|
Post by kore on Aug 26, 2010 14:20:52 GMT -8
Oh, and knowing someone named Adolf is different than knowing someone named Adolf Hitler, and only marginally. Adolf, with or without the Hitler, still gets similar reactions because it is not as culturally ubiquitous as other names, like Joseph.
...
Now, taking the context of the counter-example into account, one may or may not think 'Joseph Stalin'. Anecdotally, I know when I was first introduced to this group, I didn't think 'Joseph Stalin' when I saw there was a Joseph Barros on the board. But I can assure you, if his name was Adolf Barros I would have done a double take.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 14:24:21 GMT -8
Ok Lets see if I can remember all the points i had to talk about.
1st. No THEY DID NOT BLOW UP A CITY. I said that last post. I was just saying what kind of people they were. In other words EVIL.
2nd. I said He could use hacking as a form of income But do to the fact I haven't come up with any good ways i have yet to say thats how. His main income is do to Murphy's band. Which yes taking a month or so off to make a CD Was Factored in.
3rd. Arch-Angel Which i guess I'm Changing (A) Does have wings thats why he cant fly in liquid. (B) Wasn't kicked out of the hero academy do to his name but do to the fact his parents are villains. He also wasn't kicked out. He left cause of how they were treating him. (C) He gained his level of hacking when he wasn't on the good side of the law. (D) I did look up the ranks of angels way before this. They all have different duties. Arch-Angels are the ones that take personal interests in nations and in all the movies and stories the ones sent out to fight. (E) Yes I know the workers would know but its still hidden to most.
4th. Darkcide has access to Arch-Angels powers cause they are the same. Doing so would have its consequences. if the connection were made that they were the same (A) He could be seen as trying to "Spy" on other hero's. (B) Would most likely lose his girlfriend. (C) Lose his only free access to the world.
5th. Last game you said that we had the ability to kill in Freedom city that it was just going to bring about consequences. <--- If we don't I'm Probably going to change my character just cause of his personality.
6th. Gaara Doesn't look or really act like Gaara. Yes I did choose the name do to their similarity's mostly their powers. Mainly do to the fact they both consider themselves to be monsters. Your right though I didn't have much time to create a fully unique person do to knowing little about the game and only having about a week to get it made. So I picked an easy archetype to follow.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 14:26:12 GMT -8
Oh, and knowing someone named Adolf is different than knowing someone named Adolf Hitler, and only marginally. Adolf, with or without the Hitler, still gets similar reactions because it is not as culturally ubiquitous as other names, like Joseph. ... Now, taking the context of the counter-example into account, one may or may not think 'Joseph Stalin'. Anecdotally, I know when I was first introduced to this group, I didn't think 'Joseph Stalin' when I saw there was a Joseph Barros on the board. But I can assure you, if his name was Adolf Barros I would have done a double take. I think he Is Stalin
|
|
|
Post by kore on Aug 26, 2010 14:57:43 GMT -8
Well...maybe, I was only in the game he was DMing for several weeks.
|
|
|
Post by frobones on Aug 26, 2010 15:17:38 GMT -8
I said He could use hacking as a form of income But do to the fact I haven't come up with any good ways i have yet to say thats how. His main income is do to Murphy's band. Which yes taking a month or so off to make a CD Was Factored in. Ok, that's starting to bug me... it's "due to the fact", not "do to the fact". Gaara Doesn't look or really act like Gaara. I don't have a physical description of your Gaara, but the first thing I remember you describing was the enormous gourd made out of sand on his back. Also, your character's mind set is one where he is not afraid to kill. That's enough to trigger my brain to think of Gaara even if I ignored the fact you control sand and didn't have his name. Triggering memory isn't that hard. What do you think of when I say "blue leotard, red cape, boy scout"? For me to think of Gaara, all someone has to say is sand gourd.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 17:47:17 GMT -8
I said He could use hacking as a form of income But do to the fact I haven't come up with any good ways i have yet to say that's how. His main income is do to Murphy's band. Which yes taking a month or so off to make a CD Was Factored in. Ok, that's starting to bug me... it's "due to the fact", not "do to the fact". Gaara Doesn't look or really act like Gaara. I don't have a physical description of your Gaara, but the first thing I remember you describing was the enormous gourd made out of sand on his back. Also, your character's mind set is one where he is not afraid to kill. That's enough to trigger my brain to think of Gaara even if I ignored the fact you control sand and didn't have his name. Triggering memory isn't that hard. What do you think of when I say "blue leotard, red cape, boy scout"? For me to think of Gaara, all someone has to say is sand gourd. My Uncle Chester? So why must every hero be afraid to kill a villain? Now not every villain but the truly horrific ones? Take Mr. Zsasz For example his whole purpose is to kill innocent people. why let people like him live so they can do it again? Instead Gaara Opinion is some people just need to be taken out of the gene pool. Some people just need to be wiped out. Well I'm Thinking of making a new character for this game maybe he will fit into this world a bit better. I'll save Arch-Angel for a Different game. After i work everything out and have answers for everything.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 18:02:51 GMT -8
Ok its mute since im going to be making a new guy but why can both DC and Marvel have a Thor but I can't make an Arch-Angel Cause theres a guy in a comic book with the same name? O.o
|
|
|
Post by frobones on Aug 26, 2010 18:25:12 GMT -8
