Aethelflaed has surpassed my expectations. Not only do I have a group of 100 individuals in my laboratory cells, but she says she has created a system where I can, with a day’s warning, request any reasonable number of subjects to be transferred from the nearby jails to my cells. That pony is quite the organizer. She introduced me to the griffon she put in charge of the system: Anastasiya Kovalsky. She is one of the cultists who worship the machine. In her past life she was a cossack on a raid into Wittenland and Barrad when she heard the voice of the Machine after becoming separated from her raiding party. After finding the others who heard, she decided not to go back.

It is nice to have a round number to work with. Perfectly balanced: 10 cells with 10 ponies each. The villages from which they came are also recorded, so that when I am done with them, Anastasiya can corral them back without me having to teleport them. Good help truly makes all the difference, which is why the perfection of this spell is imperative.

Subject 1: Earth pony male

Before I begin refining the semantic-personality combination spell, I should make sure my assumptions are correct about what will not work. There is also a small probability that another approach could be better, and I don’t want to miss out on a better solution due to overconfidence in my modeling. Therefore, for subject 1, I will try the memory transplantation method.

Upon reflection of yesterday’s musings, I have come up with a more refined approach than a focus purely on episodic memory. I will first erase the episodic memory and personality of the target, and then take the corresponding parts of the mind of one of my housemaids and implant and copy them into the subject. I want to then attempt to overwrite the semantic self-identification associations from the target and replace them with that of my servant’s, but I foresee difficulties with this. This method should create a copy of my servant with the knowledge of the target. It will take more mana than I would like, but it should confirm or deny the correctness of my model.

For this purpose, I have brought Kirsi, one of my maids, to be the template. She appears scared, but probably only because I haven’t told her of the nature of the experiment. I decided to inform her, as it will likely help her with “waking up” in another body. Of course it won’t be her in the other body, but it may as well be from the perspective of the memory of subject 1.

I approach subject 1 and begin the process of erasing the relevant memories. My experience from prior subjects applies well, and it takes almost no time to erase the episodic memories and personality of the subject. I then open a second connection to Kirsi’s soul and use it as a reference to create the same patterns in subject 1. It is quick, with Kirsi herself not even noticing the process, though that may just be because most deer are not magically attuned.

With my experience and the reference, the spell concludes in moments. Subject 1 looks confused and is now transitioning to a state of discomfort. As I expected, the first speech from the subject is about how I said it wouldn’t be her and that it would just be a copy of her mind. This is immediately followed by a look of surprise and a covering of the mouth before observing the non-cloven nature of the foreign hoof.

I explain the nature of copying and about how she (he?) is the copy while the real Kirsi is still here. The subject looks quite uncomfortable with its body. Telepathy reveals a dysphoria regarding the “change” in race and gender. The real Kirsi seems to have grasped the situation and is staring wide-eyed.

The reaction of the other test subjects to subject 1 is remarkably subdued. I ask Anastasiya, who elected to stay and attend to my needs regarding the subjects, why this is the case, and she replies that she already imparted an understanding to the subjects that disruption would be met with punishment. This kind of initiative is what I want to see from those under my spell.

I command subject 1 to do a few simple tasks to check for obedience which seems to work fine, though faux Kirsi seems to be stressed and less quickly responsive than her real self. The real test is if it can call upon knowledge of the original host. I ask subject 1 if it knows what skills it now has that it didn’t have before. Unfortunately, the metacognitive knowledge of what he once knew how to do has been lost. I’m not sure how this meta-knowledge interacts with the types of memories I have categorized so far, so I’ll have to keep this in mind for future subjects.

Without the knowledge of what to test for, I have no other use for subject 1. I could try and do a deep telepathic scan or interview another subject before doing it again, but I think this is enough evidence to show this method is not a hidden gem. I thought I could solve the problem of just creating another maid by trying to leave semantic information intact, but now it is clear that, even if those skills are usable, the method opens up other problems I hadn’t thought of.

