quote: (post)

Originally posted by darthgoober
Ok let’s face it, the KMC rules are confusing and full of contradictions and confusion over the rules is one of the primary sources of bickering on the forum. Now I’ve heard that the rules are awaiting a revamp pending a review, so I figured it would be a good idea for people to go ahead and put forth their opinions to aid in the effort. If anyone has any suggestions on how the rules should be rewritten or anything like that then here’s the place to do it. Just be sure not to let any particular issue become personal. This isn’t a thread for finger pointing or anything like that, it’s sole purpose is to help the forum reach some kind of accord on the debating standards and practices of the forum as a whole so I’ll ask that all input be geared towards that effect.

The way I see it, these are the entries that most need to be discussed/clarified…

"The "No PIS" Rule

PIS = Plot Induced Stupidity

At times, for the sake of the plot, characters that are immensely more powerful than their opponent will "job" to carry on the plot of the story, even though the characters powers and history would clearly show that they are more than capable of destroying their opponent. For this reason we have a No PIS Rule. This rule prohibits the use of such instances of PIS from being used as evidence in debates."

"Full Capacity
It is assumed that each contestant will fight to his/her best ability, but still within the character's personality, unless specified otherwise. That means they will use any powers at their disposal. For example, even though The Flash doesn't clock each of his own opponents in the first millisecond in his own comic, it is assumed that is a viable tactic on this board since it is a proven fact that he possesses that level of speed.
It is also assumed that the characters fight at their optimum levels of ability - not explicitly weakened or unusually powered up for those who have variable power levels"

"No Mentioning Events of PIS
Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.

Character Induced Stupidity, or CIS, on the other hand, refers to any natural mental limitations that characters impose upon themselves and reduce their ability to use their own skills and powers effectively. Unlike PIS, CIS does not occur because the plot requires it, but because the character is genuinely that dumb. Examples of the CIS-afflicted include characters such as Rhino or Jar Jar Binks. Events of CIS are not exempt from debates."


So what do these particular rules mean to everybody? What qualifies as PIS(which isn’t allowed) and what qualifies as CIS(which is)? In my mind they seems to suggest that a characters range of valid arracks won’t be penalized for their frequency of use, but the magnitude of those attacks will be dependant on what the character routinely demonstrates to be “in character” for their personality. And just so everyone understands what I’m talking about, here’s how I see my interpretation affecting some of the more popular tactics here on KMC…

Speedblitz - Speedblitzing sucks plain and simple, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not a useful and valid tactic in combat. As long as someone’s shown it to be in their personality to speed blitz(by actually doing so) I have no problem giving them the win because of it.

On the flip side though, fans of the speed blitz need to realize that it’s rarely “in character” for heroes to hit both as hard and as fast as they possibly can because they‘re just that, heroes. You want to know why you’ve never seen a light speed blitz from Supes or a thousand IMP’s from Flash… because they INTENTIONALLY limit their own abilities(if they‘re even capable of doing so in the first place). And intentional limitations fall under the CIS category.

Godblast/Godwave/Blackbolt’s scream/etc .- OHKO powers are powerful and universally “in character” for use, but they’re also extremely “out of character” for a character(especially a hero) to use unless he/she absolutely HAS to. I only see uber attacks like these factoring into a standard fight if their respective wielder has what it takes to last long enough in the fight to decide they have to use it, and it shouldn‘t be considered an option at all against another hero unless it‘s been used against heroes in the past(an unwillingness to kill another superhero falls under the category of CIS in my book).

BFR - For characters who don’t like to fight, BFR is normally a perfectly acceptable tactic. But people need to keep in mind that the subject’s destination will be determined by the user’s personality. That means that while it’s perfectly acceptable for Surfer to teleport an opponent to some other point in space where he'll be relatively unharmed, he’s not likely to BFR him to the far future or into the middle of a star or blackhole unless he’s facing off against a truly evil villain and there’s no other way for him to win. Killing via BFR is no different than killing directly and if one is out of character for a hero the other probably is to.




Another thing that needs to be discussed is the way the term “PIS” is used to describe things that it in no way applies to. Good examples of this would be things like ”Wolverine shouldn’t be able to take a punch from *insert character* and him doing so is total PIS” or “Wolverine shouldn’t be able to cut *insert character* because he’s not strong enough“. Neither of those things qualifies as PIS because PIS refers to a character “forgetting” about their own powers/abilities to make the fight drag out for longer than it should and both of those examples refer to “high showings“ of characters in relation to their other appearances. There used to be another forum rule that was in many ways similar to PIS called SvFL that covered this kind of thing…

“What is the Spiderman vs. Firelord exemption?
Spiderman vs. Firelord, or SvFL, is a shorthand that refers to any time when a character performs a feat that their powers and skills should be blatantly insufficient for, and is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career, as well as the character's opponents' established showings. In statistical terms, it is an outlier, something that is radically beyond the character's established capabilities. For example, Spiderman defeating a herald of Galactus is a case of the SvFL exemption; however, Batman being able to sneak up on Superman is not because he has done so frequently under different writers.
For standard CBR fights, feats considered to fall under the SvFL exemption are not valid. Likewise, examples of writing which go against firmly set canon are also ignored. For example, in Larry Hama's run of Batman and Grell's run of Iron Man, both characters were out of character and did things very much against established canon; therefore those runs are disregarded.”

