Originally posted by Newjak
Well I think it depends on the judge.If you have a more lenent Judge then that may be true.
If you have a very straight forward Judge they may want you to clarify more. Which means you have to define the character more, and that takes away from other points you may have wanted to make.
Like I said it just depends but it can be a hindrance.
of course, i was just using an example...
Originally posted by Raoul
aye... but i do think that the more obscure a character is, the more you can get away with in terms of claims about their abilities, and a persons own abilities in the debating arena will be tested that little bit more, which is all the better imo...
maybe. depends on how tied the judge is to on-panel ebidence. the more obscure, generally the fewer the appearances hence the fewer feats to support 'speculated abilities'.
that's generally the clincher in these things. EVERYONE EXAGGERATES. the key is making YOUR exaggeration sound the most plausible. 🙂
Originally posted by leonidas
maybe. depends on how tied the judge is to on-panel ebidence. the more obscure, generally the fewer the appearances hence the fewer feats to support 'speculated abilities'.that's generally the clincher in these things. EVERYONE EXAGGERATES. the key is making YOUR exaggeration sound the most plausible. 🙂
aye...
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Originally I like bats' Nitro sig the best, but the one I made for leo has really grown on me.
modest, aren't we? 😛