The fact that the copy feels out of place in the body is one problem, but the main one seems to be the stress caused by the experience. Even an obedient soul would struggle in such a foreign environment as has been demonstrated by Kirsi here. In order to facilitate this on a larger scale, I would have to create a perfect soul template that would not be bothered by waking up in a new body which would require either a one-in-a-million find of a unique personality or a carefully crafted one. Neither is optimal. What I simply can’t live with though is the fact that if I were to do this on a large scale, I would have a nation of Kirsis, which wouldn’t feel as satisfying to rule. It is just like the skeletons - there is no unique being I am controlling.

Subject 2: Unicorn female

As I move on to subject 2, subject 1 annoyingly interrupts asking what will happen to it. I suppose unlike the prisoners, Kirsi, or, more accurately, the presence of her identity, makes subject 1 feel it has a level of familiarity with me. It does raise the question of what I should do with these subjects afterwards. Presumably, most will be able to function in society and be loyal to me if most of what I end up doing is simply refining my method. However, I don’t think my time is best spent judging what will likely be a wide spectrum of results. Anastasiya can handle them. I inform subject 1 of this, and Anastasiya hears as well. I see Anastasiya immediately pick up a pen and start writing notes - a sign to me that she understands the responsibility I have delegated to her.

For subject 2, I will test a personality approach, the other longshot idea. My passive methods are perhaps a bit more refined than the active methods of most emotional manipulation magic, but I predict no pattern I will be able to produce will be able to satisfactorily achieve consistently good results. The issue lies in modeling the divergent nature of how different emotional responses will react with each other which usually ends in varied and extreme behaviors.

To start, I begin the connection to subject 2’s soul and locate the personality. For this test, I begin to apply a simple positive association with me. I tune it to be relatively strong, as I would prefer to see the effects it has on a wider slate of behaviors, and an increase in strength of the association should ensure even distant associations with this response are felt consciously.

Upon conclusion of the spell, I command subject 2 to walk in a circle. There is a moment of hesitation in her eyes before she begins. This hesitation for this simple command seen both in her and subject 1 leads me to believe that it is the presence of higher thought that allows for this. Most of my previous spells reduced mental capacity, and thus the ability to question my commands, causing them to obey promptly. These subjects, with their reasoning intact, are able to recognize the arbitrary nature of the command, and likely hesitate to think through any immediate tricks. This is a tradeoff of this form of mind control, but one I will gladly make.

After completing her fourth circle, I note a look of confusion on her face. I believe I know the cause. The original obedience was caused by fear of retribution given her status as a prisoner in a lab with an all-powerful goddess. Now that she is obeying, I suspect she is beginning to become aware of the association implanted within her. A telepathic thought scour confirms this theory and gives me another idea to test.

I command subject 2 to kowtow before me. She begins after another moment of hesitation. The moment her nose touches the ground, she recoils and jumps back. The lack of camaraderie between the prisoners is clear as the rest try to give her space without questioning her behavior. This is a far cry from the villagers I used who would try to console or express concern for those being targeted, so I appreciate this comparative lack of interference. Subject 2’s eyes go wild as she begins clopping herself in the head.

I find this behavior very entertaining. I glower a little at her, and she slinks back to the kneeling position, though I see she is now closing her eyes. She is continuously wincing and squeezing her eyes shut. I don’t need magic to tell me what’s going on, but I take a look just to confirm my suspicions. As expected, the thought pattern has been a cycle of feeling the emotion of the association, recognizing its artificiality and then trying to not feel it by any means necessary.

This awareness of how the feeling does not align with the rest of her identity is another reason why a primarily personality focused approach will probably not be my final solution. Given enough time and enough coercion into following commands, it is possible the hostility she feels towards the association I implanted will fade, and that she will choose to take solace in the fact that it at least feels good or at least grudgingly accept servitude. However, it is equally likely that, through her active deconditioning efforts, the association I implanted wanes in strength. This is a downside of passive control, as targets, if they so deem, can attempt to change their own minds. Souls are always in flux as the body and mind change, so creating self-reproducing patterns will be essential.

Subject 3: Pegasus male

Having seen enough of subject 2, I leave her to her internal conflict and approach subject 3. I am now curious if I can overcome this conflict by simply turning the association up much higher and providing multiple similar associations rather than just the one. I insert the new associations into subject 3 and crank the metaphorical dial up a few notches. Right after I do, his wings stick straight out as if electrified and his eyes go wide.

