Poll of the Day > Mobile Suit Geekdam: Geek vs Zeta Geek

LurkerFAQs, Active Database ( 07.23.2018-present ), Database 1, Database 2, Database 3
Topic List
Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10
The Wave Master
08/21/18 8:26:50 AM
1
And it continues:

You know the rules: Post anything Geek related. Music, video games, movies, television, book, or comic book related. Even wrestling is allowed; because wrestling is cool and very geek.

Per usual we have an opening question to keep the topic going, and that question is:

As before we have talked about your powers and abilities if we did have special abilities, but now it's time to pick your superhero, villain, or neutral names. Therefore,

"What would be your superhero, villain, or neutral name?"

Bonus Question: Based on your abilities from the last topic, what would your associated name be? (If you didn't answer the question last topic you can make up a name of course.)

Wrap up from Geekmasters: Now in 4D in the upcoming post.
---
We are who we choose to be.
GanglyKhan
08/21/18 8:28:45 AM
2
Heh, why would I tell you my superhero name? Sneakman never gives away his identity!
I_Abibde
08/21/18 6:33:44 PM
3
I suppose I could always be Triviaman.

*thinks*

The last WWE game I purchased was the original Smackdown VS. RAW for PS2. A little strange to load it up and see Chris Benoit in my save file.
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
Zeus
08/21/18 6:45:32 PM
4
Still want a re-roll on that name. Also the crazy late start on the new topic means lost momentum >_>

The Wave Master posted...
You know the rules: Post anything Geek related. Music, video games, movies, television, book, or comic book related. Even wrestling is allowed; because wrestling is cool and very geek.


That and wrassling is more cartoony than actual cartoons these days.

The Wave Master posted...
"What would be your superhero, villain, or neutral name?"


idk, depends on my powers and/or origin story. Otherwise I could pick a name like Lightning Liger and then have a power that turns me into a dragon or something.

The Wave Master posted...
Bonus Question: Based on your abilities from the last topic, what would your associated name be? (If you didn't answer the question last topic you can make up a name of course.)


Overpowered Guy

I_Abibde posted...
The last WWE game I purchased was the original Smackdown VS. RAW for PS2. A little strange to load it up and see Chris Benoit in my save file.


tbh, my favorite wrestling games are DoR1&2 for the GC. Pretty much the entire roster is either retired or dead at this point. Offhand, I think the only guys still wrestling are Cena and RKO.
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Zeus
08/22/18 3:34:37 AM
5
At any rate, I *almost* picked up seasons 1 and 2 of ST:TNG on BR (for $5 and $4 respectively). Was doing a weekly Goodwill run after work on Monday and found the two shrinkwrapped, brand new in the DVD bin. Finally held off because my only BR player is my ps3 (and I don't like playing BR on it), I kinda already have a huge queue, and I was looking at Whoopi Goldberg's photo and it reminded me of some of the show's weaker elements... although if it's still there next week (which it won't be), I might cave.

I did kinda like TNG and it introduced the Borg, my favorite ST villain faction. And it was why I had been considering s2 more heavily.

What I did grab instead was a new copy of Barberalla: Queen of the Galaxy for $2 (which I had meant to watch for some number of years now) and a new copy of Batman: Arkham Origins for $4 (which I hadn't planned on picking up ever --- since I still haven't played Arkham City -- and had already watched most of the cutscenes, but it was impossible to resist at that price). Given that origins is self-contained, I *might* try to figure out a way to finagle my laptop off my gaming monitor and play it this weekend (especially since Pokemon Go has nothing much going on atm).
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
The Wave Master
08/22/18 2:22:55 PM
6
I am very happy that the Universal championship is off Brock Lesnar. Granted it's now on Roman Reigns, but it is a definite improvement over the creep that is Lesnar. Now that steroided out hurt machime can freely go back to UFC and injure as many people as Dana White is willing to let him.

A mini Shield reunion happened on Raw too, and it was the only logical way to get Reigns over and not jeered as the champion. Because the crowd and all wrestling fans do not like true bore that is Roman Reigns.
---
We are who we choose to be.
EvilMegas
08/22/18 5:25:14 PM
7
Names okay. See you next topic.
---
I_Abibde
08/22/18 7:21:38 PM
8
Zeus posted...
What I did grab instead was a new copy of Barberalla: Queen of the Galaxy for $2 (which I had meant to watch for some number of years now).


Barbarella is ... a unique movie experience. Watch that and Flash Gordon back to back for the full effect (because they are made by many of the same people and look very similar despite being over a decade apart).
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
Zeus
08/22/18 8:29:09 PM
9
Not sure if anybody has seen Disenchanted (there was another topic about it), but it was reasonably funny once it got going. It's been somewhat reminiscent of Futurama (possibly because it *might* be using some of the same voice talent; been too lazy to check). Can't wait for the second half.

Also been re-watching Naruto and it's been kind of a reminder how much anachronistic details bother the fuck out of me in high fantasy settings. In this case, they're still using various ninja tools in a world that has things like tv monitors. And, while the setting clearly makes use of things like gunpowder (and whatever makes those tags explode on kunai), nobody is using guns. And, when traveling, they never seem to use things like horses, instead they just jump through tree tops (which seems less reliable than just running on the ground, since branches can break). While sure, in a fantasy world you create you can kinda do whatever, but it seems like there's a logical chain of technological progression *especially* in a world plagued by war.

The Wave Master posted...
I am very happy that the Universal championship is off Brock Lesnar. Granted it's now on Roman Reigns, but it is a definite improvement over the creep that is Lesnar. Now that steroided out hurt machime can freely go back to UFC and injure as many people as Dana White is willing to let him.


My only problem with Lesnar was that he was the part-iest of part-timers. He defended what, like three or four times a year? I remember the last time he had the belt when four or five PPVs went by without a title defense. At that point he doesn't look like he's the champ because he's the strongest, he looks like he's the champ because he never defends.

EvilMegas posted...
Names okay. See you next topic.


SSf7XCFpdxvYk

The Wave Master posted...
A mini Shield reunion happened on Raw too, and it was the only logical way to get Reigns over and not jeered as the champion. Because the crowd and all wrestling fans do not like true bore that is Roman Reigns.


He'd probably have a good heel run if they let him. He gets enough natural heat that if he was being pushed as a heel, he could make stadiums explode. (And it's ironic because all the time they were pushing Seth as the face of the Authority, fans disliked Roman because they knew that Triple H, Steph, and Vince wanted Roman as the face of the company.)

However, if they changed the guy a bit, I imagine he could probably get over on his own. They're so dead-set on getting him over their way that they've hurt him among fans. That said, he's *clearly* never going to be a huge deal.

I_Abibde posted...
Zeus posted...
What I did grab instead was a new copy of Barberalla: Queen of the Galaxy for $2 (which I had meant to watch for some number of years now).


