If that is what you think. But the arguments being presented are indicative of a trend. If it weren't a trend, then we wouldn't be here in this thread now would?
And Upset about specific Characters? What the hell.
And I didn't want to rant about specifics of anything. The way I presented them at first was very vague. Digi brought it up that I shouldn't be defensive. The arguments could be applied to a many a character.
That was goober, but fair enough. Just know that where ambiguities exist in interpretation, it's almost impossible to make a rule on it without squelching the very debate process that the forum is for.
No danger of that happening under the proposed rule change. Things that CIS and "in character" are the things that are being promoted, so the fact that Supes holds back will HAVE to be taken into consideration and held against him.
No one says that Surfer has an infinite amping capacity with any degree of seriousness. But removing his(or anyone else's) ability to amp his strength to a virtually unlimited degree(the proper phrasing of the ability) just because you don't like it will only lead to trouble because it's not holding true to the character being discussed. You're talking about putting our own preferences over the characters established abilities and that's wrong IMO.
And Thanos has amping abilities of his own and a higher base than Surfer so citing their confrontations as proof that he can't doesn't hold up.
I'd have to see the actual instance in question to accurately speak on it, but if it's as you say and was never actually depicted on panel in any way shape or form then I'd be inclined to agree with you.
If he's portrayed as being the writers, then how else are we to view him?
I'd have to examine the Supes feat in question again to give my two cents on it(since it's been a while since I've seen it), but assuming things that aren't actually depicted in any way, shape, or form just because they're logical to you is a big "No No" IMO.
I agree. But we also shouldn't be asked to disprove baseless claims...ever.
I didn't act like anything, I said that if you're talking about needless spam then I agree, but if you're talking about scans that are being dodged/ignored because they're not "good enough" for the opposition then I disagree.
Dude settle down, you're not on trial here. I was just seeking a better understanding of what you were talking about so there wouldn't be any needless arguing due to a misunderstanding. If you don't want to contribute then feel free to exit the thread, but don't expect me to keep my opinion to myself about what you post in a discussion thread about what needs to be changed. And if you're unwilling to make yourself intentions clear, then you shouldn't get angry if/when someone misinterprets the meaning behind your posts.
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Oct 18th, 2008 at 05:29 AM
[QUOTE=11187688]Originally posted by darthgoober No danger of that happening under the proposed rule change. Things that CIS and "in character" are the things that are being promoted, so the fact that Supes holds back will HAVE to be taken into consideration.
I've read a lot of Silver Surfer, And Don't remember him Amping his strength. I've seen him, just like thanos, use energy to amp thier strikes. Xman has done something similiar with his TK powers.
He's being portrayed as a character in a comic. Who's name is mentioned on panel. And who's avatar has been shown on panel. Even if the avatar is never shown, the very fact that his name is mentioned on panel makes it a comic adaptation.
let's not do this again Mmkay. FanGIRL. Female. Woman.
Did you mean to say something here or was it something like a typing error?
Well if that's your only problem with it then you should have said so, because there are scans floating around that specifically state that Surfer can amp his strength to a virtually unlimited degree. Remind me next time it comes up in an appropriate thread and I'll post one for you or just visit Surfer's respect thread to see it(I'm trying to avoid derailing this thread).
But if the comic adaption is something that is being written as the person writing and has control over the story, then how else are we supposed to view him and still hold true to the character?
Just because I didn't respond to it didn't mean I ignored it. There just wasn't anything to say behind it. That sometimes happens you know.
As for TOAA, It is a character, that writes and draws the marvel u. No different than the creator of DCU who creates and makes all the rules. Even how the characters would act. Same idea. Different interpretation. Both are still fictional characters and fictional Ideas.
And I don't want to see a panel of What surfer is said to be able to do. I want to see him actually amping his PHYSICAL strength to a near unlimted degree with no outside energy absorbtion.
I'm really not understanding this. I'm not saying anything about DC, I'm saying that if TOAA is portrayed as the guy writing a comic then that's what he is.