So why must every hero be afraid to kill a villain? Now not every villain but the truly horrific ones? Take Mr. Zsasz For example his whole purpose is to kill innocent people. why let people like him live so they can do it again? Instead Gaara Opinion is some people just need to be taken out of the gene pool. Some people just need to be wiped out. It not about being afraid to kill the villain, its the courage not to cross the line that separates the heroes from the villains. The reasons why heroes don't kill is because morally no one has that right. I'm not going to get into government death penalty or anything. But consider if every hero killed the villains he deemed "unsuitable" for mankind. We have now just placed the decision of who lives or who dies into the hands of a super powered being. Who's to say that the hero's judgement is morally sound. A "hero" may deem a villain unsuitable for mankind simply because he stole lots of money from the U.S. The bottomline I am trying to get across is that when you place the decision of who lives and who dies onto the personal judgement of a single individual, you are placing your trust into that person that he knows absolutely what is right and wrong (being able to eliminate all shades of gray) and how to serve just punishment. No one is that perfect and therefore no one should be able to decided who lives or dies. Now I know you may be thinking of villains like Joker and some others deserve to die. But once a hero crosses that line and if it was deemed acceptable by society, any hero will start to think that he can slay those he thinks deserves it. Sooner or later that "definite" line of Joker type criminals being executed will soon fall over onto criminals of a lesser caliber. What if Batman killed Catwoman (assuming no romance) just because he got tired of her stealing crap and it was financially ruining the lives of those she stole from. Who's to say that her acts aren't just cause for elimination? Obviously, the general public would say that it isn't. but not everyone is the general public. There will be that one Hero who deems her acts unacceptable and will put her out her misery. That is why Heroes do not kill - they don't have the right. Is this your answer to "blue leotard, red cape, boy scout"? I don't know what to think of this. It's either an attempt to be funny or you just don't care about the point I was trying to make. It's so subtle and abrupt that I can't tell. Either way is fine, no harm or foul done, but when I try to help you understand the general consensus view on why naming your hero "Arch-Angel" is a bad idea - blatantly disregarding it makes me not want to help anymore. I know we joke around to the extremes on these forums, but slapping away a helpful hand is another thing.
|
|
|
Post by frobones on Aug 26, 2010 18:27:31 GMT -8
Ok its mute since im going to be making a new guy but why can both DC and Marvel have a Thor but I can't make an Arch-Angel Cause theres a guy in a comic book with the same name? O.o Because Thor is a Greek god and each universe has their interpretation of him. So... it's the same person; even their full names are identical: Thor Odinson.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 18:44:27 GMT -8
Ha ha Stephen I wasn't trying to be a jerk But i seriously have No Idea who you were describing. I Was just saying it in a jokingly way like they do in movies and TV. I was actually hoping you'd tell me. Had I known it was a helpful thing with Arch-Angel I wouldn't have Made it. I thought you were just screwing around with Gaara and his gourd cause well, it immediately followed that. sorry man. Didn't mean to offend you.
|
|
|
Post by frobones on Aug 26, 2010 18:51:09 GMT -8
I'm not offended, but we need to work on your Superhero knowledge if that doesn't ring any bells :p
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 18:54:49 GMT -8
I'm not offended, but we need to work on your Superhero knowledge if that doesn't ring any bells :p Haha Ok good cause I do like you guys and hope to be friends someday <--- (Go ahead start the joking hate begin.) So id hate to piss someone off for real. Now tell me cause its bugging me and I have no idea who it is.
|
|
|
Post by narutoanbu on Aug 26, 2010 18:57:24 GMT -8
Thats a leotard? haha I are Fail.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Barros on Aug 27, 2010 0:13:21 GMT -8
when you say Mute I think you mean moot? Mute means you can't speak. And even then I think sometimes you are misusing the word moot. But like Stephen said, heroes don't kill. As I said before, people like the Punisher are NOT heroes. They are not good guys. Burning the village in order to save the village is NOT a heroic path. Makes for great stories, but again, if he existed in the real world, I would not feel safe knowing he was operating in my city. In fact I'd feel very very worried. I never said you could kill in Freedom City. At best, I said if you did there would be massive consequences and I'm not just talking about taint points. Think "forced retirement." As far as the name thing goes I'm calling discussion over. You either can't or won't understand what we are trying to say, so just know that Archangel, for various reasons, is not a name you can pick. If you don't understand why, sucks for you. GM Fiat, no hero token, my left nut. And yeah I saw the Darkseid connection too, but decided to address it in a different manner so we don't have two discussions going on about the same topic. For the same reason Archangel is off limits any name with the pronunciation "Dark Side" is also off limits. We are all elitist bastards here and anything that smells of rip-off is gonna get hammered. We realize you don't have our comic book knowledge. We also don't care. You're the new homie of the group. L2 deal and pay your dues probie. Have a nice day. (probie=short for probationary. Takes one year before you earn off that label. Start earning.)
|
|
|
Post by kore on Aug 27, 2010 8:32:27 GMT -8
when you say Mute I think you mean moot? Mute means you can't speak. And even then I think sometimes you are misusing the word moot. Moot: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mootIt's strange, because every colloquial use of 'moot' I've encountered is meant to decribe an arguement or position that is no longer necessary to debate or pointless to debate. Yet, most definitions seem to indicate that a topic that is described as 'moot' is 'debatable'. This seems to be in complete opposition to its common use today. Somehow, we've culturally redefined the word...very Orwellian. Even stranger is that one of the examples (from the link) of the word's use seems to indicate the opposite of its definition. *head asplodes*
|
|