At first, it appears as if I broke something, but his gaze then falls on me. He remains standing stock-still, eyes directly staring at mine. He starts breathing deeply and then jumps to the bars of the cell directly at me. I was expecting extreme behavior, and so am unfazed. A rattling sound rings out as his face embeds itself between the bars. He flaps, seemingly trying to fly through the bars as I see a hoof begin to extend past the cell towards me. I am, of course, a few paces beyond his reach, but that physical reality doesn’t appear to stop him from trying to reach for me.

A mental examination reveals he desires to touch me, as if he were deathly ill and touching my fur would somehow cure him. The chain of thought that led to this hyperfixation is a mystery to me, but such is the chaos of emotional manipulation. Having realized he will not be able to reach me, he turns his eyes to the lock on the cell. Eyes wide, and with a shout, he slams down on the lock. When he sees no response, he backs up to the end of the cell and flies full speed into it. He howls in pain, collapsing to the ground.

Seeing his determination is a delight and reaffirms my choice of method. I remember how casting Cogeria-Fiducia caused difficulty problem solving and how lazy Asinti’s demons were. Subject 3 shows both determination and self-directed problem solving. Unfortunately, he’s chosen this brute-force method rather than simply talking, and I blame that on the emotional manipulation clouding his judgment.

I approach the cell. I wonder what will happen if I give him what he wants? He looks up from his hurting hooves and looks at me with a pup-like whimper, skittering to the edge of the bars once more. He reaches, though it appears to take all of his mental fortitude not to whip his leg out to hit me. I extend a leg and allow his hoof to gently brush its surface. I back up again and he looks at his own hoof in awe.

I thought, given his initial rabid behavior, that I would have to kill him to prevent him from becoming a nuisance, but he appears so very happy at having been granted his request. It seems I penned that too quickly, as he is now looking back at me ravenously. There is another dash to the door and another reaching of his hoof towards me. Perhaps he realizes that he can’t actually reach me and is merely signaling desire or repeating a previously successful strategy. I check his thoughts, and the answer is no, he’s just feral. The slobbering and incoherent sounds he was making should have tipped me off. To avoid him getting in the way later, I bring forth the pistol I keep here and shoot him twice in the head before putting the gun back down. No need to waste any mana - I have a lot to get through today.

Subject 4: Earth pony male

I have Kirsi clean up subject 3’s mess and move on to subject 4. With the longshot ideas not yielding results, it is time to move to the main event: a semantic-focused spell. For this first test, I will keep it entirely within the bounds of semantic memory to see if it works well. If it does, the spell can save a lot of mana which will help when scaling this to towns and cities.

Once connected to subject 3’s soul, I identify the region associated with semantic memory and begin to make edits. I start by bucketing the memories related to me. This one doesn’t know much about me but does seem to know of my power. There are no associations I find that are directly opposed to me that I must remove. For example, while I can feel that he doesn’t like me, it seems to be an emergent behavior from a distrust of authority and an enjoyment of autonomy, which he currently believes is being restricted by me. None of these memories are bad and should be removed. If I remove the positive association with autonomy, he may not resist capture by an enemy. The same scenario also could be a problem if I remove the distrust of authority. For these generic ideas, it is difficult to have them not apply for me, but apply to the enemy, and I will have to engineer another emergent behavior that achieves this effect.

The key seems to be, as I reasoned before, in adding memories, as most beliefs are emergent behaviors from known principles. I find a spot of random noise which correlates with unallocated memory, and add semantic knowledge that I must be obeyed, that I am to be worshiped, and that he is loyal to me. The only thing left to do is to see if it has any effect without the addition of any emotional weight.

I begin with the standard circle walk, and he also exhibits the same hesitation subject 2 did. His confusion also matches, but it doesn’t appear to be as serious as subject 2’s, which I would attribute to the lack of emotional associations on the added semantic data. Semantic data is also likely processed by the consciousness in a way where it is less alarming. Commanding him to stop, I proceed with an impromptu questioning.

