KillerMovies - Movies That Matter!

REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Home » Comic Book Forums » Comic Book 'Versus' Forum » Debating discussion thread.

Debating discussion thread.
Started by: Badabing

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
  Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Debating discussion thread.

Now that Raoul is back....

This thread is to discuss some problems that have arisen in the threads regarding debating ONLY! This isn't a platform to complain about fanboys, gripe about threads getting closed, moan about bannings, etc.

This also isn't a debate. All ideas about the topic will be considered. If you must voice an opinion about another poster's idea, please do so in a civil and respectful manner. Right now there are no wrong ideas.

I'm posting some quotes from the old thread.

I don't want this to turn into another argument. Please respect ideas presented. This is the last time I'll try to open the topic for discussion.

Thanks.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Last edited by Badabing on Nov 4th, 2008 at 04:16 AM

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:11 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Darthgoober
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
Ok let’s face it, the KMC rules are confusing and full of contradictions and confusion over the rules is one of the primary sources of bickering on the forum. Now I’ve heard that the rules are awaiting a revamp pending a review, so I figured it would be a good idea for people to go ahead and put forth their opinions to aid in the effort. If anyone has any suggestions on how the rules should be rewritten or anything like that then here’s the place to do it. Just be sure not to let any particular issue become personal. This isn’t a thread for finger pointing or anything like that, it’s sole purpose is to help the forum reach some kind of accord on the debating standards and practices of the forum as a whole so I’ll ask that all input be geared towards that effect.

The way I see it, these are the entries that most need to be discussed/clarified…

"The "No PIS" Rule

PIS = Plot Induced Stupidity

At times, for the sake of the plot, characters that are immensely more powerful than their opponent will "job" to carry on the plot of the story, even though the characters powers and history would clearly show that they are more than capable of destroying their opponent. For this reason we have a No PIS Rule. This rule prohibits the use of such instances of PIS from being used as evidence in debates."

"Full Capacity
It is assumed that each contestant will fight to his/her best ability, but still within the character's personality, unless specified otherwise. That means they will use any powers at their disposal. For example, even though The Flash doesn't clock each of his own opponents in the first millisecond in his own comic, it is assumed that is a viable tactic on this board since it is a proven fact that he possesses that level of speed.
It is also assumed that the characters fight at their optimum levels of ability - not explicitly weakened or unusually powered up for those who have variable power levels"

"No Mentioning Events of PIS
Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.

Character Induced Stupidity, or CIS, on the other hand, refers to any natural mental limitations that characters impose upon themselves and reduce their ability to use their own skills and powers effectively. Unlike PIS, CIS does not occur because the plot requires it, but because the character is genuinely that dumb. Examples of the CIS-afflicted include characters such as Rhino or Jar Jar Binks. Events of CIS are not exempt from debates."



So what do these particular rules mean to everybody? What qualifies as PIS(which isn’t allowed) and what qualifies as CIS(which is)? In my mind they seems to suggest that a characters range of valid arracks won’t be penalized for their frequency of use, but the magnitude of those attacks will be dependant on what the character routinely demonstrates to be “in character” for their personality. And just so everyone understands what I’m talking about, here’s how I see my interpretation affecting some of the more popular tactics here on KMC…

Speedblitz - Speedblitzing sucks plain and simple, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not a useful and valid tactic in combat. As long as someone’s shown it to be in their personality to speed blitz(by actually doing so) I have no problem giving them the win because of it.

On the flip side though, fans of the speed blitz need to realize that it’s rarely “in character” for heroes to hit both as hard and as fast as they possibly can because they‘re just that, heroes. You want to know why you’ve never seen a light speed blitz from Supes or a thousand IMP’s from Flash… because they INTENTIONALLY limit their own abilities(if they‘re even capable of doing so in the first place). And intentional limitations fall under the CIS category.

Godblast/Godwave/Blackbolt’s scream/etc .- OHKO powers are powerful and universally “in character” for use, but they’re also extremely “out of character” for a character(especially a hero) to use unless he/she absolutely HAS to. I only see uber attacks like these factoring into a standard fight if their respective wielder has what it takes to last long enough in the fight to decide they have to use it, and it shouldn‘t be considered an option at all against another hero unless it‘s been used against heroes in the past(an unwillingness to kill another superhero falls under the category of CIS in my book).

