Shuck

Server: Balmung Primary Linkshell: Misericorde Characters: Isaac Jacobi Style of Roleplay: I tend toward "adventure" RP, and I place a heavy emphasis on honesty of circumstance. Now. What do I mean by that? When I say "honesty of circumstance", I mean that I tend to apply as realistic a lens as possible to the setting, the people in it, and what's going on. On the lore end, I mean...they're the basic rules of the world we're all agreeing to play in, so naturally, I'm not against it being bent, but there are certainly lines that probably shouldn't be crossed. Strongest Skills: Realism, research, minutia, and horror. I'm pretty good at horror.

I'm not entirely clear what you mean by this. We're discussing character backgrounds, which are strictly for RP purposes. Also, it doesn't really fall into "mincing" words. There's a lore background, and definition for what is, and isn't a Dragoon. Nobody's trying to hamper your imagination here, but again, MMO's in particular tend to allow players to do things that don't necessarily make sense in the overall scheme of the game's story. For example: Every time a character goes into a dungeon, the critters within will behave exactly the same, every time. The bosses will have the same monologue, if they offer one, every time. If it's a dungeon with a story? That story will be the same every time. There isn't an assembly line out there with endless Big Bad whatevers. It's a concession of sense made for the sake of play. The multiple players running around as Dragoons are the same sort of thing. A concession made for the sake of play. People want to play these classes. That's cool. The storyline of the game itself says that pretty much nobody makes it into that super-special secret club. That'd be dandy as well, if it weren't for the sheer volume of people present in the world, all wanting to play that class, most of whom will never roleplay, or even invent a backstory for their character. So, rather than change the story (And honestly, from what I've seen in Beta, there's no shortage of "You are the Chosen One!"), they just wrap it all up in it's own little pocket (instances and solo-quests), and tell every player the same bit. When we then take that into an arena where multiple people are contributing to a combined narrative (roleplayers in a roleplaying community), we're going to have to accept that our characters are not necessarily going to be everything the writers of the main-quests make them out to be. Honestly, the mechanics of the game don't support the "Chosen One" business, but that's another kettle all together. Back on point: With that in mind, it's important to respect the boundaries set by the world, and it's history. Your character should make sense in the context of the world that they exist. Liberties can be taken here and there, but there are a few lines you just don't really want to cross. The Job system is wonderful for gameplay. The lore surrounding the jobs themselves makes a lot of this background business a mess (they're all basically super exclusive little sub-societies). Do I wish they didn't do it that way? Yyyyeah, I kind of do. I mean, it gives the Jobs a sense of identity in the world, but it also excludes the players (by and large) from ever truly being a member of their lofty ranks. I suppose in the end, you're right in saying that the lore interpretation of Dragoons in this particular case is elitist. It is. Unashamedly so. Because they are elites. But, we didn't make it that way. We're just kind of rolling with what we're being dealt.

