Fantastic Four vs X-Men

Let me put this whole CIS/PIS/Morals thing to bed.

If Torch fought Spidey and wanted to kill him, it'd be over in seconds wouldn't it? Yes it would. We all know, we all agree.

The reason he doesn't kill in the comics isn't because he's standing there going "Ahh man, can't do it, morally." It's because Marvel aren't going to kill off Spider-Man are they? If Torch wanted to, he would and could. The only reason he doesn't is because the writers don't want their characters killed off. So they CREATE the morals as an excuse.

Here, it doesn't apply. Because that element of their character doesn't apply. Because sales and concerns don't apply.

-AC

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
"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."

"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 picosecond 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."

Problem is, likewise the xmen and the ff have had their lives threatened, and haven't resorted to killing.

How many times has spiderman had his life threatened, and not resorted to killing.

Thats the rules, it sucks, but oh well.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
That's off logic though. Everyone 'might not' everything.

I can understand your point, in that there is no reason to assume someone would have something that there is no reason for them to have. I just think that is unfair in this case. At least to the extent that the man shouldn't be removed the luxury of trying to come up with something.

Now, actually going to bed.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, they're shit.

Odd, I thought we covered this. . .

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Who cares? If you do Torch Vs Spidey. Torch would kill him. Simple. It doesn't mean you can't create another Spidey thread.

Oddly enough I've argued Torch beating Spiderman in a three x-men and spiderman versus the FF. . . and that time I was completely oon the FF's side. . . of course the opponents were different.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And I'm saying you're wrong. In the comics he wouldn't. These aren't the comics. As I mentioned in my above post.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
This has nothing to do with Hulk.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I've dealt with that whole BS, in-character nonsense in my above post.

-AC

It really doesn't sound like you are trying to understand them. Was I wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt this time?

I should have been cynical about your intent? Because it sure seems that way this time.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let me put this whole CIS/PIS/Morals thing to bed.

If Torch fought Spidey and wanted to kill him, it'd be over in seconds wouldn't it? Yes it would. We all know, we all agree.

The reason he doesn't kill in the comics isn't because he's standing there going "Ahh man, can't do it, morally." It's because Marvel aren't going to kill off Spider-Man are they? If Torch wanted to, he would and could. The only reason he doesn't is because the writers don't want their characters killed off. So they CREATE the morals as an excuse.

Here, it doesn't apply. Because that element of their character doesn't apply. Because sales and concerns don't apply.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let me put this whole CIS/PIS/Morals thing to bed.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If Torch fought Spidey and wanted to kill him, it'd be over in seconds wouldn't it? Yes it would. We all know, we all agree.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The reason he doesn't kill in the comics isn't because he's standing there going "Ahh man, can't do it, morally." It's because Marvel aren't going to kill off Spider-Man are they?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If Torch wanted to, he would and could. The only reason he doesn't is because the writers don't want their characters killed off. So they CREATE the morals as an excuse.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Here, it doesn't apply.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Because that element of their character doesn't apply. Because sales and concerns don't apply.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Why is this a special case?

It's not. I'm saying Reed would try to create something, as he generally does-why deny him this?

I'm not saying the man will build an anti-thesefourxmen machine on the spot, more that it's an intangible that is acceptable. It's part of his character.

It's what he does. It doesn't go against any rule.

It's not really an acceptable intangible unless for no apparent reason Mr Fantastic has access to all his resources on the battlefield... there is no prep.
I thought you were going to sleep.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
It's not. I'm saying Reed would try to create something, as he generally does-why deny him this?

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I'm not saying the man will build an anti-thesefourxmen machine on the spot, more that it's an intangible that is acceptable. It's part of his character.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
It's what he does. It doesn't go against any rule.

Read to learn that this cannot be done by reed:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f77/t308157.html

Originally posted by Creshosk
Someone who abides by the rules (or trys very hard)

I'm serious it's in the rules.

Yeah, the rules are shit though. Realistically. So stop felching them.