He answers in a tone similar to the other subjects, implying that his manner of speech was not affected by the changes I made. He does, however, begin one answer referring to me as “Your Highness”. I find the use of this specific title worthy of a bit more thought. Obviously, he has some idea that I am to be respected, but does he think I am below Queen Honoria of Wittenland? They say not to attribute malice to what can be attributed to incompetence, and the adage is proven yet again when I look into his mind to see he just doesn’t know his honorifics.

I question him on his unchanged tone, and he seems to only now realize that he should be more respectful. I ask him if there is anything else in his behavior he would like to reflect on, and he takes a moment to bow before adopting a meeker stance and apologizing. Interesting how he didn’t notice he was acting incorrectly but was willing to change when he thought about it. There seem to be missing metacognitive links with his new beliefs as he was almost not aware of them until asked specifically. I will have to try and add these in the future.

With this lack of awareness in mind, I ask subject 4 first if he worships me (he responded in the affirmative) followed by why he thinks he believes that. At first, he is unable to answer, but then he has a look of realization as he puts 2 and 2 together. He responds that it is because he has been mind controlled, and I ask him how he feels about that. His first comment is about how he doesn’t feel mind controlled, but then begins to panic.

It seems that, once again, self-identification has come into conflict with my alterations. He takes a page out of subject 2’s playbook and begins bashing himself in the head. I notice an interesting behavior as he looks at me, apologizes, but then closes his eyes and starts yelling and thrashing while resuming his self-flagellation. His thoughts tell me he started with mental conflict, but when he saw me again, he was overcome with guilt. When he realized he didn’t like that he felt guilty, he started doing anything possible to stop the thoughts or at least distract from them.

So, it seems that when adding no emotional connections to the semantic knowledge, subjects will feel guilty that they don’t feel more emotion. Also, when realizing they are mind controlled, subjects tend to want to return to a state of freedom. I believe that adding the positive emotional associations with me will allow the subjects to justify my use of mind control on them and that they will then not resist. I ask subject 4 to keep it down as I move on, and he immediately stops his bigger outbursts. It seems he is still obedient.

Subject 5: Earth pony female

From my experience with subject 4, I see 2 avenues for improvement. The first obvious emotional aspect is self-explanatory. The second is less so and regards metacognition. Subject 4 did not change his behavior until told to question himself. The semantic data was there, but he wasn’t aware of it. Like how fake Kirsi could not perform the skills of the original pony due to not having the knowledge of them, subject 4 did not know he had to act respectfully until he queried his own memories for how he should act. I understand most creatures go through life blissfully unaware and acting automatically, but this is evidence. I suppose I don’t question my every action either, so it seems I’ve met the kettle to my pot.

I cast the spell beginning in the same manner I did with subject 4. This time, I add metacognitive semantic data which will hopefully give her awareness of her loyalty to me. Conveniently, I am able to follow the metacognitive “strands” to the associated emotions and tweak them without using as much mana as it would have cost to start a search from all of nondeclarative memory.

I engage my telepathy and command subject 5 to begin the circle walk. She responds with an obedient “Yes, your majesty!” and begins. I note a small hesitation, but this is working out nicely so far. Telepathy reveals no confusion as to why she is walking in a circle or why she feels fulfilled when obeying.

Next, I move to questioning. She wholeheartedly answers that she serves me with her body, mind, and soul. If only she knew how true that was. I ask her why she believes as such, and she replies that she doesn’t need a reason. Not a great answer with no consistent logic behind it, but I am sure this will be a recurring phenomenon with creatures being unable to justify a reason given their philosophies and just having to confabulate not needing a reason to serve me.

I ask my final question regarding how she came to believe this, and she quickly replies with mind control. As she has seen the previous subject, it would be more surprising if she couldn’t figure it out. I give her a look that suggests I want more information. She stutters for a few seconds, but then comes back with the answer that she’s glad she was mind controlled so that she could serve.

Finally! She didn’t have a good answer, but the emotions and semantics worked together to make her justify it as a good thing. She was a bit slow in coming up with it, but this is the result I want my final spell to achieve. Mind control that falls apart at doubt or challenges is useless against an adversarial actor. What I have created is resilient___/

That’s an annoying line. I was reveling a bit too much in my creation that I admit a laugh escaped. A unicorn then, it seems, took the gun from my table and took the opportunity of my distraction to fire a bullet at me. I added a new layer of sensory spells to my being, so I was able to detect the firing and my dual consciousness meant I was able to react in time while laughing. I used my levitation to stop the bullet midair to demonstrate my power. I sensed the unicorn trying to fire more bullets, so I jammed the trigger so she couldn’t do anything more.

I stop laughing and drop the bullet to the ground while yanking the gun back into my levitation. It is immediately clear to me which unicorn was responsible, and I give her a sweet look of motherly displeasure. You were never going to hurt me, so there’s no reason to be mad, even if you did make me smudge my ink. I pluck subject 5’s name from her mind and order her to kill the unicorn responsible. This defiance must be punished, or it would set a bad precedent.

As subject 5 charges the larger unicorn and they begin a brawl, I ponder subject 5’s behavior during this incident. She was looking in my direction and would have seen the gun levitating to me, and yet did not attempt to warn me. Did she know I was safe? Was the control imperfect? Is she just an idiot? I must recall the state of her mind as it happened. I note subject 5 is winning the fight. A zealous blur of hooves repeatedly smashes into the eyes of the unicorn as the other cellmates watch.

Using my improved memory, I am able to remember and observe subject 5’s state of mind at the moment I started to laugh. She does acknowledge the gun. She then associates the gun with killing me, and that that course of action would lead to her freedom. She assesses that she doesn’t need that freedom as my slave and does nothing. Only after this line of thought does she begin to worry for my safety, but by this point, the bullet has already been fired.

I begin to work out the implications of this line of thought as I watch subject 5 transition to choking out my would-be assassin after repeated punches reach diminishing returns as she tires. I believe I can correlate the initial hesitation I noticed with her and this long train of thought before she thought of me. Even the few seconds she took to justify her own mind control could be evidence to my theory. While she has the semantics and the emotion, the order of her thoughts or the way she thinks was unchanged. That is procedural. Without the procedural memory, she wasn’t used to always thinking of me or justifying things for me, and thus took a non-optimal time to react, though I believe this will improve over time as the procedural memories are created.

As I sense the pony dying at subject 5’s hooves, I am reminded of the Omphalos hypothesis. The theory, well more conjecture than theory, is that when Faust or whoever created the creatures of the world, they must have been created with navels. Having not been born of a womb, there is no biological reason for the presence of a navel, but the idea is that Faust could have created the world at any given time with geological signs of aging or, in this case, belly buttons.

In my case, I am trying to create slaves who already know how to be my slaves and have “experience” thinking how I want. If I were to embed procedural memories of how to think that would normally be developed over experience and learning, it would be like Faust creating trees with age rings already inside. In both cases, there is the creation of something with the appearance of having a greater age.

Subject 5 returns to the edge of the cell nearest me, now covered in the blood of my assailant. She bows and says she hopes she was of some use. Oh, you have been, and more than you know.

After refining the spell on the rest of the test subjects, I can confirm that the lack of correct procedural memories is what led to subject 5’s slow thinking. I have developed what I believe is the final iteration of the single-target variety of this spell. I add positive semantic information about me while weakening other strongly positive semantic self-identifications. Then, I add metacognitive information about knowing about those memories and then follow those to the related emotional reactions. I then backtrack towards the semantic information and try to bridge to related procedures and incorporate the semantic data into the relevant lines of thought.

It does require more mana than I had hoped - enough to tire an untrained unicorn, but I am no unicorn. I am the most powerful deer to grace this continent and my will will be done. The cost is a small price to pay to remove the adjustment period. When I am casting this across battlefields and cities, I want a minimal delay before they begin actively thinking for me. I remand the custody of the living ponies to Anastasiya and instructed her to have the functional ones released from their prisons. Today I have to oversee the integration of many townships into the Viiradian hierarchy and check in on the purge. Soon, though, I will have a new tool that will make this much easier.

Author's Note

Kirsi is an OC. I read Viira's description, and it seems she is used to a life of luxury, so I assume she would not leave her homeland without a retinue of servants, and now we get to meet one.
Anastasiya is also an OC. The mechanisms of state are vast and complex and will require at least a couple background ponies (or griffons in this case) to facilitate Viira's plans.

I hope you like my attempt to port Last Thursdayism to My Little Pony.