(From the guy who wrote, and is still writing Superpositions, I present this. Like the other, feedback is encouraged, and I'll be adding more as I go. Without further ado, this is a horror story.) Prelude: Look beyond the broken bottles, and past the rotten wooden stairs. Were Beatric Reid the sort to prattle, she would tell you a story of a young woman who lived outside a great, and forbidding series of buildings. Through cracks, and unattended windows, I would say, this young woman would half-glimpse the comings and goings of not just others like her, but of things just beyond sight. I would tell you that in every crack and crevice, she saw something grasping and desperate to pull us all into the waiting dark. I would tell you that she knew, deep down, if she just understood the people locked in these structures well enough, she could warn them of what was on the horizon. But all of that would be totally untrue, cliche, without merit, and perhaps most egregiously, a bore. Instead, I will talk on something that deserves the effort: The world beyond ours is not entirely indecipherable, and I intend to prove that. Correction. I've proven it, sometime in the future, and now I must re-trace my steps in order to re-arrive at my as of yet unconcluded conclusion. My notes, in this waking dream I have been quite lost in since my arrival in Ul'Dah, are quite scattered, and littered with mocking asides, baseless grammar and spelling corrections, and a recurring chant of "No Face". I've made my case to these unseen harriers that I do, indeed, have a face, but it occurs to me that the Gridanians typically used masks in a great number of their rituals involving anything sidereal. Clarification and Addendum: A number of cultures, beast tribes included, utilize masks when partaking in anything one might deem "mystic". I will endeavor to procure something with which to cover my visage. I expect this will be difficult, as the world, or the world's worse-for-wear reflection seems devoid of much beyond unusable rubble and ruin. I would also note that there is a wind here that continues to stir dust, though I can't interact with it at all. While I attempt to make a "face", it may do me good to review my notes. Entry 1: Once, it held dreams. I see that I have and will write here that I came to this place through means of an alchemical cocktail consisting of a soil sample from an Idol I was able to locate in Amalj'aa territory, a feather, lightly sprinkled in the blood of a dying man from one of the Primal Garuda's assaults in the 'Shroud, a variety of finely ground lightning crystals, a drop of Ceruleum taken from the good Captain Jacobi without his knowledge, two spoonfulls of honey for taste, and water from a Serpent Reaver hold. My goodness, this must've tasted awful. However, it does explain my current state of perception. For all I can guess, I am currently staggering about the Ruby Exchange in a stupor, drooling on myself, and pawing at passers-by. That, or I am collapsed elsewhere, dangerously near death, and experiencing this hallucination as a result of entirely too much Aether in my system. Nothing about why, though. Perplexing as it is, I have decided that I will fashion a face from one of the few objects I can interact with. It will take a bit of chewing, but I believe I can bite holes through my shoes, and string the leather over my eyes with the laces. I find it fortunate that I abhor these heavy boots, and that my feet will not feel the shards of glass and stone that litter the streets. The wind has changed direction no less than seven times as I have recorded these observations, and I believe the letters scrawled by the others here, whoever they might be, are in some form of disagreement with the paper itself. It tugs, and bends. Curls, and contorts, and struggles against...nothing. Against itself. I've opted to silence the incessant crinkling by beating the things with my now free shoe soles. Entry 2: Why didn't you come when I beat my drum? The mask has worked. I see them. They see me. We cannot touch yet, but we are close. They point my way down the road, toward the Gate of Thal. I don't believe I am dead, so I am left to assume that I am requested elsewhere. While walking, I stepped on another page of my notes. Almost illegible, as the others have implored me to make different noises. They write that I cannot know what I know. They say that these doors cannot be opened. From what I can gather, I was attempting to call to something. The Amalj'aa in particular were adept at calling upon their God, and the demi-magic influence of the Bard's songs of old held promise. If one knew how to speak to the stars themselves...find the right cadence, the right meter...well, we might fight the monsters of yesterday with the monsters of tomorrow, mightn't we? This was sound reasoning, and well within my grasp, if only I could keep the sentences and notes from running away. Or vanishing. Or killing themselves off, as was the case with the S's and K's. Engaged in some manner of overt warfare with one another, and evidently unable to cope with the horrors wrought by either side, they leapt, strangled, and skewered themselves on whatever possible. I would have to give up on chasing them. The gates were my only option. Entry 3: Lying pictures, screaming metal. The gates lead to Aleport. Aleport is not on the same landmass as the city of Ul'Dah. On the shores, men in billowing red coats prodded and poked at an ailing machine. Shaped like a man, but it's features were unclear. They melted and swayed. It was broken. Leaking some manner of inky solution. My mouth produced no sound as they closed around the thing. It loped and struggled to stand on it's one useable leg. It lashed out when it could retreat no further, yelping like a wounded dog. Three fell. Then it fell. The others, walking out of an ocean of boiling silver, turned as one and marched to a drum I could not hear. I saw, in the machine's grip, another of my notes. When I pulled it free, something churned within it. Weakly, one gear pushed another. A few fingers dug into the sand, and it's fluids...it's blackened, glossy blood, traced a message. "Why won't they let me help them?" I told the thing I did not know. I asked if it knew where more pages were. It did not respond. As I turned to leave, I felt a pang of guilt. Hallucination or not, I could not leave it to sit at the beach. I drug it, heels first, away from the waters, and toward what was a cavemouth at one point. The page was slick with the machine's ichors. I could not read the words. Tracing my steps, bound by some force of habit I had not yet developed, I came upon it's words in the sands. "I didn't want for this." There was an echo of pain in this place. Of fear. I did not want to see further, and so I removed my mask, and threw it to the sea. Entry 4: Turn back, turn back. I wandered the landscape aimlessly, trying to wipe the blood of the construct from my notes. I had to know what they said. But with no face to see this world, I had little hope of finding additional clues. The taunts followed me, impish little fingers drawing their insults in the sand. I fought with them. I bellowed my own profanities. This seemed only to spur them on. I felt some desperate longing to escape these things. A half-remembered nightmare from childhood, perhaps. Knowing only that something is chasing you, and that it must not catch up. Through the streets and walkways of Limsa Lominsa I ran. No direction. No conscious hope of escape. I stopped once I reached the ferry docks. The boats were all present, but there were no sails, and they tumbled freely through the air, bouncing off one another in an endless, clumsy dance. In the distance, something coiled and snaked through the liquid-metal sea. It ceased it's churning long enough to raise it's head. It could see me. I was certain. "No face. No mark. No master. No hope." It drew closer to the docks, dissolving ship and pier alike into churning, bubbling silver. "Unwelcome pilgrim. Trifling sham of a woman." I dropped all but the ichor-soaked note. I fled. Entry 5: The cellar door is an open throat. This world, whatever it was, was dissolving. The S's and K's still standing raised arms against the thing from the sea, and were turned to fluid. The men in their billowing red coats formed wall upon wall of proud jaws, and determined brows. The very ground they stood on swallowed them hole, as piece after piece of everything became one with this furious metallic ocean. It was through a crumbling floor, and into a half-dissolved basement that I found my refuge. The floor of the Lominsan Port Authority was where I found myself lying. One by one, the bricks fell away. I expected oblivion, and I was not disappointed. I was surrounded by stars. A yawning nothing. A howling everything. The ocean had stopped. The serpent ventured no further. I approached it. Curious as to why it had stopped, and it recoiled. It spoke in a language...a song, that I did not know. And the nothingness answered in turn. There were things moving around me. I could feel them. The tingling of other presences. The songs repeated again and again, and I begged them to explain. How did it halt the serpent? Where was I? What had I learned? But my words were lost. I had discovered how to see, but I had neglected to give myself a mouth. I did not give myself ears, and now, it was clear that I was mistaken to throw my eyes away. I could not allow myself to discard these things in the future. I twisted my remaining note into something that looked like a pen. The machine's blood crackled and squealed, but held firm against the boiling metal. With screams and curses directed at nothing, I created. I drew. I would give myself eyes so that I might see. A mouth, that I might speak. Ears, that I might hear.