BFR - For characters who don’t like to fight, BFR is normally a perfectly acceptable tactic. But people need to keep in mind that the subject’s destination will be determined by the user’s personality. That means that while it’s perfectly acceptable for Surfer to teleport an opponent to some other point in space where he'll be relatively unharmed, he’s not likely to BFR him to the far future or into the middle of a star or blackhole unless he’s facing off against a truly evil villain and there’s no other way for him to win. Killing via BFR is no different than killing directly and if one is out of character for a hero the other probably is to.




Another thing that needs to be discussed is the way the term “PIS” is used to describe things that it in no way applies to. Good examples of this would be things like ”Wolverine shouldn’t be able to take a punch from *insert character* and him doing so is total PIS” or “Wolverine shouldn’t be able to cut *insert character* because he’s not strong enough“. Neither of those things qualifies as PIS because PIS refers to a character “forgetting” about their own powers/abilities to make the fight drag out for longer than it should and both of those examples refer to “high showings“ of characters in relation to their other appearances. There used to be another forum rule that was in many ways similar to PIS called SvFL that covered this kind of thing…

“What is the Spiderman vs. Firelord exemption?
Spiderman vs. Firelord, or SvFL, is a shorthand that refers to any time when a character performs a feat that their powers and skills should be blatantly insufficient for, and is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career, as well as the character's opponents' established showings. In statistical terms, it is an outlier, something that is radically beyond the character's established capabilities. For example, Spiderman defeating a herald of Galactus is a case of the SvFL exemption; however, Batman being able to sneak up on Superman is not because he has done so frequently under different writers.
For standard CBR fights, feats considered to fall under the SvFL exemption are not valid. Likewise, examples of writing which go against firmly set canon are also ignored. For example, in Larry Hama's run of Batman and Grell's run of Iron Man, both characters were out of character and did things very much against established canon; therefore those runs are disregarded.”


But as you can clearly see, unlike PIS SvFL IS dictated by consistency of occurrence. That means that as long as Wolverine can consistently takes punches from cl100+ and cuts every character he comes across, both are acceptable even if the SvFL rule is in effect(and it‘s not even in the rules anymore).



If I’m interpreting these all of these rules correctly, then I honestly see no need for an actual change in them. We might need to expand on them to clarify some of the more subtle points but beyond that I don’t see anything wrong with them. What we really need to work on, is holding all characters to the same standards because we have entirely too many characters who are rules unto themselves around here. We can’t say that Supes speed blitzes 10/10 but Surfer hardly ever BFR’s(or vice versa). We can’t say that it’s ok for Thor to pull a Godblast but WW’s Godwave is BS. We need to set some concrete standards on debating practices because as this point it seems like half of the debates are going on at CBR and half of them are going on at Herochat.




So does anyone else have any thoughts on what(if anything) needs to be done to the forum rules, or any other interpretations of the rules as they currently stand?


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:11 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Darth cont.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
You know what might help? Scrapping terms like PIS and CIS in favor of new ones. The terms PIS and CIS both originated at CBR if I'm not mistaken and they're actually meant to apply to that kind of debating. This of course leads to all kinds of confusion(especially to visitors from other boards) because the terms aren't really applied correctly even in those rare instances in which most of us agree on them.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
I think we should make a rule that specifically covers misrepresenting a scans or taking them out of context. Accidents happen from time to time(I've made them myself), but if someone KNOWS they're passing off bogus info I think it should at least rate a warning.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
Barring that, we need stricter policies in regards to supporting your case with evidence for those posters who have a tendency to point others to respect threads or cite feats and abilities for characters rather than scans on the grounds of the feat/ability being "common knowledge that everyone should know". All to often I've looked into "common knowledge" only to discover that's actually a common misconception brought about by a misrepresented source or outright speculation.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
In regards to my earlier thought and Smurph's PM to Bada...