Originally posted by Creshosk
So youd rather listen to something that happens the minority of the time because it favors you, rather than the majority of the time because it IS what happens the majority of the time?

No, you misunderstood the point. Again.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Again, Wolverine stabbed and nearly killed the hulk.

But this has been so few times in happeneing that it'd be unrealistic to rely on this to say that Wolverine beat the hulk.

On here, there isn't any laws. It would be the two fighting, with no limits. Wolverine wouldn't last a minute. This is all irrelevant though. Let's get back to F4 Vs X-Men.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Other than to follow the rules?

Forgive me for debating on a forum that hasd rules, and abiding by said rules.

Why though? They're clearly faulty rules made up by someone with no authority over comics characters. Stupid rules. Not because I don't like them, but because they're stupid.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Why didn't hulk kill wolverine in their first encounter when Wolverine was a no name villian?

Because they had plans for him. Stop going off topic to save yourself.

Originally posted by Creshosk
You mean other than breaking (or bending) the KMC Vs rules?

Why should I adhere to bullshit rules? You wanna tie yourself down to unofficial BS CIS/PIS rules, go for it. I don't because they're illogical and faulty. As I've proven.

Originally posted by Creshosk
You mean other than following the rules right?

See above.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Seriously, it doesn't matter how stupid the rule is, a rule is a rule.

See above. I've proven why the "rules" are flawed.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Situational, aka circustantial, aka one time thing, aka a comic book plot device that you were so ready to abbandon just moment ago.

No, situational as in it happened. You're really dense, you know.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Because comic book characters always tell the truth, and are never mistaken.

The question remains, who are you to call a character wrong? To accuse them of being wrong? Sue wasn't boasting without proving it.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Sounds a bit naive don't you think?

I'm not presumptious, nor pretentious, I'm skeptical and cynnical. But I prefer the term realist.

You're anything but realistic. You're a rules nazi, sadly. You're one of those people who like fantasy things but not when it collides with their idea of what should happen.

Originally posted by Creshosk
or why she tought she beat her.

Ok, enough of this crap.

Tell me why you have this holier than thou reason to call Sue Storm a liar? Or wrong. Please.

I don't buy Wolverine standing up to a blow from Namor, he should be sent flying. Yet since "it happened" it has to be accepted, doesn't it?

Even though it only happened once.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Your interpritations are that she proved it. Because you are more willing to accept what she says than I am.

You're calling her wrong. That's the most ridiculous, idiotic tactic I've heard. "She said her powers operate at the speed of thought". "Nah she's wrong."

Originally posted by Creshosk
I'm skeptical of anything any comic book character says in a fight, unless it's happened more often than not.

Then that's your own flawed rationale.

Also, can we stop having mass bulk posts? Creshosk, reply to all of what I've said so I don't have to keep posting please. It's not hard.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let me put this whole CIS/PIS/Morals thing to bed.

If Torch fought Spidey and wanted to kill him, it'd be over in seconds wouldn't it? Yes it would. We all know, we all agree.

The reason he doesn't kill in the comics isn't because he's standing there going "Ahh man, can't do it, morally." It's because Marvel aren't going to kill off Spider-Man are they? If Torch wanted to, he would and could. The only reason he doesn't is because the writers don't want their characters killed off. So they CREATE the morals as an excuse.

Here, it doesn't apply. Because that element of their character doesn't apply. Because sales and concerns don't apply.

-AC

I was explaining that in wolverine vs spiderman, why hulk and namor didn't put logan out the area with a hit.

Or why venom wouldn't kill wolverine.

Its because the comics need to look good, that doesn't apply in a hypothetical debate though.

Its not what HAS happened, its what most likely will happen, given of reasoning of the characters, and what they've consistently done.

Thats PIS, why flash doesn't beat batman in a second is pis, its for comic sales.

Why spiderman doesn't kill people, or the FF is becuase they're heroes, and have MUCH more restraint than guys like wolverine, who are antiheroes, or Dr. Doom.