Fair enough. I had misunderstood.

Just remember that there's a huge difference between guys that wield spears, and an actual, holy knight of Ishgard that is bound to, and sworn to slay dragons in the name of Halone, the Fury. It's not the people you'd have to worry about. It's the forest. The Twelveswood is a conscious, thinking thing. One hundred years isn't such a huge deal to a tree. Your timeline's a bit messed up. Silvertear Skies happened before the entirety of the events of 1.0 (during 1562). Carteneau Flats happened at the end of 1.0, a full ten years later. Also, Silvertear was entirely between the Garleans and Midgardsormr. None of our troops were deployed to that. By the time Silvertear was said and done, the Ala Mhigan exodus was largely done. As for the sailing route? That's likely the faster, safer way. Garlea attacked by air, and a small vessel could easily slip by the imperial air fleet. They'd also avoid getting eaten by trees. Again, there's a break between what the player can access, and what the world says makes sense. If every player running about was a Dragoon, and also master of the lost art of the Warrior, and was a member of the dying Bard circles, and also able to tap the forbidden (for real) practice of White Magic to it's fullest, that would be one bizarre world. PC's, for the most part could not possibly all be true Dragoons. They can dress like them. They can mimic them through whatever means they please. After all, it's not like you can't just commission a set of armor, and ask whatever smith that cranks it out to make it look just so. Likewise, red patterns on a white robe doesn't mean that the Seedseers of Gridania have decided that you're good to go on hurling around a magic practice that brought a golden age to an end. I'm not saying that there are no PC's that are really, truly Dragoons. But it's better to be cautious with these labels (because seriously, the Jobs, as they are, are usually closely guarded secrets trusted to absolutely goddamned nobody), and remember that there are concessions the game has to make in order to allow people to play it. Short of it: Chances of being a real Dragoon are about as good as winning the lottery. Fudge it.