What about replacing the terms PIS and CIS with WIS, which would stand for "Writer induced stupidity". PIS and CIS are very subjective and a large chunk of many debates is wasting on which category something falls into. WIS would be admissible unless otherwise stipulated by the thread starter and it would encompass the "dumb" way characters are written(not BFRing, speedblitzing, etc.) as well as logical extensions of abilities that are never actually seen on panel(like Wonder Woman or Surfer blitzing at lightspeed in combat). Then we'd debate by comics for the most part but if someone wants an "all out at max power" thread all they'd have to do is tack on a "No WIS" stipulation and the thread would effectively go into CBR mode. Just a thought...
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
Hey here's an idea, how about something like a Faq for debating. It could give a basic rundown on the ever shifting Burden of Proof in a debate and cover some of the "poor debating tactics" that's we often see employed by those who don't know any better.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by darthgoober
I wanted to use a different example because it seems like the only thing I talk about nowadays but pg put me on the spot so it's all I can think of right now. But I'm not suggesting any kind of limits on the Faq or that my way is necessarily the "right way" so if anyone can come up with anything else feel free to pitch it.


Who's responsibility is it to prove whether or not Character X can successfully speedblitz Character Y?

1. Well first things first, since the speedblitz is being pitched by Character X it's up to the person suggesting the tactic to show proof that Character X has both the ability and inclination(since we're talking about "In Character" fighting) to preform a speedblitz at all.

2. With both of those things established, it falls to the person defending Character Y to show that he has the ability to defend against a speedblitz.

If both Character X and Character Y have evidence to support their case, then things have to become a little more specific to keep the debate moving forward(otherwise people just start arguing in circles). So then it becomes...

3. What quantifiable speed feats does Character X have that give an idea as to his max speedblitzing speed(since his opponents ability to defend against a "generic" speed has been established).

4. What quantifiable speed feats does Character Y have that give an idea as to his ability to defend against "high speed attacks"(since his opponents ability to preform more than a "generic speedblitz" has been established).

If Character X's quantified feats are superior to Character Y's quantified feats then there's definite evidence to suggest that the tactic can be preformed successfully so the debate should move on to what the effect of the blitz will be on Character Y. If not, then there's no evidence to support the initial claim so it should be dropped in favor of other tactics.

And that's it, one very simple procedure and a 200 page circular debate becomes a 1 page debate. No one has to change their opinion as to whether or not the tactic will be successful, they just have to concede the point when there's no evidence to support their opinion. And it's not even any kind of actual change to the rules because it goes right along with the "No biased claims" rule that we already have in place but is often ignored. Just apply it to a couple of common claims that are made(one-shotting, weakness exploitation, ect.) for the Faq and it'll give a good idea to all as to who should be providing what in any particular situation.

I know that many topics/tactics are very subjective and because of that are hesitant to support adding guidelines to the debates themselves, but we've got more than enough intelligent members to cover the basics of a debate. I mean Digi and leo are school teachers for God's sake, I'm pretty sure they can successfully come up with some impartial guidelines that will save tons of time all around.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:12 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Mindship
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mindship
This thread was inspired by recent, as well as past, debates involving what a given character is capable of.

In debates, on-panel feats are of obvious value in pointing out what a character can do. The only real drawback is the posting of PIS moments, which can be a tough call.

On the other hand: there are some characters -- generally those with open powersets -- where inferring abilities never actually shown (or rarely shown) makes sense when logically reasoned from other (more-consistent) on-panel feats.

Should inferred abilities be allowed in debates? Should feats be restricted to those purely on-panel? And if so, what is the criteria for judging whether something is PIS or not? Doesn't this imply a certain amount of inferential reasoning to weed out PIS (ie, is it not a subjective call)? And if this type of inferential reasoning is allowed, then why not such reasoning for inferring unseen/rarely seen abilities, as long as they are logically deduced?

I'm curious where most members stand.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Mindship
All else being equal, I would agree. Eg, Spider-Man stating Sentry stalemated Galactus doesn't equal Sentry actually doing it. On the other hand, if Sentry had stalemated, say, Aegis and Tenegrous, then it would be more logical to assume that Spider-Man's statement would be somewhat accurate.

