CHARACTER RULING THREAD - Suggestions

Started by Newjak18 pages

That Bada officially smells like pasta and grease 😐

Originally posted by Newjak
That Bada officially smalls like pasta and grease 😐

Now now, don't go telling me things we already know.

What is the summary of points, I might have missed a few.

The major points.

Originally posted by Newjak
That Bada officially smells like pasta and grease 😐
newjak
Originally posted by -Pr-
Now now, don't go telling me things we already know.
Yes, but I can pull it off. flirt

Originally posted by Badabing
newjak Yes, but I can pull it off. flirt
I did not know I had my own smilie 😄

Hulks strenght/madder no limits fallacy has to stop, because its got to the point now where people say he's unbeatable.

People have always done that, lol.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
People have always done that, lol.
Its becoming a joke now though, it spoils any debate as thats all is said.

I thought Hulk was handled a bit better than he was years ago. I guess I was wrong.

Its mostly carver though

Well yea... of course.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Hulks strenght/madder no limits fallacy has to stop, because its got to the point now where people say he's unbeatable.

Sounds good. Will talk to Badabing about it.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Hulks strenght/madder no limits fallacy has to stop, because its got to the point now where people say he's unbeatable.
Originally posted by -Pr-
Sounds good. Will talk to Badabing about it.
No. Hulk has no limits and he is unbeatable! sneer

biscuits

It's a given the feats need to support the debates. There are many characters which have fans who go off on rants about hypothetical full capacity power. Best thing to do is ignore or report.

Originally posted by Nihilist
Hulks strenght/madder no limits fallacy has to stop, because its got to the point now where people say he's unbeatable.
both things are mutually exclusive, so that's simply untrue

Originally posted by -Pr-
Feats.

It's the difference between deciding what they can do, and what they WOULD do.

Debates are how the character would fight, not how we would have them fight. That's what tourneys are for.

👆

Originally posted by -Pr-
i assume you're using the proper type of low showing?

don't understand this question.

I have a question about debate thresholds. Let's say we're arguing two characters. One has massive TP, the other doesn't but has demonstrable tp resistance. So then it becomes a 40 page argument about quality/quantity of tp resistance i.e. "yeah he has shown some resistance, but not against this level of tp".

I've seen many otherwise good threads become bogged down in that manner. So how much evidence does one have to present in order to produce enough reasonable doubt as to rather or not a specific character would be able to resist said power?

Originally posted by leonidas
don't understand this question.

Okay: Are you talking about the "getting armbarred by Panther" type of low showing, or the "got knocked down by a 100 tonner when you should be better than that" type of feat?

Originally posted by dmills
I have a question about debate thresholds. Let's say we're arguing two characters. One has massive TP, the other doesn't but has demonstrable tp resistance. So then it becomes a 40 page argument about quality/quantity of tp resistance i.e. "yeah he has shown some resistance, but not against this level of tp".

I've seen many otherwise good threads become bogged down in that manner. So how much evidence does one have to present in order to produce enough reasonable doubt as to rather or not a specific character would be able to resist said power?

Honestly, it's just feats. If a person can hold off, say, Despero, then someone with low level TP shouldn't really be hurting them.

If the character in question hasn't shown resistence on that level of telepathy, then we can't simply assume that he has one simply because he has resisted weaker attacks; otherwise it would be akin to saying Batman can withstand Superman's attacks because he took Bane's.

Originally posted by Philosophía
If the character in question hasn't shown resistence on that level of telepathy, then we can't simply assume that he has one simply because he has resisted weaker attacks; otherwise it would be akin to saying Batman can withstand Superman's attacks because he took Bane's.
There also needs to be a relative understanding of characters involved.

Batman taking a straight punch from Superman is ludicrous cause Batman is defined as a normal human being.

Someone who can resist TP as well as being highly powerful. I'd say it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility for them to resist a much more powerful TP user as long they we didn't consider them so much higher than the character in question.

Also how well did said character resist the weaker version of TP.