No, man. Seriously. Real, true Dragoons are products of Ishgard. They've spelled that out in bold. There's a difference in what the players are allowed to access, and their place in the world. Consider for a moment that the storyline in 1.0 was centered around the Player Character being the chosen one. Now, obviously, we weren't all the chosen one, and the NPC dialogue for the Dragoon Quest straight-up says that the eye doesn't just pick anybody. You don't just sign up on the roster, and become a Dragoon. And even then, Dragoons are rare commodities. They don't leave Ishgard. They fight the Dragons. Here's another video:

I don't mean to throw a wrench in the works here. Really, I don't. But you should check this out: Dragoons (real, true Dragoons) are the exclusive property of Ishgard, an intensely isolationist and religious city-state in northern Coerthas. Like...the only way in was a single bridge, and they locked the rest of us right out. Anyway, the Dragoon arose from this area when a guy named Haldrath had himself a throw-down with Nidhogg, one of the Dragon Kings, and quite literally wrenched the dragon's eye from it's head. Since then, the eye of the dragon itself has been held inside Ishgard's walls. Dragoons are chosen by the eye (it glows or twinkles or whatever), for their ability to connect with, and channel the power of the Dragons themselves. This, however, weighs exceptionally heavily on the individual in question, and they're at constant risk of falling under the sway of the Dragons they're sworn to fight. Ok, so click these to get the 1.0 story in it's entirety. Short of it: No Dragoons in Ala Mhigo, and not a ton of story-swapping is likely to be had that far east of Isghard (and over some mountains. Check this out.) Otherwise, the concept is...I'm gonna say "familiar". We're treading a lot of well-trodden ground here. Let's get some questions cooking to make this (honestly, solid enough) idea better: 1. Why exactly does he want to be like his father again? Let's remember that this was a child who, for all accounts (being too young to remember Ala Mhigo), doesn't really know this man, save for the stories. He'd have like...a few fuzzy memories. If anything, from what you've told us, his "uncle" raised him. 2. Is this character's only aptitude in combat? I don't see a lot of what else he might do/try in order to make a living. I get that he wants to physically protect people, but you also mention that he's aiming to provide for his family. 3. Why is it he needs to provide for his family all on his own? 4. What if this whole plan in Ul'Dah doesn't pan out? Is this a first attempt, or a last resort? 5. How'd that trip through the Twelveswood go? The trees there eat people. Not joking, nobody goes into the Black Shroud for a reason. Gridanians know the routes, and Ala Mhigo had tried their hand at wrecking that nation in the past. How'd they get through a living, breathing, hostile forest that remembers their people and what they did? I'm sure I'll think of some more later. Just stuff to consider.

If Captain Ahab and Captain Nemo had some kind of weird English/Indian clone-baby together, and Nemo's line were to suddenly lose all their money, you would get something really, really close to Isaac Jacobi. Admittedly, he'd be more like his latter dad than his former, but there's a kind of heedless, obsessive, borderline maniacal drive behind him that speaks pretty strongly of what I took away from Moby Dick. Really, it's all in the symbology. Without giving a ton away, the titular white whale is often times thought to symbolize god, fate, blah, blah blah (basically, the inevitable, or a force of nature that is inherently careless and/or destructive), and there's a busted dude who'll give absolutely anything (and that means anything) to spite it, harm it, and hopefully kill it. On the other hand, we've got Nemo. I mean, I can't really say much more than that link I provided does, so in the interest of space, we'll just leave it here.

Doesn't that assume that the individuals present have the where-with-all to spot, and actively root out recessive alleles? Because I would argue that the Miqo'te have no idea how to do that, and cannot effectively map say...congenital forms of cancer. Then, I mean...the long term effects of inbreeding have been documented to be largely influenced by societal factors (literacy, wealth, etc.), so a tribal society like the Miqo'te in a pre-industrial world like Eorzea would have a ton working against it in terms of successfully weeding out weak genes. All they (the Miqo'te) have to do in this particular case is win a duel. Doesn't say how. You'd assume that the most fit individuals would get to breed, but as we can see that's not always the case, now is it? The bit about Esuna eliminating contagious disease is kind of off as well. It's a videogame ability. If it were actually a cure-all beyond status effects, the world of Eorzea would have no sickness, poisonings, or even a need for the Alchemist's guild. Clearly, these factors continue to exist in the world, so we can assume that Esuna is either not readily available, and therefore is not a viable vector to totally discount an entire tribe being ravaged by the Miqo'te flu, or it is in fact not a cure-all, and is ineffective at eradicating naturally occurring diseases, being specifically for afflictions of the "magic" sort. This thread is now about science.

Good, that's how we like it. PM incoming.