But I'm talking more about something like this: currently in the Wonder Woman vs Silver Surfer in h2h thread, there seems to be this controversy: WW has demonstrated time and time again her incredible hand speed at blocking multi-vector, high-speed attacks. Having demonstrated such sensorimotor fleetness, wouldn't it be logical to assume she could strike with equal fleetness, even if this has never/rarely been shown on-panel? Another example would be the Surfer, with the now famous flightspeed = or doesn't = combatspeed argument (I won't repeat it here; we all know the points and counterpoints raised).

And what about the Really Famous Panther-SS Armbar, or the Most Famous Of All, Batkick (against Hulk, against Cap Marvel)? These are on-panel feats, yet most of us (I think) have decided these are PIS. Why? What reasoning applies? Much of it seems inferential, based on what we know of these characters and their powersets.

When is inferential reasoning on what a character can do (or shouldn't be able to do) legit? Is an on-panel feat a necessary starting point, or can logic, at times, fill in the gaps (just as logic, at times, determines what is or isn't PIS)?


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:12 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Smurph
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Cavalier
Meh. I think what we should be doing is adding a whole new section to break down every PIS/CIS/feat related rule.

I mean, the purely mechanical ones are fine. But it's each that requires an element of subjectivity that we need to be defining and adding to.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Cavalier
Meh. I don't particularly like "Fighting to the best of their abilities" either, because that all too often undermines CIS.

Spider-Man fighting to the best of his ability against Captain America >> CIS-infliced Spidey vs. Cap

As demonstrated on panel.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Cavalier
We could try, but it'd be quite a feat to attempt, considering how often we use the terms PIS and CIS.

As for Flash, I'd actually title it under CIS... I think that he's only going to use top speed against characters that can match it, and otherwise will still go fast, but perhaps not super fast... it's really not representative of the characters to assume that they'll do something which we know would never be written.

Looking at it like this also circumvents "speedblitz" arguments.

quote:

Cavalier wrote on Sep 30th, 2008 10:51 PM:
I know we don't have the thread open anymore, so I thought I'd PM you.

What if we started with a new term that encompasses what we're using CIS for?

CIS stands for Character Induced Stupidity, right? But Flash not speedblitzing each match isn't him being stupid, it has to be that way for the plot.

So it's technically PIS, but PIS carries with it such a negative connotation that everybody ignores it, which leads to Flash speedblitzing each match, which is unrealistic.

I propose a term that has to do something with "Comic Mechanics" or "Character Mechanics" (I took it from Game Mechanics from the Games Vs)

Just to mean that there are some ways that characters just don't fight.

They don't kill the villain, they don't always BFR if they can, they don't speedblitz, because the mechanics of comics dictate that this would lead for short lived villains, or shorter comics, which makes less money.

Just a thought...


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:12 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Digi
quote: (post)
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul.

Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist.

I think goober's clarifications are a good start. They leave a lot less gray area about rule interpretation.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Flash's bad showings are more PIS than anything. Ending things in picoseconds would make for tough writing. So even with CIS, he can usually be argued at top speeds.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by DigiMark007
That's not quite the issue mb, though you've got the starting point there. Few, if any, have a problem with your first type. For the second type (and I won't use examples, for fear of starting a Surfer scan war), the problem isn't so much whether it should be allowed or not, but whether his power set actually infers it. Everyone's ok with inferring when they agree on the inference, but not when it becomes harder to logically deduce without possible doubt.

We can't say "yes, that's allowed" or "no it isn't" because we don't have a definitive stance on the point, nor can we draw a clear line as to what is and isn't acceptable. Thus the problem. It's not really rule-able, and is possibly something we shouldn't be trying to standardize in the first place.

...

Anyway, see my post above for a suggestion on CIS vs. power sets only. It's probably the one thing I'll have a clear opinion on here.

This also relates to it:


Agreed.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Here's a potential solution for one of the problems: just like prep, where it is assumed "no prep" unless the thread-starter specifies, we could have one way be the default unless specified.

