Rule Amendments & Clarifications Discussion

Originally posted by Philosophía
Basic knowledge of the character pretty much rules out the whole 'he won't go all out at the start of the match'. If it's against characters like Silver Surfer, Thanos or such, Superman would have no reason to hesitate bringing his speed and strength and blitzing the crap out of them. If it's against characters like Iron Man, he will use whatever speed he would deem necessary to put them down but without killing them, since it's not in Superman's character. You won't see him use his full speed and strength against characters that basic knowledge says that they could not take it, but you'll see him using it against the bigger threats.

I'm tempted to say we need some criteria to distinquish between things like Batman aim dodging or Spidey with his spider sense and fast reflexes and Cassie Caine with her Mach speed reflexes and the whole Superman/ Wonder Woman/ Flash set who have ftl reflexes to varying degrees. But then again, I suppose that really comes down to proven comic feats as long as they are looked at carefully and not misrepresented.

Originally posted by Bentley
He has been holding back for years, he declared so against the Squadron Sinister.

thor vs arishem/exitar, that's a good example of classic thor going all out.

facepalm

Originally posted by illadelph12
facepalm

???? 😕

For the record, the planetary destruction thing is the main reason most characters don't go FTL inside an atmosphere. Except Flash, because he gets to cheat physics.

May I assume that the rules mean characters do not hold back their full powers for story considerations? Example: Darkseid obliterating people with the OE or the rest of his rediculously large powerset?
😛

Originally posted by TricksterPriest
???? 😕

For the record, the planetary destruction thing is the main reason most characters don't go FTL inside an atmosphere. Except Flash, because he gets to cheat physics.

May I assume that the rules mean characters do not hold back their full powers for story considerations? Example: Darkseid obliterating people with the OE or the rest of his rediculously large powerset?
😛

I'm all for the new policy, but doesn't mean that the number of threads decided via BFR are going to skyrocket(except threads with stipulations against of course)?

Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm all for the new policy, but doesn't mean that the number of threads decided via BFR are going to skyrocket(except threads with stipulations against of course)?

It's not like BFR wasn't an option before these rules came in.........😛

Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm all for the new policy, but doesn't mean that the number of threads decided via BFR are going to skyrocket(except threads with stipulations against of course)?

....This isn't an addition of new rules.

Originally posted by Badabing
BFR......People will always throw that in to the threads. It hasn't reared up yet.

Originally posted by TricksterPriest
It's not like BFR wasn't an option before these rules came in.........😛

Originally posted by Kris Blaze
....This isn't an addition of new rules.

I don't really care because I rarely post here anymore, but if I were to offer my two cents...

This is a horrible set of rules.

All that it does is encourage people to argue power sets instead of characters. It takes the emphasis off of how a character is likely to fight, and puts the emphasis on the most ZOMG feats that are ages old and/or never repeated.

I realize that the inclusion of CIS should help define how characters fight, but it's far too vague.

The majority of problems that people have with trolls stems from the fact that they argue powersets over characters.

It's a step in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by Kris Blaze
You should also differ between limitations set by a characters morals.

In the new x-men issue where Julian Keller fights Kimura we get to see both. He won't create a huge bubble inside her brain because he's not a killer. Later on Emma needs to open up some mental blocks to let him move past the speed of sound.

The former is an inhibition he put on himself and is connected to his morals.
The latter is an inhibition his body put on him and is connected to his power potential.

If he were to participate in a fight where CIS was off he would still not be able to break the sound barrier, but he might create bubbles inside people's heads.

If he were to participate in a fight where he was boosted by Sage he would be able to break the sound barrier, but would not create bubbles inside people's heads.

Originally posted by Kris Blaze
Way to ignore what I said.

If there's some sort of mental or psychic block then that will have to be dealt with by stipulations in the thread or default to forum rules.

facepalm

Originally posted by Original Smurph
I don't really care because I rarely post here anymore, but if I were to offer my two cents...

This is a horrible set of rules.

All that it does is encourage people to argue power sets instead of characters. It takes the emphasis off of how a character is likely to fight, and puts the emphasis on the most ZOMG feats that are ages old and/or never repeated.

I realize that the inclusion of CIS should help define how characters fight, but it's far too vague.

The majority of problems that people have with trolls stems from the fact that they argue powersets over characters.

It's a step in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
I don't really care because I rarely post here anymore, but if I were to offer my two cents...

This is a horrible set of rules.