Barbarella is ... a unique movie experience. Watch that and Flash Gordon back to back for the full effect (because they are made by many of the same people and look very similar despite being over a decade apart).


Watching Flash Gordon once is enough. (Well, the movie anyway. The tv show reboot I could see myself watching again, other than the fact it only got one season which was majorly depressing.)
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
I_Abibde
08/23/18 9:00:43 AM
10
Zeus posted...
The tv show reboot I could see myself watching again, other than the fact it only got one season which was majorly depressing.


See, that version pissed me off. You don't take a villain as iconic as Ming the Merciless and turn him into the Gary Cole character from Office Space. You just don't do that (... IMO). That, and the lack of budget (because Sy Fy) was painfully obvious. ... I'm really not a fan.

Of course, it might just be down to taste. The 1980 movie is something I can watch repeatedly and enjoy the Hell out of it every time.
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
The Wave Master
08/23/18 10:31:13 AM
11
My channel options are limited at dialysis. Maybe 30 channels, and a lot of them are junk. I am forced to watch "Bar Rescue."

My God is it a terrible hour of television, but it's either this or "Cake Wars" or "Ryan Seacrest and the lady."

Anyway, I have grown fond of the lack of common sense, and alcoholism that occurs every episode. The owners and employees wonder why the bar is failing, and the obvious answer is that everyone is drunk. I'm not a genius or anything, but I know an alcoholic shouldn't be running a bar. Yet, every episode here we are. (I learned that lesson from Pookie and New Jack City.)

I could watch the NFL network, but they aren't allowed to tackle or hit any longer. Something about brain damage.
---
We are who we choose to be.
shadowsword87
08/23/18 10:56:15 AM
12
Posting for my AMP.

I may have more time now?
---
ImmortalityV, "I would like to kiss Icoyar to be honest in a non gay way though"
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 7:16:25 PM
13
shadowsword87 posted...
Posting for my AMP.

I may have more time now?

In that case, I've got another crunchy D&D 5e rules question for you:

Let's say, hypothetically, you were making a custom zodiac for a setting, and wanted to work it as a mechanic where each constellation was connected to a thematic advantage (ie, if you're born under the sign of Gemini, you are influenced by the mythological resonance with Castor and Pollux, and one of their known aspects was they were skilled horsemen, so you gain bonuses to Animal Handling checks).

The question is, how would you best represent something like that if you were implementing it as skill check bonuses? Assuming it's essentially a Feat, would you say it would be better to have it as a +2 to skill rolls for a given skill, or automatic Advantage conferred to a skill roll? Or some other mechanic?

I'm basically thinking of it being a sort of deal where it does convey some degree of useful benefit, but not so much that it's hugely game-breaking. Sort of the universe giving you a subtle boost, not a massive blatant gift where you magically become the greatest in the world at whatever skill is getting buffed.

Conversely, I could see a scenario where there's a stronger buff (say, +5 to a skill roll), but it functions as a single-use buff that needs to be invoked, and which requires a short or long rest to recharge. But that feels like it makes it a bit more blatant than I was thinking, and not just a subtle metaphysical influence.



---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 7:42:41 PM
14
The Wave Master posted...
As before we have talked about your powers and abilities if we did have special abilities, but now it's time to pick your superhero, villain, or neutral names. Therefore,

"What would be your superhero, villain, or neutral name?"

Bonus Question: Based on your abilities from the last topic, what would your associated name be? (If you didn't answer the question last topic you can make up a name of course.)

I tend to be of the school of thought that, if you're going to be a truly effective villain, you shouldn't be wearing overly-elaborate costumes or calling yourself ridiculous names. The best villain is the one standing right next to you and you never even know it.

That being said, my character back when I played Marvel Superheroes RPG was "Shayde", partly because it was the 90s and everything was cooler when spelled with Ys instead of I and Zs instead of S, and partly because I stole the name from a Doctor Who comic.



The Wave Master posted...
I am very happy that the Universal championship is off Brock Lesnar. Granted it's now on Roman Reigns, but it is a definite improvement over the creep that is Lesnar. Now that steroided out hurt machime can freely go back to UFC and injure as many people as Dana White is willing to let him.

All things considered, I'd almost say the belt was better off on a champion who almost never defended it than it is on a champion who's going to defend it constantly in spite of absolutely no one wanting him to have it.

Because now they're just going to keep feeding people like Finn and Braun and whoever else they see as top-level talent to Roman on a regular basis, and Roman is either going to beat them all or the matches are going to end with screwy finishes because the Shield will keep interfering. At least when Brock had the belt it was easier to just forget about it and pretend the IC title was basically the main title of the fed.

(Which is also a nice bonus, because the Universal title has a stupid name, and looks like it's made of jam, so I like being able to pretend it doesn't exist.)

The only positive thing that might come of this is the rumors that with Bray Wyatt losing his tag-team partner and Erick Rowan getting hurt at the PPV (and losing the tag titles on SmackDown), they might have Braun recruit Bray and Harper to counter-balance the Shield.

The problem, of course, is that the WWE is still blindly determined to push Roman as a face in spite of all evidence of how terrible an idea that is, so if they do reunite the Wyatt family as a counter, they'll just push them as heels and absolutely kill Braun's momentum, so that's also a bad idea.

Then again, considering they'll still going with the Becky-as-hell push in spite of pretty much everyone in the arena clearly being pro-Becky and anti-Charlotte, pushing the right people in the wrong way is basically their standard MO these days.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
Metalsonic66
08/23/18 7:51:40 PM
15
Geek, dam
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 7:56:07 PM
16
I_Abibde posted...
Zeus posted...
What I did grab instead was a new copy of Barberalla: Queen of the Galaxy for $2 (which I had meant to watch for some number of years now).

Barbarella is ... a unique movie experience. Watch that and Flash Gordon back to back for the full effect (because they are made by many of the same people and look very similar despite being over a decade apart).

I've never actually watched Barbarella because it always looked like a terrible movie and I've never really liked Jane Fonda, but if it was very similar to Flash Gordon maybe I should, because I love that movie.

I was actually thinking about going out for Halloween as Klytus, after seeing this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abeFLCGO_Eo" data-time="




Also, from the last topic:
Zeus posted...
Kind of a flaky system. I guess it has its benefits, if you're guaranteed to get everything you might need.

Sometimes, it's nicer to know what you're going to get for your money, and not having to spend hundreds of dollars and still not getting specific cards you want, while getting hundreds of useless commons.

With Magic, I split two separate Ice Age booster boxes with friends, and still didn't get all of the Rare cards I wanted. I've had far more luck just buying individual cards piecemeal based on what I want/need, but that can be expensive as well. "Living" card games and dedicated deck games eliminate artificial scarcity from the equation.

It's part of why I don't like distribution in anything these days, which in turn disdain for loot boxes (and my unwillingness to play games that utilize them).