Example: Superman vs. Anyone. We could make it that Supes fights to the full extent of his abilities, CIS turned off, as the default. Then the thread starter could specify that character traits, not just power sets, are to be counted, which would override the default setting.

Or the reverse, if we think the majority should include CIS factors like "boyscout mode" and such, and should only be "power sets only" or "bloodlust" when specified by the thread-starter.

Of course, this could easily lead to things like CBR Surfer (if you know about it, you know), but would also make an objective criteria for debating.

....

As for Inferred ability vs. on-panel ability, I'm still thinking about it.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:13 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Ultimatethor
quote: (post)
Originally posted by ultimatethor
Ok, this thread is God sent. Some issues badly need to be clarified . First of all i want to ask about the viability of people arguing tactics that a character has never shown on panel. In numerous threads i have actively argued against people trying to use inference over on panel showings. This is because i believe that the actual comics we are arguing should be the supreme evidence in our debates. So the questions is

" Can we infer powers for a character even if they have consistently failed to do such on panel?"
quote: (post)
Originally posted by ultimatethor
Exactly. The comics we are debating should be the supreme evidence used barring PIS instances. No form of inference can replace that. This especially occurs when we see people( i wont name anyone but the culprits are obvious) trying to argue tactics for a character which they should technically be able to do but have never actually shown it to be within their abilities in that particular context. Speed especially is an issue which i think should definitely be based on their shoings in comics and not inference.

Like in the recent wonderwomanvs Ss h2h thread. There were many claims that Wondy is so fast that SS wont be able to land a hit on her. Meanwhile nobody even came close to providng a credible scan showing her displaying this sort of speed in a context similar to how she would be fighting SS. HOw then can it be claimed that she will be capable of something which she has been incapable of in comics? At best would it not be highly out of character?

Note the difference between this and arguments that request for exact replications of the situation. For instance, if i want to determine whther thanos can withstand a ram from superman, I dont need to receive a scan of thanos resisting the exact same type of ram. What i do need however is thanos resisting a physical attack that generates equal or more force than supermans ram.

Also the whole "CIS" and "fight to the best of their ability" part of the rule needs to be clearly defined. Because they directly contradict each other. For instance alot of people use the superman speedblitz tactic alot for an instant win, and though it is within his abilities his CIS would cause him NOT to use it as an opening tactic.

On the other hand though, I agree with those ho say that u cant actually tell people how to debate. The different perspectives that people bring in are what makes the forum interesting. But there are definitely some issues that i think need to be definitvely addressed
quote: (post)
Originally posted by ultimatethor
I think we need to create a balance between how they debate on hero chat and how they debate on CBR. Hence, i think that a character fighting "in character" should maintain his the mindset he has in the comics unless stated by the threadstarter. However we shouldnt just take on panel showings without analyzing them and the context which they occurred.(i.e Hulk beat thor so he can beat superman etc)


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:13 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Fangirl
quote: (post)
Originally posted by fangirl101
I dont' like people assuming a character can do something because they think it's in the characters power set. And I don't like people requiring someone prove a negative when they haven't proven the opposite. For instance, people who are asking us to prove that surfer loses his speed while off the board. That is ridiculous. Why wont' they just prove that he keeps it?
quote: (post)
Originally posted by fangirl101
So let's talk about comics and the sense of time and how they are portrayed. Take for instance Gladiator destroying a planet or planetoid with three punches. was it really three? Or were the panels limited in the fact that it's a comic and they usually draw in panels for motion effect. Was it a planet? How big was it? If someone is fighting at Superspeed and you dont' see the action, are we to assume they didnt' throw any punches becuz it's not expliticly shown? I keep hearing about the Silver Surfer's infinite Amp abiblity but I've never seen it. Should that even be allowed to be mentioned in a forum debate?
quote: (post)
Originally posted by fangirl101
Ok. So we gotta look at some things in general about comics.

They aren't cameras. It's panel. Which means we really don't see all of the action.

