• Member Since 16th Jul, 2013
  • offline last seen Mar 16th, 2018




After Shining Armor and Princess Cadance all but obliterate the changeling army with their magic, Queen Chrysalis awakes to find the twisted corpses of her subjects. Blinded by grief, she's forced to make the decision between enacting her revenge against the Princesses that caused this calamity or saving her remaining subjects. It shouldn't be such a difficult decision, but what if saving her people means sacrificing herself?

Just how strong is Chrysalis' love for her changelings?

We Will Always Remember

Chapters (1)
Comments ( 13 )

This story managed to make me care, though, I do have just one minor thing. And I completely understand that the Queen is being irrational at this point, if she had been given a sympathetic sort of character.

The changelings would have spared their lives to feed upon them. Perhaps it wouldn’t have been a perfect life, but the ponies would have lived!
The blood pounded in Chrysalis’ ears as she knelt there, torn between screaming in grief or rage. This was all Celestia’s fault! That damnable Princess always had her way in the end and others had to pay the price! Sombra, Discord, Chrysalis…they were all just trying to stay alive and claim their rightful places in Equestria. What right did Celestia and Luna have to obliterate or turn to stone those who too craved life and safety?

Given the actions she took to get said love (staging a coup on a first-world country while you yourself lead a third-world country), being thrown out like that was a perfectly acceptable defense. Had she tried diplomacy first, maybe the result would have been different. Plus, it really seems to me like the ponies would have been food slaves, rather than treated as equals. And then of course, we have Sombra, who...oh, maybe, tried to make an entire empire his slaves? Why isn't it a responsible decision to do that?

And then we have Discord...I don't think I need to say why he was turned to stone. I live my life by the saying "your right to do something ends where someone else's begins." My right to extend my arm ends where your right to stand begins. In short, I can't punch you without expecting some kind of reprisal. Sombra, Discord, and Chrysalis (and Tirek and Nightmare Moon) all violated that rule to some extent, and got comeuppance for their bad deeds.

That said, this WAS an interesting take on it. Like I said, given the Queen's mind is purely thinking of her race's safety and hunger, it does seem like she'd lash out like this, but I just couldn't let it go so easily. I had to give my two cents.

tl;dr: Cool story bro, but I just couldn't let that quote pass without saying my piece on the matter at hand.

Good written story but with the spike of said stories recently it loses impact as a result. Its not your fault... And i still like it for what its worth.


Oh, no problem, I completely understand where you're coming from, and I feel the same way as you. The main villains did wrong and got their comeuppance. I really was just trying to play on Chrysalis' view where she's sympathizing more with the villains than realizing what she's done wrong. She's so focused on wanting her people to survive and find a save haven for them, that she's blinded to her own misbegotten actions.


Thanks! Yeah, I was afraid that might happen. I didn't realize just how many Chrysalis stories had been favorited recently until I started writing it. It was more a song called Chryssy's Lullaby that inspired it.

4833309 I understand. Which is why i am trying to make a fic where Chrysalis faces a kind of judgement by those who made her Queen. I dont want to spoil this but its not the Equestrians or her changelings at least not her "subjects".

Technically, they are both third world countries :twilightsmile:.
You mean developed and non-developed.


Comparatively speaking, the dominion of the Changelings (whatever that is) would be third-world compared to Equestria considering they were apparently suffering from a food shortage. But I get your point nonetheless.

4848082 And I stand by my point that you should use the terms developed and undeveloped, as the term 'third world' means unaligned with either the USSR or NATO, and 'first world' means aligned with NATO.

Incorrect. You're think "Bloc" not "World". "First Bloc" means alined with NATO, "Second Bloc" means alined with the Warsaw Pact, and "Third Bloc" means alined with neither. "First World" means that the nation is highly developed (economically), "third world" meaning un- or underdeveloped (economically), and "second world" being in between first and third, which is all based on the nation's GDP. The business world and the UTO are starting to shift the usage to a four-level system (developed, developing, less developed, and least developed) based on the living standard, the industrial base, and the Human Development Index (HDI).

Perhaps you should look up the terms first.

Or you might not want to argue an economics point with an economist, given that the terms are very clearly defined. Unless you are trying to use the archaic definitions of these words (in which you'd be correct in that alone), however no one uses these terms in that manner anymore. The Bloc terms are used more prevalently.
"...[T]he actual meaning of the terms "First World", "Second World" and "Third World" changed from being based on political ideology to an economic definition. The three world theory has been criticized as crude and relativity outdated for its nominal ordering (1, 2, 3) and sociologists have coined the term "developed", "developing", and "underdeveloped" as replacement terms for global stratification—nevertheless, the three world theory is still popular in contemporary literature and media. This might also cause semantic variation of the term between describing a region's political entities and its people... [source] [underline added]"

First Bloc (aka Western Bloc): The Western Bloc during the Cold War refers to the countries allied with the United States and NATO.

Second Bloc (aka Eastern Bloc): the name used by NATO-affiliated countries for the former communist states of Central and Eastern Europe, generally the Soviet Union and the countries of the Warsaw Pact.

First World: Since the end of the Cold War, the original definition of the term First World is no longer necessarily applicable. There are varying definitions of the First World, however, they follow the same idea. John D. Daniels, past president of the Academy of International Business, defines the First World to be consisting of "high-income industrial countries." Scholar and Professor George J. Bryjak defines the First World to be the "modern, industrial, capitalist countries of North America and Europe." L. Robert Kohls, former director of training for the U.S. Information Agency and the Meridian International Center in Washington, D.C. uses First World and "fully developed" as synonyms.

Third World: This term, used today, generally denotes countries that have not developed to the same levels as OECD countries, and are thus in the process of developing.


With all due respect, can you two please continue this through private messaging? There's really no reason for this discussion to occur here.

Thank you.

Awwww, i finally had time to read this!:pinkiesmile:
And honestly i can't say i find it as sad as i find it beautiful!:raritystarry: You describe everything so well!:twilightsmile:

Login or register to comment