It's like you want to pretend you don't know us. We know you. We remember you. Remember us to your friends and acquaintances. It focuses the errant strands of thought. Ever winding. Ever tangling, matting, making their own tapestry of the half-forgotten. The faceless. The nameless. You're not sorry yet. Not sorry that you've tossed us to this grey, inky sea of lost dreams and missed connections. Not sorry that you've stripped our names from our faces, and our faces from your mind. But you will be. Once we sign you up for Cat Facts. That being said: As one of those people who is still using Linkshell as a holdover term from 1.0, I'll fix my shit, and make an effort to badger others until they do the same. As far as I know, it's just Intermission, and they pass that out like it's going out of style. Just yell at Xenedra until she gives you a pearl come Phase 4/Launch (use harsh language, it's what she's comfortable with).

And here I've been busy. People have been running all about, postin' up in this thread like it ain't no thang. You guys must be lost. I'll fire you a PM. It's a name a guy would have. That's...really about it. Why, what's it to you? Word. Seriously, though. You guys. This is the Misericorde thread. The other threads are over there. Everywhere else.

Sure it is. Let's walk through history. Again. Because the things you say are preserved in a text-based format. So. Here we have the meat of your thrust. Right in bold. Your words. You'll notice that A) Nope, that's not what the thread had ever stated, and B) No one's denigrated anything, as denigration is defined as "unfair criticism" first and foremost, or "disparaging", which would be to regard something as being of little worth. Neither of those things happened. I don't know why you insist on pretending you have a better grasp of language than you do. Also, you're not so much "debating" anything as you are making shit up, and throwing out words that you don't understand the meaning of. In whatever fantasy land you imagine yourself to be the calm, reasonable individual in this exchange, I'm sure that opening line is true. I mean, it's not in reality. Also, I'll point out faults in whatever I like. In any discussion. At any time. If you can't handle that, nobody here can help you, but that's been said. I'll go ahead and link you to my posts in that thread (you won't read those either, because that's the fashionable thing to do, I guess): Here's the one that you took issue with. In this one, we see, and I can't believe I'm explaining this again, that my (entirely fair, and grounded in what happened in the comics)criticism of Superman ties into some thoughts on another character all together. We can already see that the sole focus is not on Superman, but on the discussion of comic book heroes and literature in general. But that's a bit you would like to gloss over, because I guess you live in a world where pesky things like "facts" and "reality" get in the way of your grandstanding nonsense, and your ability to pretend to be smug. Moving on, we have my initial post in that thread. Which, as you can see, offers more discussion points on other characters. Nowhere does anyone suggest that the other thread be based entirely around the discussion of one character, so...y'know, again you're making shit up. Even the posts after that move the discussion in new directions. Is english just not your first language? If so, that's ok, and I can cut you some slack on it, but holy hell, guy. You can't just not look at the words. The difference here being that this isn't a cafeteria, we aren't shouting across a room, and the discussion that was being had was not even a full degree separated from the short exchange we had on Superman. This analogy is flawed from the ground up, and the argument is still invalid. Also, nobody cares about how little you say you impose on others. You've imposed on the previous thread. I mean, far be it for me to call you a liar, but that is some wild un-truth. And this is just wonderful. I'll tell you why in a minute, but I want this one hanging out there. Not what was said, let's revisit. That's what was said. In response to this: That's what you said. I'm not belittling you, I'm correcting you. There's a difference. You (for some reason) thought that you could...I don't know, "profile" a stranger on the internet based on like two half-read blurbs. You also decided that everyone needed to know that you've...been...on the internet. I guess. Nobody cares, and it's not relevant to any bit of any conversation that you and I have ever had, but hey! Why not, right!? Seriously, though: You attempted to impress, it didn't happen, that's not being belittled, and you're not nearly keen enough to "understand" a person through the internet. Nobody here is. Nobody. Unless you're secretly telepathic. Are you? What number am I thinking of? Nope. It wasn't. Nowhere in anything that was posted on the topic of Superman was directed at you. Here's the post. Again. Point out to me where I say anything in this post to you. I mean, you can't, because it doesn't exist, but I want to see how far you're willing to pretend. You're gonna give your ego a rash if you keep stroking it like that. Anyway, I was responding to Uther. The guy I quoted. He agreed with your points, so I provided some counter-points. To him. If I wanted to respond to you, I would have. Like I'm doing now. This isn't an inability to see what happened, this is a refusal to follow you down the twisting, ill-maintained road to crazytown. I have no idea why you thought that I was responding to you by-proxy. Who would do that? Nobody