Zeus posted...
Doesn't that also conflict with LCGs since they also have expansions and continuous releases? After all, the only time when rules can be build with the cards in mind is when the rules and cards are being designed at the same time.

Not really, because new sets tend to be designed around specific ideas, and the developers can keep track of all the previous cards players are likely to have, thus they can design things much tighter than you can when you're talking about a system with dozens of extant sets stretching over 20+ years, with absolutely no idea when a given player came into the game or what cards they own (or what cards will be coming out over the next 20 years).

Plus some of the Wizards of the Coasts developers have admitted that they often throw cards into sets that are deliberately awkward, or outright terrible, out of curiosity over whether or not players will manage to figure out a combo with older cards or future cards that turns useless cards into must-own cards.



Zeus posted...
Otherwise the customization factor is one reason why I find CCGs enjoyable as opposed to just normal card games. Decks are designed for usability, but they're also a player's creative self-expression.

Many LCG and DDCG still allow some degree of player modification or deck building, in spite of the shared pool of cards being the same. And for many games play strategy can make even decks with the same cards play differently, so player self-expression still comes through.

Sure, you likely won't get some of the more ridiculous or unexpected deck builds or people playing unpopular theme decks, but to be honest, 99% of the people playing the game don't play that way anyway. Most players just sort of fall into the rut of building tactical variations of whatever deck is currently popular/strong.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 7:56:25 PM
17
Zeus posted...
That's why strategies, combos, and synergy are set up on a block-by-block basis in MtG, tbh, and why standard (or whatever the format is called) is restricted to the current core set and last two blocks.

Yes, but that also means you are pretty much forced into constantly buying cards, as all of the cards you bought more than a year or so ago cease being "legal" and wind up being worthless garbage.

It's the main reason why my friends only play Type I rules from the 90s, and why it would be a cold day in hell before any of us ever agreed to Standard rules or entered official tournaments. We play almost entirely with cards we bought more than a decade ago, and even thought we occasionally buy new cards, none of us would ever want to be entirely restricted to only new cards.



I_Abibde posted...
I stand corrected on the point of sohei, which goes to show how long it has been since I last looked at the 1st Edition Oriental Adventures (which I got used, and which is falling apart). And I remember the L5R tabletop game being really popular back when I was at university (... fifteen years ago), but this topic is the first time I have seen it mentioned since then.

L5R sort of peaked creatively at the Day of Thunder (1997), but had a few more years of popularity before interest started to wane. By 2007 the game still had a pretty dedicated fanbase, but it was definitely smaller and more niche... and after the Race for the Throne, a lot of people started losing interest, which ultimately led to AEG selling off the rights to the game in 2015. I can definitely see it not being talked about by a ton of people in the last decade or so, and even before that I could see it being overshadowed by Magic (or for younger people, by Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh).


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
shadowsword87
08/23/18 8:04:56 PM
18
ParanoidObsessive posted...
The question is, how would you best represent something like that if you were implementing it as skill check bonuses? Assuming it's essentially a Feat, would you say it would be better to have it as a +2 to skill rolls for a given skill, or automatic Advantage conferred to a skill roll? Or some other mechanic?

I'm basically thinking of it being a sort of deal where it does convey some degree of useful benefit, but not so much that it's hugely game-breaking. Sort of the universe giving you a subtle boost, not a massive blatant gift where you magically become the greatest in the world at whatever skill is getting buffed.

Conversely, I could see a scenario where there's a stronger buff (say, +5 to a skill roll), but it functions as a single-use buff that needs to be invoked, and which requires a short or long rest to recharge. But that feels like it makes it a bit more blatant than I was thinking, and not just a subtle metaphysical influence.


So, there are a few ways of doing this, so I'll just walk through it.

The Official 5e D&D method: You would give them advantage. There are no direct buffs that you add that isn't advantage/disadvantage. The only way you can get just a flat bonus on *anything* would at level 6, the Paladin's Aura of Protection gives everyone +Cha to their saves. That is it, no other class, subclass, or anything gives you a bonus, it's all advantage/disadvantage.

What People Normally Do: +3 seems reasonable. Honestly feel free to reduce it down to even a +1. It's not the actual number that matters, it's the fact that you have a chart that you can hand the players, who then look down the list, and have to remember that it's there.

What I Would Do: I'd give them a small bonus to basically everything. +1 to three skills (that I chose), +3 to one skill, +1 Hit Dice, +4 starting HP, or anything else that will fuck with things just enough to draw attention to it, but not warp the game.
---
ImmortalityV, "I would like to kiss Icoyar to be honest in a non gay way though"
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 8:10:05 PM
19
Metalsonic66 posted...
Geek, dam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7phlHG78do" data-time="&start=22



---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
Entity13
08/23/18 9:05:18 PM
20
The Wave Master posted...
"What would be your superhero, villain, or neutral name?"

Bonus Question: Based on your abilities from the last topic, what would your associated name be? (If you didn't answer the question last topic you can make up a name of course.)


As terrible as I am with my own names, like this, I'd probably go with something like "Lightning Flower," or something meaning that.
---
Zeus
08/23/18 9:23:00 PM
21
Re-watched TDK for the first time since... actually, this might be my first rewatch. Can't remember. The things that kinda bugged me the first time around still annoy me (ie, the ridiculously over-elaborate plans that fall squarely into the Xanatos Roulette trope), some of the characterizations being wonky (ie, Dent's face-heel turn), etc.

However, I also noticed some things I might have missed the first around that I got a kick out of (such as the truck where an "s" was painted in front of "laughter" to say "slaughter is the best medicine"), but now it kinda raised a lot of questions just in terms of the Joker's staffing policy because he *always* seems to find men despite being known for killing his own henchman. I know some of his lackeys were revealed to have come from Arkham but that kinda raises more issues than it solves, since at least the others were trained for this shit.

Still love Heath Ledger's Joker performance, still cringe at Bale's Batman voice, Eckhart's Harvey Dent still seems goofy, and the re-casting of Rachel Dawes still bugs me. And, as much as I still love the Scarecrow cameo at the beginning, I'm not sure *why* any drug dealer would want to work with him in the first place.

The Wave Master posted...
My channel options are limited at dialysis. Maybe 30 channels, and a lot of them are junk. I am forced to watch "Bar Rescue."


No Netflix, Hulu, or YT? >_>

ParanoidObsessive posted...
I tend to be of the school of thought that, if you're going to be a truly effective villain, you shouldn't be wearing overly-elaborate costumes or calling yourself ridiculous names. The best villain is the one standing right next to you and you never even know it.


I think he meant to say supervillain, not just villain (ie, to match superhero). The guy standing next to you may be a great villain, but he's a pretty boring supervillain. And if you're going to be a supervillain, you really need to go over the top. Just ask this guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy2zB8bLSpk" data-time="


ParanoidObsessive posted...
All things considered, I'd almost say the belt was better off on a champion who almost never defended it than it is on a champion who's going to defend it constantly in spite of absolutely no one wanting him to have it.

