Originally posted by Creshosk
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?
I'm not saying remove the rule.
If characters aren't restricted, then it alters the bloodlust rule.
The rules need to be streamlined and/or made more effective.
IMO that rule is titled Bloodlust as it regards whether or not the characters are bloodlusted when it is not stipulated by the thread starter. I don't believe Tron thinks that the definition he's given is "bloodlust", it's more a description of the lack thereof when bloodlust is not stated as a condition of a particular thread.
Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Honestly its not this rule that annoys me, as it can be specified, its the damned prep time rule.You get stuff like "batman wins, because he's batman."
or, "How will I know what batman will do, he's smarter than me".
Drives me crazy.
Yeah, that's irritating. In fact that's one of the reasons I stopped posting in this particular forum.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomNo no, removing the PIS rule, or altering it to allow higher level feats powers wolverine up. Killing intent and prep don't effect him.
I'm not saying remove the rule.If characters aren't restricted, then it alters the bloodlust rule.
The rules need to be streamlined and/or made more effective.
Originally posted by Creshosk
No no, removing the PIS rule, or altering it to allow higher level feats powers wolverine up. Killing intent and prep don't effect him.
Shall we actually clarify what this rule means, because I'm sure everyone thinks it means something different.
I swear these rules have no value at all.
As far as I can see, PIS means that if Hulk is fighting Spider-Man in a comic, it will obviously last the whole comic, not two panels of destruction. This is plot induced stupidity. However, IN THESE FORUMS, we can then ignore the PIS, and say that Hulk can, as is within his power, complete a two panel destruction.
Therefore a Spider-Man fan can't use PIS to say 'Spider-Man fought Hulk for a whole issue'.
The CIS rule is character induced stupidity-ie it is an inherent part of the character, and thus usable in a debate. (IE Spider-Man fan saying Hulk is too dumb to catch Spider-Man, or suchlike.)
PIS is only there because the plot requires it, so it's not an issue ON THE BOARD. CIS is inherent, so it is relevant.
Therefore...
If a character is not bound by PIS- as they aren't on the boards- there is no reason that their 'bloodlust' should adhere to their PIS (not relevant) influenced morality.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Shall we actually clarify what this rule means, because I'm sure everyone thinks it means something different.I swear these rules have no value at all.
As far as I can see, PIS means that if Hulk is fighting Spider-Man in a comic, it will obviously last the whole comic, not two panels of destruction. This is plot induced stupidity. However, IN THESE FORUMS, we can then ignore the PIS, and say that Hulk can, as is within his power, complete a two panel destruction.
Therefore a Spider-Man fan can't use PIS to say 'Spider-Man fought Hulk for a whole issue'.
The CIS rule is character induced stupidity-ie it is an inherent part of the character, and thus usable in a debate. (IE Spider-Man fan saying Hulk is too dumb to catch Spider-Man, or suchlike.)
PIS is only there because the plot requires it, so it's not an issue ON THE BOARD. CIS is inherent, so it is relevant.
Therefore...
If a character is not bound by PIS- as they aren't on the boards- there is no reason that their 'bloodlust' should adhere to their PIS (not relevant) influenced morality.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomSo if it happened then it's allowable?
Shall we actually clarify what this rule means, because I'm sure everyone thinks it means something different.I swear these rules have no value at all.
As far as I can see, PIS means that if Hulk is fighting Spider-Man in a comic, it will obviously last the whole comic, not two panels of destruction. This is plot induced stupidity. However, IN THESE FORUMS, we can then ignore the PIS, and say that Hulk can, as is within his power, complete a two panel destruction.
Therefore a Spider-Man fan can't use PIS to say 'Spider-Man fought Hulk for a whole issue'.
The CIS rule is character induced stupidity-ie it is an inherent part of the character, and thus usable in a debate. (IE Spider-Man fan saying Hulk is too dumb to catch Spider-Man, or suchlike.)
PIS is only there because the plot requires it, so it's not an issue ON THE BOARD. CIS is inherent, so it is relevant.
Therefore...
If a character is not bound by PIS- as they aren't on the boards- there is no reason that their 'bloodlust' should adhere to their PIS (not relevant) influenced morality.
Wolverine kills the FF singlehandedly. I'm not kidding.
PIS Wolverine can take nukes, stab thanos(with bone claws no less), regenerate from a bloodcell, and cannot be budged with 100 class hits.
This guy will walk through your Nova flames, cut a hole through your forcefeild, and then proceed to remove the heads of each of the combatants. Including Reed Richards and thing.
No, we do not remove PIS or alter it when Wolverine is in play.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Character morality isn't always PIS for the most part it's CIS.
I don't disagree.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
E.g. Emma Frost is willing to kill, Wolverine is willing to kill, Kitty Pryde is reluctant to kill, Nightcrawler is reluctant to kill. These examples have nothing to do with plot and everything to do with character.
That's true, but it's not always the case. We could also reference hundreds of times when PIS has prevented such occurances.
If a character wouldn't kill in the comics, then obviously you wouldn't argue it on here.
This whole debate is a bit of a waste of time in any case because death needn't come into a victory.
I think the only thing that needs clarifying in each thread is location, and prep.
Originally posted by CreshoskNo, we do not remove PIS or alter it when Wolverine is in play.
What are you talking about? I'm not saying remove PIS.
Originally posted by Creshosk
So if it happened then it's allowable?Wolverine kills the FF singlehandedly. I'm not kidding.
PIS Wolverine can take nukes, stab thanos(with bone claws no less), regenerate from a bloodcell, and cannot be budged with 100 class hits.
This guy will walk through your Nova flames, cut a hole through your forcefeild, and then proceed to remove the heads of each of the combatants. Including Reed Richards and thing.
That's not quite what it means though. The opposite in fact.
It means if a plot device has been put into place to balance a fight, while being clearly unrealistic, it's void. Wolverine doing such things is PIS.
The rules state that they wouldn't be recognisable.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomYes...
I don't disagree.That's true, but it's not always the case. We could also reference hundreds of times when PIS has prevented such occurances.
If a character wouldn't kill in the comics, then obviously you wouldn't argue it on here.
This whole debate is a bit of a waste of time in any case because death needn't come into a victory.
I think the only thing that needs clarifying in each thread is location, and prep.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomThat's what the rule as it is now means.
What are you talking about? I'm not saying remove PIS.That's not quite what it means though. The opposite in fact.
It means if a plot device has been put into place to balance a fight, while being clearly unrealistic, it's void. Wolverine doing such things is PIS.
The rules state that they wouldn't be recognisable.
No feats of PIS are useable.
We like this rule.
Yes, it prevents fanboyism.
You could argue though about just what is PIS and what isn't, and then you get debates that aren't even about the actual battle. That's a whole other can of worms though.
When people try to use those kind of examples, people will debate them down. It's all part of the fun. Just don't see the point of sterilising the debates with rules that aren't exactly foolproof in the first place.
Anyway, don't know why were still talking about this.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomKeeps it down at least.
Yes, it prevents fanboyism.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomThat actually happens.
You could argue though about just what is PIS and what isn't, and then you get debates that aren't even about the actual battle. That's a whole other can of worms though.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doomit keeps the fanboy's in check. . . otherwise they could turn this place into a no mans land.
When people try to use those kind of examples, people will debate them down. It's all part of the fun. Just don't see the point of sterilising the debates with rules that aren't exactly foolproof in the first place.
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomMe either.
Anyway, don't know why were still talking about this.