But as you can clearly see, unlike PIS SvFL IS dictated by consistency of occurrence. That means that as long as Wolverine can consistently takes punches from cl100+ and cuts every character he comes across, both are acceptable even if the SvFL rule is in effect(and it‘s not even in the rules anymore).



If I’m interpreting these all of these rules correctly, then I honestly see no need for an actual change in them. We might need to expand on them to clarify some of the more subtle points but beyond that I don’t see anything wrong with them. What we really need to work on, is holding all characters to the same standards because we have entirely too many characters who are rules unto themselves around here. We can’t say that Supes speed blitzes 10/10 but Surfer hardly ever BFR’s(or vice versa). We can’t say that it’s ok for Thor to pull a Godblast but WW’s Godwave is BS. We need to set some concrete standards on debating practices because as this point it seems like half of the debates are going on at CBR and half of them are going on at Herochat.




So does anyone else have any thoughts on what(if anything) needs to be done to the forum rules, or any other interpretations of the rules as they currently stand?

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Mindship
This thread was inspired by recent, as well as past, debates involving what a given character is capable of.

In debates, on-panel feats are of obvious value in pointing out what a character can do. The only real drawback is the posting of PIS moments, which can be a tough call.

On the other hand: there are some characters -- generally those with open powersets -- where inferring abilities never actually shown (or rarely shown) makes sense when logically reasoned from other (more-consistent) on-panel feats.

Should inferred abilities be allowed in debates? Should feats be restricted to those purely on-panel? And if so, what is the criteria for judging whether something is PIS or not? Doesn't this imply a certain amount of inferential reasoning to weed out PIS (ie, is it not a subjective call)? And if this type of inferential reasoning is allowed, then why not such reasoning for inferring unseen/rarely seen abilities, as long as they are logically deduced?

I'm curious where most members stand.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Goobers post is good.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Cavalier
The original rules have been raped by the age of scans and just age in general...

And yet we tell people how to debate every day. Bada's started cracking down on ignorance and so forth, and it's time to step forward and start pointing out some of the flaws in how debaters are approaching vs. threads now.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I don't know that they need a full rehaul.

Also, as it pertains to Smurph's point, we can't tell people how to debate comics. Part of the fun of it, even though it leads to disagreement, is that there isn't a set way to gauge them. For example, regardless of what teh rules state, "in character vs. in their power set" will always exist.

I think goober's clarifications are a good start. They leave a lot less gray area about rule interpretation.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Not universally, but it's on the right path. I'm too tired to fully critique it at the moment, but will offer my comments sometime soon

quote: (post)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Don't worry bada. I'm not offended. When I did it, I was creating rules that were needed, or heavily modifying ones that were ill-conceived. No forum input, I just did it out of necessity. I'm actually shocked they've held up for as long as they have.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Cavalier
As for the Superman feats-

Meh. Really, all we see Clark do in Trinity is KO some people that are physically on his level, and that he can go all out against.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Cavalier

In Hush, Clark doesn't smush Batman, and hesitates for the second that Bats needs his kryptonite ring to work. It still barely works, but he needed that second of hesitation. However, I wouldn't say that Bruce could have relied on that 10/10 times. Perhaps the next time, Clarks puts on a little more speed, dodges the punch and KO's/kills him with a tap? He may be more inclined to go easy than the next guy, but we was still mind controlled and still Superman... so it's really more just a low showing for Clark vs. prepped human being than anything else.

CIS? Yes, to Hush. But because he was against a human opponent, not Ultraman and Super Woman. It also helps that he was actively fighting mind control in Hush... eh.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Badabing
Mind control or not is a moot point. Batman knows Superman very well and he stated that Clark being a good person is the main reason he's not a blood smear.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Badabing
I agree and your help will be appreciated very much.

Now for some specifics.

These are from Batman: Hush. Batman tells us that Superman won't go all out because of his greatest weakness, he's a good person. CIS???
(please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)

Trinity. Here Superman goes full out and embarrasses Ultraman and Superwoman, who have given Clark problems in the past and are his peers.
(please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)

Now, do we say Superman won't do what he did to UM and SW every time? Aren't we making the assumption that Supes is at his best with bloodlust? How do we factor in the boyscout weakness Batman spoke of?