Because now they're just going to keep feeding people like Finn and Braun and whoever else they see as top-level talent to Roman on a regular basis, and Roman is either going to beat them all or the matches are going to end with screwy finishes because the Shield will keep interfering. At least when Brock had the belt it was easier to just forget about it and pretend the IC title was basically the main title of the fed.


The problem with that line of thought is that *no matter what* you'd still have the same thing: Reigns headlining shows and better stars being fed to him. At least now he has a title so the matches can have pretend-meaning.
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Zeus
08/23/18 9:33:57 PM
22
ParanoidObsessive posted...

Not really, because new sets tend to be designed around specific ideas, and the developers can keep track of all the previous cards players are likely to have, thus they can design things much tighter than you can when you're talking about a system with dozens of extant sets stretching over 20+ years, with absolutely no idea when a given player came into the game or what cards they own (or what cards will be coming out over the next 20 years).

Plus some of the Wizards of the Coasts developers have admitted that they often throw cards into sets that are deliberately awkward, or outright terrible, out of curiosity over whether or not players will manage to figure out a combo with older cards or future cards that turns useless cards into must-own cards.


I think I'm missing something here because it kinda sounds like the two approaches are pretty similar, other than WotC occasionally tossing in interesting designs to see what players do with them (which is a fun concept)

ParanoidObsessive posted...
Sure, you likely won't get some of the more ridiculous or unexpected deck builds or people playing unpopular theme decks, but to be honest, 99% of the people playing the game don't play that way anyway. Most players just sort of fall into the rut of building tactical variations of whatever deck is currently popular/strong.


You're thinking of the competitive scene, not the casual scene. The vast majority of MtG players have never even participated in a tourney.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
Yes, but that also means you are pretty much forced into constantly buying cards, as all of the cards you bought more than a year or so ago cease being "legal" and wind up being worthless garbage.

It's the main reason why my friends only play Type I rules from the 90s, and why it would be a cold day in hell before any of us ever agreed to Standard rules or entered official tournaments. We play almost entirely with cards we bought more than a decade ago, and even thought we occasionally buy new cards, none of us would ever want to be entirely restricted to only new cards.


For competitive it means you're forced to buy cards. For casual, no. Otherwise it doesn't seem *that* different from buying a new set for a LCG, other than maybe the difference in expense (unless you're stocking up with commons or something) and CCGs presumably releasing more often.
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Metalsonic66
08/23/18 10:36:02 PM
23
Zeus posted...
Eckhart's Harvey Dent still seems goofy

I loved Eckhart's Dent, even more than Ledger's Joker TBH. I wish he'd had more screen-time.
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
Entity13
08/23/18 10:51:33 PM
24
I liked his Dent, but the Two-Face bit at the final act did border on silly or tacked-on.
---
Zeus
08/23/18 10:53:34 PM
25
Entity13 posted...
I liked his Dent, but the Two-Face bit at the final act did border on silly or tacked-on.


Meanwhile I'm the opposite where I liked his Two-Face but not his Dent... and yeah, they kinda rushed the Two-Face arc.
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Metalsonic66
08/23/18 11:10:38 PM
26
I do wish they had done the actual "split personality" thing.
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
ParanoidObsessive
08/23/18 11:57:06 PM
27
Entity13 posted...
As terrible as I am with my own names, like this, I'd probably go with something like "Lightning Flower," or something meaning that.

The first thing my brain thought was that sounds like something you'd hear as someone's name in an Asian exploitation martial arts sort of movie.

So then I went to Wiktionary and jury-rigged it into a Japanese name, and got Inazuma Hana (or Hana Inazuma if you're feeling Western). Which actually works out pretty well as a name that would sound plausible if it was used in a story or as an RP character.



Zeus posted...
I think he meant to say supervillain, not just villain (ie, to match superhero). The guy standing next to you may be a great villain, but he's a pretty boring supervillain. And if you're going to be a supervillain, you really need to go over the top.

Yes, I got the implied supervillain. And I'm still suggesting that truly effective supervillains don't go around proclaiming they're evil and putting good guys into easily escapable death traps.

Since you invoked "Xanatos Gambit" earlier in your post, I'll throw "Dangerously Genre Savvy" into the mix. Just because a countless stream of stupid overly theatrical criminals established the precedent doesn't mean someone clever has to follow them. Especially when you consider most of those showy spotlight-grasping egotists never actually win.

I'd take boring and ruling the world over a technicolor outfit and prison time every day of the week.

It's the difference between seeing the villain as a caricature who exists solely to give the hero something to strive against, versus as someone with flexible morals who is actively trying to achieve their unacceptable goals in a realistic manner.



Zeus posted...
The problem with that line of thought is that *no matter what* you'd still have the same thing: Reigns headlining shows and better stars being fed to him. At least now he has a title so the matches can have pretend-meaning.

Yeah, but Roman on top with the belt still sort of invalidates his opponents in ways that him "just being a guy" kind of doesn't. For all that Brock holding the title kind of devalued the title, Roman having it isn't much better. And honestly, Brock having the title and not defending it every week on TV sort of gave it a bit more gravitas anyway.

If anything, the only part of Brock having the title for the last year or so that really sucked is the fact that half his title defenses were against Roman (four of which were in direct succession with no break between), in spite of the fact that Roman getting constant rematches over other people makes zero narrative sense (unless you narratively acknowledge he's being pushed undeservedly by the boss, which is the opposite of the story they're trying to tell), and the audience was radiating raw thermonuclear hate (which made those matches terrible in ways that Brock vs Braun weren't, even though the crowd wanted Braun to win, and he didn't).

People didn't really start HATING Brock having the title until the WWE started telling them they should hate Brock for having the title, while refusing to take the title off him and repeatedly throwing Roman at him over and over again.

But now Roman has the title, is going to be the main storyline of every episode of Raw, and is going to have tons of matches against people who have no hope of winning, all in the desperate hope that people will eventually start liking him. And with the Shield being sucked into his event horizon of suck because that's the only way they can get him cheered at all at this point.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
Zeus
08/24/18 5:00:18 AM
28
Metalsonic66 posted...
I do wish they had done the actual "split personality" thing.


That's very rarely handled well.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
The first thing my brain thought was that sounds like something you'd hear as someone's name in an Asian exploitation martial arts sort of movie.


Same wavelength. I guess geek minds truly do think alike.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
Yes, I got the implied supervillain. And I'm still suggesting that truly effective supervillains don't go around proclaiming they're evil and putting good guys into easily escapable death traps.

Since you invoked "Xanatos Gambit" earlier in your post, I'll throw "Dangerously Genre Savvy" into the mix. Just because a countless stream of stupid overly theatrical criminals established the precedent doesn't mean someone clever has to follow them. Especially when you consider most of those showy spotlight-grasping egotists never actually win.