Hyperbole on panel statements without collaborative evidence in said comic or in previous comics may need to be outlawed. For instance transmangor and the omnipotent votronix destroyed countless moons in thier fight. And yet after the fight we see the moons all in tact with no explaination for how they got put back that way.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by fangirl101
Rules That I believe should be enforced.

1. Absolutely no prep feats should be allowed ever unless given by the thread starter.
2. No Real world or 4th wall writers are Gods Bull should be allowed to be brought up on a COMICS forum.
3. Speed blitz should only be realistic if the characters have myriad uses of Superspeed. I need to see super fast hands, Feat, spinning, flight etc. Not just super fast reaction times and flight.
4. No arm bar shit.
5. I believe we should have a sliding effect where we say the last 10 or 15 years worth of feats count. That leaves out crappy hyperbole and silly shit like PC superman sneezing out stars and Thor and Herculese rocking the planet out of orbit with no actual evidence that they did. It also leaves out shit that doesn't go with the current status quo.
6. Repeated multiple scans of the same thing over and over should be banned.
7. Characters with Unlimted ampming abilities should be limited to what they have done on panel. I get sick of this cosmic God can amp his power. But never does. This cosmic guy can amp his strength. But never does. Blah blah.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:13 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Quan
quote: (post)
Originally posted by quanchi112
Agreed. I just looked through some of these posts and I agree with this post. Goober has some good points as well. Ill look through this later more and actually weigh in later but I just wanted to state something now thats on my mind.

Ill give you a link here to a cbr thread. Now I went there after my battlezone with nver and just recently have returned. This is what cannot happen imo. Take a look see and read for yourself.

http://forums.comicbookresources.co...ad.php?t=239606

Now, Id like anyone who is interested in this to take a quick read through this. Basically,Gladiator wins due to his speed and their minds are already made up. They use pis and such to pretty much favor certain characters and argue powerset vs powerset which is pretty boring to say the least. I like herochat's approach because we argue whats in character. Gladiator can use his superspeed sure,but saying he beats anyone without it 10 of 10 is completely and utterly ridiculous especially when Gladiator has never defeated him inside a comic book. Kmc can never turn into cbr.

Here is a pm I received shortly after the mod closed this down for further review. Its from come cbrer who I dont even know. Ill leave his name out of it,but Id like you to see what he wrote.

You can't win with them. They just compare powersets and nothing else. The term "PIS" will be the bane of your existance. If I were you I'd just let it go. The rest of the boards on this site rock, but the rumbles boards...eh.. people outside of that board have a bad opinion about it for a reason.

Im just throwing this in there so we dont become more like cbr.
quote: (post)
Originally posted by quanchi112
I personally think we should leave this up to the posters. To create rules to limit one's argument no matter how radical it is will kill the fun on kmc. Posters will always get pissed and overheated at one another(just like Rulk) no matter what the rules are.

I agree if we are going to change it then we have to find something in the middle of herochat and cbr although I personally love herochat's way of debating. Its all up to the poster and you cant hide behind pis or use it at your convenience like some seem to do here. Thats how they argue things on cbr and use pis all the time. Most psoters complain about how unfair it is over there as I pointed out earlier.

I think pis and cis should be eliminated altogether. If someone wants to be a dope and argue spiderman beats firelord then school the shit out of them. But rarely in comics does something this awful happen. Granted it does and will continue but how often does a wolverine defeat the juggernaut straight up without a plot device.

Rely on your own unique arguing skills and prove your points however you will. Lets not restrict or try to restrict someone's creativity based on the rules. This is meant to have fun and lets start having fun again.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:14 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
fangirl101
Restricted

Gender: Unspecified
Location: In My Panties.

Account Restricted

Scans. Scans. Scans.
Or
Issue Numbers.
Or
Examples.

All of this IMO is for the birds.

And no Real world stuff in comics debates. This is a comics forum.


__________________

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:14 AM
fangirl101 is currently offline Click here to Send fangirl101 a Private Message Find more posts by fangirl101 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Avlon
quote: (post)
Originally posted by Avlon
My random scribble/notes:

Part of the issue is also that in general people want to make sequential sense of a medium in which is purely for entertainment. Sure in the last 10-15 years things have been getting better in terms of story cohesion, but the fact it that with multiple titles, writers, and simple time there will never be an truly standard version of a character. Power levels can vary per title, per era or even per issue.

