroying things for the shits and giggles of it. It’s less evil, and more amoral from common society’s standpoint. 

There are certainly psychopaths out there who have no real conscience, who believe the ends justify the means.  Some become serial killers, others become CEOs/Bankers/Lawyers/Politicians.  My current universe, though, are people who feel they are doing the right thing, who agree with what is happening even if it gets a bit “messy”.

Just to throw in some thoughts. A human antagonist will almost always believe they are doing the right thing. However, they don’t need to be sympathetic for it. There are many examples in history of people that were downright vile doing what they thought was a good thing. Beliefs of superiority due to race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. have led to many atrocities that were supposed to be for the right reason. While some of these people are universally hated, some are heroes or villains depending on who you ask. Winston Churchill for example. Often seen as a hero by the media, but I’m sure the Irish and Indians have much different views on him. Or Sir John A. MacDonald. One of the leading figures in the formation of Canada as a nation and the first Prime Minister. However an alcoholic and involved pretty firmly in the Residential Schools.
If not human though, minds work in different ways. A few examples have been brought up such as Jaws, or the Raptors in Jurassic Park. These though are primal creatures acting on instinct. Slasher villains such as Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers are often supposed to be embodiment of evil but they are really mostly instinctual and primal. Characters like Pinhead from Hellraiser though have objectives and goals though they are clearly not of the moral variety.
My current story my villain is a demon. He has plots and schemes that involve the destruction of many lives in one way or another, and he’s not sympathetic to the pain he causes as that stands in his way. However, he just just go off destroying things for the shits and giggles of it. It’s less evil, and more amoral from common society’s standpoint. 

I write soldiers a fair bit, so guns are around often enough.

I write soldiers a fair bit, so guns are around often enough.

Well I just hope I succeeded in an erotic horror/fantasy fusion. ]
As @Desiderius Price has, death is part of life in my stories. I tend to go less simple. Even a gunshot makes a hell of a mess. I personally feel its what makes my stories mine.
I’m curious though if others find that a messy death can make a character’s death less emotionally impactful. I don’t think so myself, but there’s always various opinions out there.

Just to throw in some thoughts. A human antagonist will almost always believe they are doing the right thing. However, they don’t need to be sympathetic for it. There are many examples in history of people that were downright vile doing what they thought was a good thing. Beliefs of superiority due to race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. have led to many atrocities that were supposed to be for the right reason. While some of these people are universally hated, some are heroes or villains depending on who you ask. Winston Churchill for example. Often seen as a hero by the media, but I’m sure the Irish and Indians have much different views on him. Or Sir John A. MacDonald. One of the leading figures in the formation of Canada as a nation and the first Prime Minister. However an alcoholic and involved pretty firmly in the Residential Schools.
If not human though, minds work in different ways. A few examples have been brought up such as Jaws, or the Raptors in Jurassic Park. These though are primal creatures acting on instinct. Slasher villains such as Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers are often supposed to be embodiment of evil but they are really mostly instinctual and primal. Characters like Pinhead from Hellraiser though have objectives and goals though they are clearly not of the moral variety.
My current story my villain is a demon. He has plots and schemes that involve the destruction of many lives in one way or another, and he’s not sympathetic to the pain he causes as that stands in his way. However, he just just go off destroying things for the shits and giggles of it. It’s less evil, and more amoral from common society’s standpoint. 

Well I just hope I succeeded in an erotic horror/fantasy fusion. ]
As @Desiderius Price has, death is part of life in my stories. I tend to go less simple. Even a gunshot makes a hell of a mess. I personally feel its what makes my stories mine.
I’m curious though if others find that a messy death can make a character’s death less emotionally impactful. I don’t think so myself, but there’s always various opinions out there.