I'd take boring and ruling the world over a technicolor outfit and prison time every day of the week.

It's the difference between seeing the villain as a caricature who exists solely to give the hero something to strive against, versus as someone with flexible morals who is actively trying to achieve their unacceptable goals in a realistic manner.


Which, again, is what I see as the nuance between a villain and a supervillain, especially since your concept degrades the concept of a supervillain to a morally ambiguous businessman or politician which, to some extent, might not even qualify for a villain

ParanoidObsessive posted...
Yeah, but Roman on top with the belt still sort of invalidates his opponents in ways that him "just being a guy" kind of doesn't.


How, though? If the matches play out the same, the opponents can at least be considered title contenders which is more prestigious than just a guy fighting another guy.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
And honestly, Brock having the title and not defending it every week on TV sort of gave it a bit more gravitas anyway.


But we're not talking about weekly tv defenses -- although Cena's run as US champion was actually pretty incredible *because* he was doing that fighting champion gimmick -- I'm talking about regular tv appearances and challenges at most PPVs. You gain no gravitas if nobody can remember who has the championship and if it's been out of circulation so long that nobody can remember what it looks like.

Absentee champions don't build a brand. You can't book PPVs and shows based on somebody NOT appearing. And a casual viewer watching tv isn't going to care enough to check out a PPV when they've never seen a guy fight because he does maybe a few tv matches a year.

And I'd argue that if Brock was willing to work a regular schedule, it's possible that Roman would be kept at a far lower level because Brock *was* the guy they wanted.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
People didn't really start HATING Brock having the title until the WWE started telling them they should hate Brock for having the title, while refusing to take the title off him and repeatedly throwing Roman at him over and over again.


I certainly disliked Brock long before that. Partly because he was *really* good at being a heel (so was Rapper Cena), but also because he never took the business all that seriously. The fact that he was busted for steroids in MMA, squats on the title, etc, is just icing on that cake.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
But now Roman has the title, is going to be the main storyline of every episode of Raw, and is going to have tons of matches against people who have no hope of winning, all in the desperate hope that people will eventually start liking him.


So.... literally nothing changes?
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
I_Abibde
08/24/18 6:56:34 AM
29
Have not pondered TDK for a good while. I like Aaron Eckhart enough as Harvey Dent / Two-Face to forgive how awful his performance was (IMO) in Black Dahlia. ... Then again, that entire movie was wretched.

The Wave Master posted...
I could watch the NFL network, but they aren't allowed to tackle or hit any longer. Something about brain damage.


NFL Network is my jam. Between that and the Bleacher Report app, I get my football fix, since I rarely get to watch the actual games.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
I was actually thinking about going out for Halloween as Klytus, after seeing this:


IIRC, the reason they had Peter Wyngarde wear that mask in the first place was so that the audience would not immediately know it was him, since he was in the process of shrugging off a 'public indecency' scandal at the time.

By 2007 the game still had a pretty dedicated fanbase, but it was definitely smaller and more niche.


This sounds about right. I am honestly surprised that the game had a life cycle that long, but that speaks favorably of the dedication of its fan base. There are probably things to be said about the life and death of tabletop game fandoms.

Meanwhile, a dungeon I designed for my D&D 5E group is going over pretty well. Putting the gelatinous cube inside an armored box with little holes for its pseudopods was a good way to get the players thinking. Almost makes up for putting the gorgon at the end of a tight passage (... where its breath weapon is pretty much unavoidable).
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
Metalsonic66
08/24/18 12:55:07 PM
30
Zeus posted...
That's very rarely handled well.

They did it well in the '90s Batman series. They could have just kept most of that the same.

Though, the main gimmick of the Dark Knight trilogy was "everything is 'realistic'", so, even though split personalities do exist IRL, Nolan probably thought it would be too "unbelievable".
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
ParanoidObsessive
08/24/18 1:30:43 PM
31
Zeus posted...
Same wavelength. I guess geek minds truly do think alike.

It probably helps in my case that I used to have an Akashic martial artist character in Mage named Burning Lotus, and another named Iron Princess.

Though I almost named her Iron Butterfly first...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIVe-rZBcm4" data-time="




Zeus posted...
Which, again, is what I see as the nuance between a villain and a supervillain, especially since your concept degrades the concept of a supervillain to a morally ambiguous businessman or politician which, to some extent, might not even qualify for a villain

Very few people would hesitate to call Lex Luthor a supervillain, yet apart from the occasional moments of lapsed judgement when he puts on kyrptonite powered armor suits and tried to out-punch Superman, he's very rarely overt in his villainy. He's certainly never felt the need to establish a "code name", and most of the time, he covers his tracks enough to be beloved of the general population. In a few cases, enough so to actually become President of the US.

Feel free to insert any and all Trump jokes here.

I'd argue that the difference between villain and supervillain isn't one of how ostentatious you are, but what your goals are, and what methods you use to carry them out.

Rob a bank with guns and maybe explosives? Villain. Rob a bank with freeze lasers or strange electrical powers? Supervillain. Try to kill your noisy neighbor with a tire iron? Villain. Try to defeat or kill a superhero? Supervillain.

If anything, that's why people get into quibbling about the lower-tier characters in Marvel or DC, and whether or not someone like Punisher falls into the SUPERhero category because he's just a normal dude with guns (though in his case, there's also a lot of quibbling over the HERO part as well). Do you need world-breaking powers and ridiculously mismatched spandex to be a superhero? Or just the ability to play the game at a higher level than most normal humans could ever dream?



Zeus posted...
How, though? If the matches play out the same, the opponents can at least be considered title contenders which is more prestigious than just a guy fighting another guy.

For one thing, as long as he has the belt, they're more inclined to only feed him top-level talent in one-one matches rather than potentially using him in other feuds or occasionally throwing him jobbers to crush.

Plus, after months of him constantly ranting about how Brock is an absentee champion and how if Roman had the belt he'd defend it on Raw every week, they can't really give him too many off-weeks (like they used to occasionally do) or tag matches with no overt pay-off. They've basically painted themselves into a corner where he needs to devalue more opponents than he did without the belt.

And "contenders for the belt" doesn't really mean much if almost no one respects the belt in the first place. It's a terrible looking belt with a terrible name that was somewhat devalued by Brock never being around and which is now devalued by Roman holding it, so no one's going to go "Oh man, Finn's really made it now because they gave him a shot at that worthless title!"

If anything, I'd say we're closer to how things were at times in the past, when most fans almost view the IC title as being more indicative of whether or not a wrestler is worth caring about more than the world title (which often happened when they put the world title on a stinker of a wrestler).


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
ParanoidObsessive
08/24/18 1:30:50 PM
32
Zeus posted...
But we're not talking about weekly tv defenses -- although Cena's run as US champion was actually pretty incredible *because* he was doing that fighting champion gimmick -- I'm talking about regular tv appearances and challenges at most PPVs. You gain no gravitas if nobody can remember who has the championship and if it's been out of circulation so long that nobody can remember what it looks like.