People will always pick and choose what they want to believe, whether it's the comics forum or their personal life. As long as a logical argument can be made, it's fair game.

One particular issue is open ended power sets. If it isn't shown, then it shouldn't be implied that it can be done. One particular issue is with energy based characters. Unless that character is shown with 100% success rate at easily controlling every form of energy thrown at them, then it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Green Lantern's don't share feats despite having the same base power set, neither should other energy based characters.

Feats where help is required should also be something that is looked at. For example, a particular poster argued that Quasar can absorb practically any energy easily...an example was named. However, the poster knowingly forgot to mention the outside assistance in that particular example. Thus the example falls into a separate category since it's not viable for the character to perform on their own.

Speedblitz is another one. Traveling vs battle speed is a hot topic a lot of the time. My proposal:

Superspeed isn't limited to traveling or fighting. One way to quantify it is "it something that the character uses often in a myriad of ways?"

For example. Both Flash and Captain America will be shown to dodge lasers as a feat. However, Flash will also be seen vibrating his hands to make fires, changing clothes before someone can blink, mentally calculating complex scenarios at faster than supercomputer speeds ect. We know Flash is far faster because he can do anything at superhuman speeds and while Cap is fast/skilled, he can't duplicate any of flash's other feats in any way.

Is it an inherent ability or is it something that looks cool on panel? Captain Cold may occasionally hit the flash but is that reason to believe that the captain has FTL reflexes?

One time events should be taken with a grain of salt for characters that have a long history. I see some far out stuff from the 70's being used in debates sometimes that is hilarious and that probably will never be duplicated again since the suspension of disbelief would never fly now. Unless these things are at least shown a couple of times, then it shouldn't be a used as undeniable proof.

For now, I'll leave my "notes" as is and hopefully it will makes sense to most of you. Sleep is starting to call me.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:14 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Badabing
Karen

Gender: Male
Location: Looking for the manager

Moderator

Jinzin
quote:

jinzin wrote on Sep 28th, 2008 02:17 PM:
Hmmmmm... Well I think you already know what I think about this subject.

It's my personal conviction that on panel feats should always take precidence over what people think a character should be capible of doing.

Inferred power estimation, or basing a matchup off powersets alone, while making things less complicated in debating these fights also is not an accurate presentation of character portrayel.

Classic versions of Hulk might have the powerset to beat on the Avengers but if he doesn't have the brains to back that powerset up, then it brings into question the outcome of the fight.

I mean in all seriousness by powersets alone Rhino "should" be able to curb Spiderman 10 times out of 10. Rhino's strong enough to rip through his webbing, he does have superhuman amounts of speed and stamina, his body is super durable, and his armor is so durable that there was a time where it was questionable as to what really could even penetrate it.... Even though Spiderman's superhumanly fast, agile and has a Spidersense, he "shouldn't" be able to beat a fast, impenitrible street fighter who can go rounds with Hulk.... but you, I, and every other member on this forum knows that Rhino>Spiderman is just plain nonsense.

Then we also have the issue of powers and abilities that are clearly represented by consistent comics but never attributed to characters outright. For instance, Captain America's superhuman durability. It's clearly up there with even Spiderman foes, we seen instance upon instance of him taking superhuman punishment only to continue to outperform strict superhumans but based on established and documented powersets alone, there's never been one mention of such an attribute.

Of course there's going to be issues with what people regard as PIS but that's were I've ALWAYS been of the opinion that consistency is EVERYTHING.
How many likewise instances of "PIS" (similar feats) has this happened?
Did the character perform similarly?
Did he not?
If the character has 1 extremely impressive feat of dodging something, punching through something etc etc, then how do his other feats stack up to it? Do they make a good case for it? Do they show the opposite?