And how are you supposed to depict someone amping their strength to a virtually unlimited degree exactly? It'd be a lot like saying you want proof that GL's ring can create virtually anything via him creating virtually everything on panel. Open ended powers/power sets can't be judged that way.
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Oct 18th, 2008 at 06:01 AM
TOAA by virtue of the name is a comic book character. Thus when it hits the paper, it is a comic character. It's a character that draws and writes the MU.
And I'm saying that Virtually means nothing with out actual proof. A description of said powers alone holds no weight if no feat is shown to back it up. Case in point. the New magog is said to be as strong as KC superman, but have as much power as Alan Scott's flame. Until he uses said powers to back up those claims, I can't go by that statement alone.
So we should assume that GL's are each limited to creating constructs and preforming feats that they've been depicted as creating on-panel then and ignore their basic powerset? And Takion should only be credited with manipulating the exact forms of energy that he was depicted as manipulating. And time travelers and teleporters are only capable of traveling to periods/places that they've went to in the past?
We should assume that a GL who has never made any complex constructs no matter thier power set, wont' be doing so in a forum fight.
Takion on the other hand, has been shown to manipulate several sources of energy and thus the statement that he can manipulate all energy and has limitless energy manip is believe able. Especially since he's the walking source.
Time travel may or may not be the same. maybe they can travel only so far in time. That would have to be done by a case study of the character.
As for Surfer, All I ask, is where is the feats that show he can amp his physical stats so high.
But should they be limited to what they've actually created or not? You can't cap one open ended ability unless you cap ALL open ended abilities if you want to retain any degree of impartiality. Virtually is virtually, if it gets tossed out then it should be tossed out completely.
And Surfer's stood toe to toe with many people of varying levels of strength. If Surfer's and other amper's abilities are limited to what's been shown, then so should everybody elses.
Case by case examples aren't what you've been talking about, you've been talking about completely neutering a characters given abilities at amping.
You mean like trading punches with someone who had the strength of Gladiator w/Enigma Force?
Anyway we're going off topic and getting into specific character debates that are more appropriate to threads.
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Oct 18th, 2008 at 06:33 AM
It seems that I wasted my time. Same circular arguments even though I specifically stated in the opening post this thread isn't for debating. I'm guessing aside from fanboys and trolls and adhering to current rules, reading the opening post of threads and understanding the stipulations of that thread is the main problem.
Unless it's shown someone amping themselves to infinity, it didn't happen. Same with Hulk's limitless strength. We can only go by what's been shown in the comic, not hyperbole.
That's my bad Bada. I have difficulty speaking in gerneral without getting lost in the specifics. Greater effort will be put into avoiding it in the future.
And I agree about "infinite strength" as the term is ridiculous(which is why no one uses it seriously), but are talking about putting a cap on Hulk's very ability to increase his strength with anger as the match goes on(like he'll never under any circumstances be angrier/stronger than he was during WWH, regardless of thread stipulations or match length) or saying that he shouldn't be considered to have infinite strength at the start of the match?
__________________
Last edited by darthgoober on Oct 18th, 2008 at 06:28 PM
Meh... I don't see why we need to put a cap on that, as it can be argued by anybody in the thread that Hulk wouldn't grow angrier than WWH levels, even if infinite time passed.
And we already do argue that Hulk has a base strength level (varies based on incarnation of Hulk)
Along a similar train of thought, what about Sundipped Supes? Are we limiting his abilities to the level they were shown at after a couple of minutes even if the battleground is set inside the sun or the opening post gives him a week long sundip, or is the standard yo be that he can't be sundipped in threads for longer than has appeared on panel?
A Week Long Sun amp means nothing unless we know the rate in which he processes a sun amp. We don't know if he'll be hundreds of times more powerful, thousands, millions.
What else can we do. Unless someone is going to take the time to figure out out much more powerful he was at OWAW and then do the math to figure out how powerful he would be in a week. And We dont' know if he gets a metric rate of increase or a Geo-metric rate.
KMC Community Forums
Oct 18th, 2008 04:55 AM
Official pimp of Steverules 