Absentee champions don't build a brand. You can't book PPVs and shows based on somebody NOT appearing. And a casual viewer watching tv isn't going to care enough to check out a PPV when they've never seen a guy fight because he does maybe a few tv matches a year.

Champions who are hated by most of the audience don't really build brands either. At least not when they're being booked as faces - booking a champion as a heel and allowing popular faces to chase the belt is arguably better for business than just putting the most popular face on top.

The problem is, when Roman has the belt, we already KNOW they want to push him as "THE GUY", so we go into every match knowing they're not going to take the belt off him, and thus we're either getting a screwy finish to protect his opponent (which doesn't really work anymore), or Roman winning and WWE throwing a tantrum and demanding everybody cheer him (which will just make people boo him more). So constant defenses hurt him (and the people he's fighting) more than an "absentee" belt does.

And yeah, Cena's "fighting champion" gimmick definitely helped him get over - which is exactly why the WWE is hoping they can pull it off again with Roman. But odds are it won't work this time, because Roman is worse damaged goods than Cena was at the time, crowds are smarter now, and too many people KNOW they're basically trying to turn him into Cena 2.0.

The irony being, they should be trying to turn him into The Rock 2.0 if they were smart - just turn him heel and let him cut promos that aren't heavily scripted, and he'd probably win the crowd over in ways he never will if they keep pushing him the way they are.

Though it's worth noting that the WWE has long since stopped caring about "selling PPV buyrates". Between the network and the Fox deal (and being heavily bribed by the Saudis and Australians), they barely care about having PPVs at all at this point, and multiple people have suggested we may reach a point where the business shifts towards using PPVs to sell TV more than using TV to sell PPVs. In the same way that house shows used to be the be-all end-all of wrestling, and now they're barely an afterthought for the most part.



Zeus posted...
And I'd argue that if Brock was willing to work a regular schedule, it's possible that Roman would be kept at a far lower level because Brock *was* the guy they wanted.

I'd disagree strongly. Because while Vince definitely loves him, there was always the feeling that he was seen as an attraction in the moment, whereas Roman is basically the Anointed One who is supposed to be the face of the company for decades to come. Brock can't really fill that role in any realistic way - he was never going to be the babyface centerpiece no matter how compliant or willing to work he might have been.

Brock likely would have been positioned closer to where Braun is right now - a monster that the crowd can cheer when he does insane things, but who acts more as a foil to Roman than someone who gets to take his place as WWE's new Superman. He might trade the belt with Roman a few times, but Roman would always be at the top because that's where WWE defiantly wants him, no matter what.

But again, even just working PPVs isn't necessarily a negative - it can make a title feel more important to ONLY be defended on PPVs.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
ParanoidObsessive
08/24/18 1:36:21 PM
33
Zeus posted...
I certainly disliked Brock long before that. Partly because he was *really* good at being a heel (so was Rapper Cena), but also because he never took the business all that seriously. The fact that he was busted for steroids in MMA, squats on the title, etc, is just icing on that cake.

YOU might have disliked him, but the majority of the crowd didn't.

In spite of shitting on him and Goldberg when both left the company around the same time back in the day, crowds loved him after his recent return, and that (combined with effective match booking) is why the rematch of Brock/Goldberg was so warmly received. The outright hate didn't start until WWE started pushing the narrative of him as an absentee champion who didn't give a damn about the business (which, while true, wasn't really how most fans saw him in the kayfabe sense until then), and kept giving Roman rematch after rematch after rematch (when he didn't really deserve any of them in kayfabe). The Brock matches against Goldberg, Samoa Joe, Braun, and even the threeway with Kane didn't inspire the same sort of existential dread most people had going into Brock/Roman at SummerSlam.

(And Paul Heyman is responsible for a LOT of Brock's positive image. It's true the crowd likely would have turned out him faster without Paul there)

Brock was the ideal heel champion - he got heat, but not the same sort of heat Roman gets. With Brock, the crowd was generally in a "We want to see a beloved babyface beat this dastardly heel, because we are willing to buy into the narrative" mindset, whereas with Roman the boos are more "We're tired of your shit and just want this guy to go away, because the story you're telling sucks."

It's the difference between hating the villain in a movie because he's well-written EVIL, and hating the villain in a movie because it's a bad movie. It's why so many people loved Darth Vader in the original trilogy Star Wars films, in spite of rooting against him - but also why so many people thought Anakin Skywalker was a little turd and hated him in the prequels.

Also, make no mistake. If the WWE and Brock had come to terms on pay (which is the one thing Brock's booking always hinges on), you can absolutely bet that he would still be holding the title, and would still have it when he competed in UFC again, because Vince would absolutely orgasm if he could talk Brock into wearing the WWE title to MMA matches, and doubly so if he won and became a "two-sport champion". That would generate the kind of PR Vince absolutely loves. They were literally meeting hours before SummerSlam to decide whether or not they could settle on a price both sides were willing to accept, and if they'd agreed, Roman almost certainly would have lost again.

Or, at the very least, Brock would have lost, but then gone after Roman and won it back again later.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
ParanoidObsessive
08/24/18 1:36:27 PM
34
I_Abibde posted...
IIRC, the reason they had Peter Wyngarde wear that mask in the first place was so that the audience would not immediately know it was him, since he was in the process of shrugging off a 'public indecency' scandal at the time.

Yeah, I was aware of that. Though that was more for the potential UK audience, because almost no one in the US knew or cared who he was at the time.



I_Abibde posted...
This sounds about right. I am honestly surprised that the game had a life cycle that long, but that speaks favorably of the dedication of its fan base. There are probably things to be said about the life and death of tabletop game fandoms.

I'm always still kind of amused that Amber DRPG has the lifespan it does in spite of the original books it was based on ending in the mid-90s when the author died, and the RPG system itself not really getting re-released since the 80s due to the death of the designer and convoluted rights issues (and the one company that finally managed to sort the rights issues out going bankrupt before they could actually put out a second edition).

But yeah, in a marketplace where it seems like almost no games last all that long (other than the Big Three of Magic, Pokemon, and Yu-Gi-Oh), L5R managed to hang on for a long time. Doubly impressive when you realize it was never supposed to last past 1997, and the company told the designers "We are making a ton of money off this, you absolutely need to make more."



I_Abibde posted...
Meanwhile, a dungeon I designed for my D&D 5E group is going over pretty well. Putting the gelatinous cube inside an armored box with little holes for its pseudopods was a good way to get the players thinking. Almost makes up for putting the gorgon at the end of a tight passage (... where its breath weapon is pretty much unavoidable).

My brain immediately went to "Heat Metal". That would be an absolutely evil spell to use on a monster like that.


