I think it should be case dependent instead of generalizing characters in a narrow definition of bloodlust. We should first check out if the character has ever given into bloodlust in a comic and that should be a reference to the things he/she would do in bloodlust. If not, OP should clarify what he means when he says about a character in bloodlust. Its mostly another way to say the character is CIS free.
I agree that no CIS and bloodlust are different.
Bloodlust is when they're specifically going for the kill, and often with little regard of their own safety. Not all characters are equally effective under bloodlust, while some might be more. They don't hold back as much, but at the same time I don't think they'll be as creative with their abilities as someone who has CIS off.
Originally posted by -Pr-CIS-off = forum avatar.
Not really what I'm thinking of.To me, bloodlust is something like, anger at it's most, where a character stops caring about anything but the death of their opponent, but at the same time is somewhat emotionally compromised because of how angry they are. Like Superman in Sacrifice, but less handicapped.
CIS-Off, to me, is say, Superman fighting Imperiex probes or the Elite and having that cold detachment that basically ends up with him trolling his enemies by utterly destroying them more casually than he really should.
If people want to define them as interchangeable (the terms, not the mental states), though, that's fine with me.
CIS on = forum avatar?
That's what we're trying to figure out.
But yes once you remove CIS from a character you're essentially controlling the character.
Bloodlust is still the character as they are but out for blood and death.