(BL/PT) Fantastic Four vs X-Men

Started by Creshosk3 pages

(BL/PT) Fantastic Four vs X-Men

Fantastic Four

Mr.Fantastic
Invisable Women
The Thing
Human Tourch

Vs.

Wolverine
Storm
Cyclops
Emma Frost

Bloodlust is turned on, Reed has enough time to pick up four gadgets.

Who wins?

And for those of you that say that it is unfair, mismatched, what have you go here:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=362830&from=thread&pagenumber=17#post4861584

To give everyone a taste of their own medicine:

Sue protects the team, Torch kills the rest with supernova.

Done. No reason why that cannot happen, at all. Factually.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To give everyone a taste of their own medicine:

Sue protects the team, Torch kills the rest with supernova.

Done. No reason why that cannot happen, at all. Factually.

-AC

Happy now?

No one can disagree with you and you are well within the rules.

Doesn't matter to me.

I've said the same in the other thread and it's as applicable because I realise the rules are stupid. NOT because it's the F4, overall.

-AC

hmm?

nevermind...

If you're admitting it's acceptable for what I just said, to occur.

Why isn't it the case in the other thread? That's what I mean about the rules being bullshit. We all know the F4 would cream the X-Men. They only reason they aren't being allowed to in the other thread is because of the restrictions of the over-generalising, unfair rules.

If you all admit that the way I just describe the fight, is accurate. Why are you debating against it in the other thread? The rules are why. So now you see why the rules are silly. Because you're saying "no bloodlust." Which is stupid, because it's a natural emotion in fighting.

-AC

Nono, its ALWAYS bloodlust friend.

Bloodlust is simply to the best of abilities, but within morals.

It has to be specified, same with spiderman vs trio, or I wouldn't have argued him a winning chance.

You cannot sanely claim to have bloodlust with morals.

It's a massive contradiction. Unbelievably stupid.

-AC

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Nono, its ALWAYS bloodlust friend.

Bloodlust is simply to the best of abilities, but within morals.

It has to be specified, same with spiderman vs trio, or I wouldn't have argued him a winning chance.

I've always misunderstood that rule. . .

Well, I'm talking about the willing to kill bloodlust rahter than simply best of their abilities but within character.

I think therein lies one of the problems with the rules.

Without PIS, bloodlust would often mean a character would actually kill, even if they don't within the comics, thus making it seem like their particular moral stance.

IE- if the winner of every fight killed the loser, Marvel would have a pretty lethal character turnover rate.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I've always misunderstood that rule. . .

Please don't tell me you were just repeatedly replying to everything saying 'The rules', while misunderstanding them. 😱

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I think therein lies one of the problems with the rules.

Without PIS, bloodlust would often mean a character would actually kill, even if they don't within the comics, thus making it seem like their particular moral stance.

IE- if the winner of every fight killed the loser, Marvel would have a pretty lethal character turnover rate.

Well. death is practically a joke in marvel. . . Wolverine's died three times. . .at least.

And then there was Jean grey. . .

Wait, let's not skip Victor's point.

You've been shouting out the rules like Moses, and you didn't even understand them?

-AC

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Please don't tell me you were just repeatedly replying to everything saying 'The rules', while misunderstanding them. 😱
No, that one only.

Because of the misleading name. I followed the rule, but assumed that there was another optional rule for bloodlust that meant an allowence for willingness to kill.

Default they still aren't allowed to willingly kill since it's in character to their personalities unless otherwise stated.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I followed the rule, but assumed that there was another optional rule for bloodlust that meant an allowence for willingness to kill.

Remember how, for the past 5 or more pages, I've been trying to show how everyone followed the stupid and wrong rules blindly? Yes?

Remember that? You've been doing that.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Default they still aren't allowed to willingly kill since it's in character to their personalities unless otherwise stated.

No, it's not. We've been over all that in character stuff. It has no place on a fantasy vs forum.

-AC

Originally posted by Creshosk

Default they still aren't allowed to willingly kill since it's in character to their personalities unless otherwise stated.

If we remove PIS (another rule), the characters might have no reason not to kill.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
If we remove PIS (another rule), the characters might have no reason not to kill.
We remove pis the uperhand most insane feats are allowed. . .

Wolverine would then become the most powerful character in existence. . .

Tell you what, let's leave PIS the PIS rule alone and in place, k?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You cannot sanely claim to have bloodlust with morals.

It's a massive contradiction. Unbelievably stupid.

-AC

True, bloodlust definitely implies that if anything, that the character is beserk and willing to win at any costs.
It is a contradiction, then again tron said blood lust isn't default, but in this posts its considered to be so.

Bloodlust

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.

Yes, but that's still harping on that BS about character.

Like I said, I don't come here to discuss who would morally let the other live. I read comics for that.

It's not a fantasy forum if it's doing what the comics say, is it?

-AC