---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
WhiskeyDisk
08/24/18 6:13:48 PM
35
Zeus posted...
Which, again, is what I see as the nuance between a villain and a supervillain, especially since your concept degrades the concept of a supervillain to a morally ambiguous businessman or politician which, to some extent, might not even qualify for a villain


Patrick E McLean's "How to Succeed in Evil" podcast, and later the books in the series had a lot of fun playing with this idea. They center around Edwin Windsor, Evil Efficiency Consultant. He's so much better at finding fault in the plans of the villains that hire him that he basically takes over as the Alpha Supervillain using little more than common sense and ambition.
---
https://imgur.com/4fmtLFt
http://s1.zetaboards.com/sba/ ~there's always free cheese in a mousetrap.
jbomb1234
08/24/18 6:36:51 PM
36
I find the lack of Gundam in this topic most disturbing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NafycpgevsQ" data-time="

---
To Punish and Enslave Barricade
My PSN name is jbomb1234
Metalsonic66
08/24/18 6:38:58 PM
37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0R42Xe-GKqU" data-time="

---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
ParanoidObsessive
08/24/18 6:51:56 PM
38
jbomb1234 posted...
I find the lack of Gundam in this topic most disturbing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CH1XGdu-hzQ" data-time="



---
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
I_Abibde
08/24/18 8:02:03 PM
39
ParanoidObsessive posted...
My brain immediately went to "Heat Metal". That would be an absolutely evil spell to use on a monster like that.


They made do with clever use of Firebolt, actually, since I mentioned that it was an older gorgon that had rust on its scales. One of my players reasoned with me that rust was highly flammable, and Google confirmed that, so I let the party use that to their advantage.
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
Zeus
08/25/18 1:23:06 AM
40
I_Abibde posted...
Have not pondered TDK for a good while. I like Aaron Eckhart enough as Harvey Dent / Two-Face to forgive how awful his performance was (IMO) in Black Dahlia. ... Then again, that entire movie was wretched.


I enjoyed Black Dahlia =x Partly because it was my first ScarJo film.

Metalsonic66 posted...
Zeus posted...
That's very rarely handled well.

They did it well in the '90s Batman series. They could have just kept most of that the same.

Though, the main gimmick of the Dark Knight trilogy was "everything is 'realistic'", so, even though split personalities do exist IRL, Nolan probably thought it would be too "unbelievable".


They didn't touch on the split aspect that often, that I can recall. It occasionally just took the form of Two-Face talking to himself and, quite honestly, not that many years earlier you had *two* other supervillains who talked to themselves in widely lampooned moments (Green Gob and Doc Ock)

ParanoidObsessive posted...
Very few people would hesitate to call Lex Luthor a supervillain, yet apart from the occasional moments of lapsed judgement when he puts on kyrptonite powered armor suits and tried to out-punch Superman, he's very rarely overt in his villainy. He's certainly never felt the need to establish a "code name", and most of the time, he covers his tracks enough to be beloved of the general population. In a few cases, enough so to actually become President of the US.


I've always been on the fence over calling Luthor a supervillain, although he *certainly* has presentation down given that his version of a powersuit lets him go toe-to-toe with heroes and villains in addition to his overblown schemes. That said, doesn't Lex undermine your point? Once Lex starts doing evil, he's pretty widely known for it and he's somewhat of a supervillain simply *because* he gets away with that kind of shit which is comic books-level stuff. And given that people know enough not to trust him, he kinda undermines your previous argument.

ParanoidObsessive posted...
I'd argue that the difference between villain and supervillain isn't one of how ostentatious you are, but what your goals are, and what methods you use to carry them out.

Rob a bank with guns and maybe explosives? Villain. Rob a bank with freeze lasers or strange electrical powers? Supervillain. Try to kill your noisy neighbor with a tire iron? Villain. Try to defeat or kill a superhero? Supervillain.


idk, seems like ability is more important than just methods. A lot of superheroes and villains are just exceptionally talented rather than empowered or using anything unusual. As for trying to defeat or kill a superhero, pretty much every flunky tries it >_>
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Zeus
08/25/18 2:02:48 AM
41
ParanoidObsessive posted...
Zeus posted...
And I'd argue that if Brock was willing to work a regular schedule, it's possible that Roman would be kept at a far lower level because Brock *was* the guy they wanted.

I'd disagree strongly. Because while Vince definitely loves him, there was always the feeling that he was seen as an attraction in the moment, whereas Roman is basically the Anointed One who is supposed to be the face of the company for decades to come. Brock can't really fill that role in any realistic way - he was never going to be the babyface centerpiece no matter how compliant or willing to work he might have been.

Brock likely would have been positioned closer to where Braun is right now - a monster that the crowd can cheer when he does insane things, but who acts more as a foil to Roman than someone who gets to take his place as WWE's new Superman. He might trade the belt with Roman a few times, but Roman would always be at the top because that's where WWE defiantly wants him, no matter what.


He definitely seemed poised to be far more than just a monster heel. Braun is where he is because he doesn't have the right look. Brock has the body, the power, and a good enough appearance that he could have sat in the top position -- and, at the time, he was the right age for it.

And, unlike Roman, Brock is a name that if he was putting in the time could get the brand exposure Roman will never provide (unless Roman gets a movie career going).

ParanoidObsessive posted...
But again, even just working PPVs isn't necessarily a negative - it can make a title feel more important to ONLY be defended on PPVs.


You can work without defending. The problem isn't title defenses but just not working

ParanoidObsessive posted...
YOU might have disliked him, but the majority of the crowd didn't.

In spite of shitting on him and Goldberg when both left the company around the same time back in the day, crowds loved him after his recent return,


...because he was gone and then he came back. Seeing a big name return is always exciting for a while. Hell, even Roman Reigns would probably get some enthusiasm if he vanished for a few years and reset that slate. (And, you know, had Paul Heyman or another charismatic manager talking for him.)

jbomb1234 posted...
I find the lack of Gundam in this topic most disturbing.


More reason to hate the name! Plus are we geeks or are we otaku? (Overlooking that otaku is basically the Japanese equivalent of geeks.) What's next, am I going to spam this topic with Pokemon talk?
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Zeus
08/25/18 3:20:11 AM
42
On that whole rare-for-the-sake-of-rare RNG nonsense, I think I'm about done with Funko's Mystery Minis (or at least heavily curtailing again). Was looking at some of the sets and there a mess of 1/36, 1/72, etc (for reference, a display case of Funko's Mystery Minis contains 12 figures -- so you could conceivably buy multiple display boxes and not get rares).

I was looking at the most recent Harry Potter set and the only thing in there I really cared about was Nagini... a 1/36 where, while it looked larger, there was little guarantee I'd get him. Then there was a Star Wars set with *multiple* Bounty Hunters... but again, most of it was 1/36. (And then some of it was exclusive to one retailer or another.)

https://www.cardboardconnection.com/funko-star-wars-empire-strikes-back-mystery-minis

Honestly, if all the choices were just 1/12, I'd probably buy 3 or 4. However, given that the odds are kinda stacked against me, even buying one is a waste. (And, for reference, B&N sells them at the $6 MSRP whereas other retailers range $7-9, with Hot Topic being the highest although they routinely run weird discounts which knocks it down a little bit.) It's probably a little scary to think about how much money I've spent on these things, although it was obviously broken up over several years.