All that it does is encourage people to argue power sets instead of characters. It takes the emphasis off of how a character is likely to fight, and puts the emphasis on the most ZOMG feats that are ages old and/or never repeated.

I realize that the inclusion of CIS should help define how characters fight, but it's far too vague.

The majority of problems that people have with trolls stems from the fact that they argue powersets over characters.

It's a step in the wrong direction.

What you say here sounds very good and right. The problem I have is what it will almost certainly really turn into. The more you loosen the rules, the more it will just result in peoples' bias coming to the surface.

We already have situations where people want to count feats by one character that were performed in one storyline ever and discount feats by another character that have been repeated many times even if still a small part of that character's overall showings.

I honestly feel that the majority of troll problems results from people wanting to have their favorite at his best and the opponent at lower than best and then, when they aren't allowed to stack the deck like that, its unfair and the rules are ridiculous.

We could go with average showings rather than best showings. But who decides what is average? Its a little harder to measure than best. We could argue character instead of power sets. Same result as I stated above. The reality is all we'd have done is say, "There are no criteria."
You'd just have people arguing that what their fave would "really do" would be to his best advantage and that the other guy wouldn't do such and such no matter how many times he's done it.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
I don't really care because I rarely post here anymore, but if I were to offer my two cents...

This is a horrible set of rules.

All that it does is encourage people to argue power sets instead of characters. It takes the emphasis off of how a character is likely to fight, and puts the emphasis on the most ZOMG feats that are ages old and/or never repeated.

I realize that the inclusion of CIS should help define how characters fight, but it's far too vague.

The majority of problems that people have with trolls stems from the fact that they argue powersets over characters.

It's a step in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
I don't really care because I rarely post here anymore, but if I were to offer my two cents...

This is a horrible set of rules.

All that it does is encourage people to argue power sets instead of characters. It takes the emphasis off of how a character is likely to fight, and puts the emphasis on the most ZOMG feats that are ages old and/or never repeated.

I realize that the inclusion of CIS should help define how characters fight, but it's far too vague.

The majority of problems that people have with trolls stems from the fact that they argue powersets over characters.

It's a step in the wrong direction.

the last thing this set of rules is designed to do is to turn this in to a forum where powersets come first and character comes second.

firstly, the main thing is that we're trying to invalidate all the unbeliavably low showings. armbars, gas stations, all that stuff. we're trying to get the point across that stuff like that isn't welcome.

secondly, CIS is defined as being how a character is likely to fight and the lengths they are willing to go to secure a win.

personality will always come first.

what we're doing is focusing on the high fights and mindsets that characters have consistently shown, like cyclops' mega blast and his repression, superman's speed and his fairness, thor's versatility and his tendency to want to fight, doctor light's cruelty, doctor doom's arrogance etc etc, all the things that affect how people fight and WHO they fight.

example:

Thor Vs Hulk. A lot of people seem to assume that Thor would just brawl with someone like the Hulk and would refuse to use his other, more varied abilities. The point we're making is that even though Thor would brawl with Hulk, he still has the sense of mind to use his other powers because a) he can, b) he's fought hulk before, and most importantly c) he's in this to win it. all forum battles come with the presumption that something huge is at stake. these aren't random brawls. you don't live to fight another day if you lose.

this isn't about making everyone uber, its about making sure that people stop underselling characters, which happens just as much if not moreso than people bumping their favourite characters.

besides, if you're in the thread, its presumed that you have at least some knowledge of the character you're debating about.

Originally posted by Raoul

Thor Vs Hulk. A lot of people seem to assume that Thor would just brawl with someone like the Hulk and would refuse to use his other, more varied abilities. The point we're making is that even though Thor would brawl with Hulk, he still has the sense of mind to use his other powers because a) he can, b) he's fought hulk before, and most importantly c) he's in this to win it. all forum battles come with the presumption that something huge is at stake. these aren't random brawls. you don't live to fight another day if you lose.

he's never done so in their countless battles. yet on kmc, many people say godblast ftw or something like that.

so is godblast allowed even though thor has never used it against hulk?

Originally posted by Starscream M
the thing is thor would never use a godblast or time stopping or antimatter against Hulk.

he's never done so in their countless battles. yet on kmc, many people say godblast ftw or something like that.

so is godblast allowed even though thor has never used it against hulk?

if he's forced in to using it as his only option, a last resort if you will, then yes he would, otherwise no.