would do that. Nobody would believe anybody would do that, unless they had some kind of self-importance issues, and that's not something I care to broach. Also, there's no zeal here. I don't think you know what "zeal" means. Let's clear the air on that one too, and add it to your list of "things I don't understand, but will use anyway": Eagerness or ardent interest in pursuing something. In this pursuit, right here? There is no fire. There's no eagerness. Trust me. I would know. I'm me. And then lots of points that contradict each other. Someone to "Argue" with. Not "Debate" with. Not a "Oh, as much as I see your opinion, I disagree because..." What points that contradict? Point those out, otherwise, you're making things up. Again. Anyway, this is another point where you've bungled your communications. The word "argue" is used to denote a contention or disagreement with words. Any negative connotations you might attach are...well, they're fiction. Like the majority of your points. Utter, total, fiction. So...yeah, that is in fact what I said. And I meant it! I like arguing. It's a great way to exchange ideas. Cleaned up? What the fuck are you talking about? The language, cadence, and general posting style hasn't changed in the slightest. The conversation moved on. Hell, the time stamps on the posts themselves will even reveal that nothing was edited. Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about? Moving on, you can't claim victory if you haven't provided a single counter-point. And you haven't. Like, at all. It's all been either utter bullshit, or a willful ignorance of events as they happen. Ok, remember when I said that I wanted that one little bit hanging out there, because it was funny? This is why. This isn't even close to what she said, and you're full of shit. Check this out: I even bolded that for you. You're so incredibly wrong, and off-base that it's...well, it's not even funny anymore. It's just strange. Right there, she says the opposite of what you think she said. Right there! Her words! Why not? Talk about whatever. You're not making any grand statements by doing...whatever this is. If you're so very unselfish, I would argue that you would've just let those events play out any way they like, as doing anything else would invest a piece of your self into the happenings, and would therefore make any actions you take selfish, but that's because I understand the logical progressions of events. And, actually, I've proven you wrong like twenty times over, you just live in a fantasy world. As evidenced in the last quote. The one where you imagined that someone said something entirely opposite to what they actually said. You haven't thrown up any counter points or supporting examples because you don't have any, and are entirely too proud to just bow out. I continue this pursuit because...well, honestly? It's a blast for me. I love exchanges in communication. Love 'em. I love conflict! You're just, unfortunately, bad at it. That's cool. Everyone's got their thing. Don't pretend you have some kind of secret evidence, though. Put your cards on the table, man. Also, there was no whining. I understand your points entirely, they're just made-up. Never uttered those words. Like, in my life. There's no back-pedaling here. And, like before, I dare you to point it out. I do. If you didn't want to cloud up the thread, why did you bother posting? That's just counter-productive. Except for the post in question, where I spoke on Rorschach, Batman, and Superman. Also, the post about John Stewart. And the post about Namor. Really, the vast majority of my posts in that thread. If you're gonna make shit up, at least make sure that the medium you're using isn't one that records conversations with a handy timestamp, because you end up looking like a fool when you try to go against those. Ok, again, you're not telepathic, and I won't believe you're able to accurately pin down my emotional state unless you can correctly guess what number I'm thinking of, and prove your superhuman ability to know a person who you've only had sparing interactions with via the internet. Also, this uh...this says a lot. "In your head". Your head that imagines statements. Your head that makes up support where there isn't any. Your head that assumes you're being targeted in a post clearly directed at someone else (regardless of whether or not they agreed with you to begin with), and bore no actual indication that you, the user with the handle Black, should weep because Superman blows goats (he does). Your head's straight-up wrong, man.

I will. I will come at you, bro. This image here raises another issue I've got with Superman. He's incapable of truly understanding our plights and issues. His situation is so far removed from ours, that he's never going to get a real grip on what it means to be human. Look at this. Look at this dismissal. Look at this disregard for us. Look at how disposable we must seem to this Sun God from distant stars. Fills me with dread. But. You know who handles his shit exceptionally well, and doesn't pretend to be one of us, or have any real idea what that entails? [align=center][/align] Namor. Namor is a joy to read about, not only because he's unrepentant in any of his pursuits, but because he is utterly alien to us. He has an entirely separate set of morals, comes from a culture we know jack about, and still looks at us and says "They deserve a shot." He pitches himself into our fights, time and again, when he typically has no real reason to invest in us. On one exceptionally notable occasion, he comes to the aid of the X-Men simply out of respect. