Actually, I doubt we'll have a definitive answer at the end of the arc. There's what, 2 issues left? A character really takes months to be fully fleshed out. When you're working with only 2-3 relevant feats, they get extrapolated to the point where we're making wide generalizations based on insufficient evidence.
It would be like saying we had a power level for Sentry after his 6-part debut arc. People still don't fully know what to make of him, and he was around for years.
Personally, I doubt the character will be around long enough to make for decent vs. threads. He'd need to continue to pop up after Fear Itself for some time before I feel like we could say anything for certain about him.
Also, it's not natural as comic fans to jump the gun. Only of some people. I'm just surprised that those people don't eventually learn the lesson who have been here for a long time. At best they'll get inconclusive speculation in their thread...is that really what we're after?
Well, the only reason not to use characters with little showings its that it produces bad debates, or no debates at all, but arguably, most possible character matches just don't produce good debates anyways. Lack of evidence is one of the positions in which we are the most often about here, the very fuel of the forum is fan speculation, so I'd argue that dodging both of those bullets is the very essence of what we do around here.
He becomes stronger by feeding with fear, and can break the shield of Captain America. He's been called the "actual Skyfather" of the norse pantheon, but to be honest I don't know if that statement has been said on panel.
This statement just represents a difference in our approaches in the forum.
I'm fine with saying "we don't know, and may never know for sure" in a lot of threads (enough evidence or not). I tend to only deal at length with threads and fights where we can construct an opinion and justify it based on multiple showings. Speculative musings don't interest me. Less so the more speculative it becomes (as with brand new characters).
Some subjectivity is present in any opinion, but there's certainly varying degrees of this, and I enjoy being able to form a logical and coherent argument, and dealing with others who can as well, regardless of whether or not they agree with you.
I suppose I didn't really consider that approach though, so you may have a point. Some might make threads simply for the speculation, because it's the best way we have to determine outcomes when we don't know enough to say definitively. If you're interested in such outcomes, there's not many other choices.
I suppose my concept of debating around here is focused in constructing a consistent method of judging different showings, since coherence and clarity is the only thing from which others can learn or disprove my own ideas to favor their own.
Debates cannot be won most of the time, so the point is mainly to get a compelling argument. If you can make one with a character with three showings but you can't with a character you know perfectly, then you chime in accordingly. That's half of the pleasure to me.
Of course, characters with a few showings and omnipotents are less compelling most of the time, as they should be. Characters that are barely compelling in their own stories don't lend themselves to nice interactions.
KMC Community Forums
Aug 14th, 2011 03:10 AM