I still kinda need to build a display case of some kind for these. I'm thinking either shallow shelving or tiered shelving. Going to have to just make it myself because I'm not sure who would make that kind of a thing at a reasonable price.

Oh, and on a quasi-interesting note, while the Disney Infinity games are dead, the thing apparently lives on in another form. Disney Stores still carry articulated figures based on the style (called Disney Toybox). Had seen them at a Disney Store in the past, but learned that they were still doing new ones including a kinda junk-looking Jack Skellington (and only him from NBC so far).
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
Metalsonic66
08/25/18 11:33:55 AM
43
Zeus posted...
They didn't touch on the split aspect that often, that I can recall. It occasionally just took the form of Two-Face talking to himself and, quite honestly, not that many years earlier you had *two* other supervillains who talked to themselves in widely lampooned moments (Green Gob and Doc Ock)

The split personality aspect was mostly for his origin story. After his accident, the "Big Bad Harv" personality took over pretty much completely, and from there his main gimmick was his indecisiveness, reliance on the coin, and occasional fixation on "duality".
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
The Wave Master
08/25/18 11:48:29 AM
44
I know Shonen Manga/Anine get bad reps from fans, but I freaking love "My Hero Academia."

I've been watching the Anine on Hulu, and it's really good. My favorite character is "All Might" which is one hell of a name for a superhero. He's basically their version of Superman in that universe, but a lot better, deeper, more complex of a character.

Yes there are tropes, it's a damn anime, but I'm not going to be ashamed for liking something, and neither should any of you.

I figured since we are discussing superheroes and names it kind of fit to the overall theme of the first few pages of the topic. I think it's a fun anime, give it a shot if you have some time.
---
We are who we choose to be.
Metalsonic66
08/25/18 11:58:21 AM
45
All Might is basically if Superman and Captain America did the fusion-dance.

The series is great. My brother was telling me how he started watching it around the time the second season ended, and I had heard of it before but never really looked much into it. I randomly started reading the manga and ended up catching up to the weekly releases (somewhere around the end of the Overhaul arc) within a couple weeks, lol. So I've been reading every chapter as it's come out since then.

I've watched the first several episodes of the anime and they seem to be doing a good job adapting it. I'm glad they're doing it in seasons instead of weekly. That's what ruined the adaptations for several other manga.
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
Entity13
08/25/18 1:37:22 PM
46
I'm finding some enjoyment in MHA, but I'm not head over heels about it. Most of the characters play off of one another well enough, though I feel as though I could do without a couple of the Class 1-A characters, and we'd barely lose anything at all; like that sugar rush guy (Rikido), or the pelvic laser dude (Yuga).

I want to like Mina, but she keeps getting the short end of the stick before showing her strengths (if she has any). Her one moment to shine was when she easily beat the aforementioned laser dude in a fight, so she's basically a notch above useless, despite not contributing more to the story than a cute-ish face.

I dislike Minoru as the obligatory wuss, annoying kid, and team pervert, as well I don't care for how his costume looks like he's wearing a ceramic diaper, but at least he fucking contributes once in a while during combat.

Katsuki...I get it, but he needs to start getting over himself already. It's been so many episodes or chapters, and he's still as much of the same asshole as when we first saw him in the series, and it's beyond grating or tiring at this point. Show some growth, dude.
---
Metalsonic66
08/25/18 1:43:19 PM
47
Entity13 posted...
I want to like Mina, but she keeps getting the short end of the stick before showing her strengths (if she has any). Her one moment to shine was when she easily beat the aforementioned laser dude in a fight, so she's basically a notch above useless, despite not contributing more to the story than a cute-ish face.

She's one of the more minor characters so she's probably never going to get the focus she deserves. Probably my favorite female character design in the series though. And I'm usually not one who likes "less than human-looking" females.
---
PSN/Steam ID: Metalsonic_69
Big bombs go kabang.
Zeus
08/25/18 4:49:54 PM
48
Tried watching Magic For Humans on NFI which, at the beginning, claims that no camera tricks are used. However, as I watch some of these tricks, it *seems* like they're using camera tricks or the other person is in on it.

The Wave Master posted...
I know Shonen Manga/Anine get bad reps from fans, but I freaking love "My Hero Academia."


Nooooo! The otakuing has begun!

The Wave Master posted...
I figured since we are discussing superheroes and names it kind of fit to the overall theme of the first few pages of the topic. I think it's a fun anime, give it a shot if you have some time.


Not starting until the series wraps. It's bad enough that I watched One Punch Man and now if I want to continue the story I have to read the manga which doesn't make the action look anywhere near as cool (and the animated manga or whatever videos don't really improve things). Granted, the early stuff is better anyway when it's just wacky parodies and goofy origin stories, like a guy who loved custom cars so much that he decided to deck out himself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otoV-OrI1RY" data-time="


The Wave Master posted...
I figured since we are discussing superheroes and names it kind of fit to the overall theme of the first few pages of the topic. I think it's a fun anime, give it a shot if you have some time.


A *lot* of anime falls under the auspices of geek subjects, considering that many involve fantasy or scifi settings or things like heroes. Then you have meta shows like Genshiken concerning otaku themselves as they go about their geekery.
---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
I_Abibde
08/25/18 7:47:53 PM
49
Yeah, I'm going to be That Guy here, I guess: The overwhelming popularity of MHA is why I haven't made time to watch it yet. Want to wait until the hype passes. Wouldn't be the first time I've done that for anime.

Zeus posted...
I enjoyed Black Dahlia =x Partly because it was my first ScarJo film.


Brian de Palma is a frustrating director for me. I know he can make a great movie (see: Carrie and Scarface), so it's weird when he does something like Black Dahlia that just misses all the marks (... IMO).
---
-- I Abibde / Samuraiter
Laughing at Game FAQs since 2002.
The Wave Master
08/25/18 8:08:28 PM
50
Black Dablia was just a terrible movie. It was a well acted Tues in the punch bowl. The performances were solid, but everything else was an exercise in stupidity and frustration.

Also, while I think Scar Jo is a very talented and pretty lady, and I literally love redheads, for obvious reasons; Mary Jane Watson, my wife, I find myself liking Jennifer Lawrence more. I think she's a better actress (Watch Joy and American Hustle.) And she is easy on the eyes and is a bit of a crazy drunk too. I kind of like mentally unstable women, it makes them more attractive to me. I guess I have issues too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6N8z2WIYr4M" data-time="

---
We are who we choose to be.
Topic List
Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10