If someone like doom was in this matchup, I'd understand, but this is the FF, so its not the same thing.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Overall the X-Men have far fewer compunctions about killing than the FF and Spider-Man though.

Originally posted by Creshosk
It's in the rules.

The rules.

IT does go against the rules

Read to learn that this cannot be done by reed:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f77/t308157.html

Point out the rule.

Cut and paste the actual rule.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Point out the rule.

Cut and paste the actual rule.

Originally posted by Tron
Prep time

Neither side receives any notable prep time before the starting bell. Neither side may take any offensive or defensive actions before the starting bell. Planning is allowed and powers that are automatic or 'always on' can be up, but actions such as setting up forcefields, taking flight, or consciously activating powers is not. For example, Batman cannot shove together an 'anti-Avengers ray' before the fight.

Standard Equipment

Each side starts out with the equipment that they normally and have been shown to consistently carry on them. For example, Daredevil would have his billy-club, but Reed Richards would not have the Ultimate Nullifier.
In a scenario fight, the contestants in whose city/reality the fight takes place are allowed access to any material resources they usually have there or of any team they're active members of, as long as they can reasonably get to them. For example, in a scenario set in the DCU, Green Lantern would have access to equipment in the JLA Watchtower, but not the Titans headquarters.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
It's not really an acceptable intangible unless for no apparent reason Mr Fantastic has access to all his resources on the battlefield... there is no prep.
I thought you were going to sleep.

I was, it passed.

I'm not talking about all his resources.

I'm talking about him using anything, to try anything, as characters as wont to do, within their character.

And he can't go make something either:

Originally posted by Tron
Leaving the field

Combatants who leave the field of combat on purpose forfeit the match. If they are removed from the arena against their will (being punched, thrown, teleported, etc.) and can make it back under their own power, then they are still in the fight. Obviously, if a combatant leaves the field and cannot return under their own power, then they have lost.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Point out the rule.

Cut and paste the actual rule.

In most cases, the poster who originally set up the versus fight determines the conditions of the fight itself (ex. If a character like Superman is in a thread, it'll be assumed that it's the current version unless mentioned otherwise by the thread starter, the same goes with Thanos without the IG, and so on). However, in the cases where the original poster did not set down any contraints or conditions for the fight, then the match would default to the standard rules below.

Prep time

Neither side receives any notable prep time before the starting bell. Neither side may take any offensive or defensive actions before the starting bell. Planning is allowed and powers that are automatic or 'always on' can be up, but actions such as setting up forcefields, taking flight, or consciously activating powers is not. For example, Batman cannot shove together an 'anti-Avengers ray' before the fight.

Standard Equipment

Each side starts out with the equipment that they normally and have been shown to consistently carry on them. For example, Daredevil would have his billy-club, but Reed Richards would not have the Ultimate Nullifier.
In a scenario fight, the contestants in whose city/reality the fight takes place are allowed access to any material resources they usually have there or of any team they're active members of, as long as they can reasonably get to them. For example, in a scenario set in the DCU, Green Lantern would have access to equipment in the JLA Watchtower, but not the Titans headquarters.

I didn't mention prep-time.

'In a scenario fight, the contestants in whose city/reality the fight takes place are allowed access to any material resources they usually have there or of any team they're active members of, as long as they can reasonably get to them. '

So he can use these then? Like I said?

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I'm talking about him using anything, to try anything, as characters as wont to do, within their character.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I didn't mention prep-time.

It was relevant:

"For example, Batman cannot shove together an 'anti-Avengers ray' before the fight."

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I didn't mention prep-time.

'In a scenario fight, the contestants in whose city/reality the fight takes place are allowed access to any material resources they usually have there or of any team they're active members of, as long as they can reasonably get to them. '

So he can use these then? Like I said?

Originally posted by Creshosk
It was relevant:

"For example, Batman cannot shove together an 'anti-Avengers ray' before the fight."

I'm talking about during the fight.

During. Post-start of fight.