Consistency is the reason I'm under the impression that Wolverine can take class 100 shots in a fight without going down to a one shot more often than not. It's the reason why I think Spiderman's nearly impossible to shoot, but easy to hit if your a good fighter.
It's why I think Frank Castle can go rounds with tons of supers and make a good show of it.... and speaking of which... where does that leave street levels? If we were to go off of powersets alone, guys like Daredevil, Batman, Punisher and Bullseye would never have a chance in 1 on 1 against superhumans, hell, they may have little chance against something as simple as a lion or an attack dog. erm
For those guys, going off powersets alone reduces their entire career into a practical non factor; they "shouldn't" even be able to beat a group of armed thugs.
Even Daredevil with his radar sense.. For the time that it takes the brain to process the sense of touch (which is basically what that is to him) he wouldn't have enough time to even react to a bullet coming at him much less dodge the thing.

Does it make any sense to ignore a character's entire career based on legitimate powersets though? Could we even consider that to be the same character at that point? I certainly don't think so.

When it comes to Abstracts, Celestials, and Heralds inferred powers are probably easier to apply since you can't see the limits to what they can do as clearly as you can with streeters even by comic standards, but on panel feats still take precedence over what we might assume them to be capible of. As such I'd never think Tyrant to be so dominant over Thanos or such a threat to Galactus based on their inferred power but their fights tell a different story.


So basically I think comic evidence should be the most suitable evidence for comic book debates. They should be based around the STANDARD showings of a character and not the extreme highs or the exteme lows... This means that if a character does something that seems ridiculous or extreme to us, but does it multiples of times that the characterization has been presented as such and is considered capible of doing that thing, or vice versa.

If people want to debate based off powersets alone they should be able to do so in marked threads as not to cause confusion.

As for changing rules... I don't know... PIS is very subjective, has to be applied on a case by case basis, and most people call PIS on something simply out of distaste for it and not an actual reason so it's hard to make up a rule based around subjectivity..... perhaps a position should be established for each thread to have at least 2 judges who can decide if something is PIS or not.... I know that's pretty much impossible due to the sheer overwhelming defections towards PIS as well as the amount of threads out daily but it's also the only real way to keep everyone on the same page, otherwise you just have people interpreting rules and panels as they see fit if not flat out ignoring them.... as they do already.

When it comes down to it, people are always going to have problems with other people and characters on this site, it's a given. That's simply the nature of the beast when it comes to arguing over favorites, and real debating needs real judges, refs, etc to make calls, as does any game for non partison consolidation of the outcome.
But, since that's outside the scope of our ability to provide, and these boards are supposed to be for fun, then I re-affirm my thoughts already stated...

Consistent/standard on panel evidence is what should be considered more than anything else unless it's proven otherwise (not a standard etc). Anyone who wants to debate a character based on abilities alone should do so in specially marked threads. And unless you can find a way to mark judges for every debate, then we should probably just leave the rules alone.

I don't know if this helps at all, I hope it does, sorry if it doesn't and I hope everything else in life is going well for you friend.


__________________



You've just been Trump'd!

Official pimp of Steverules

Sig by Steve Rules

Old Post Nov 4th, 2008 04:14 AM
Badabing is currently offline Click here to Send Badabing a Private Message Find more posts by Badabing Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
darthgoober
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Purgatory

quote: (post)
Originally posted by fangirl101
Scans. Scans. Scans.
Or
Issue Numbers.
Or
Examples.

All of this IMO is for the birds.

And no Real world stuff in comics debates. This is a comics forum.

Co-Sign on the "real world" part, ESPECIALLY in regards to what "shouldn't be possible" for comic book characters. Just because people in the real world can't scrounge up the free time to learn as many martial Martial Arts styles as Batman or Gamora doesn't mean that we should say that neither character actually knows all those styles and just because a real person can't take a full on punch from a cl 10 doesn't mean that it's impossible for Captain America.


__________________

Last edited by darthgoober on Nov 15th, 2008 at 02:23 AM

Old Post Nov 15th, 2008 02:19 AM
darthgoober is currently offline Click here to Send darthgoober a Private Message Find more posts by darthgoober Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 11:46 AM.
  Last Thread   Next Thread

Home » Comic Book Forums » Comic Book 'Versus' Forum » Debating discussion thread.

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.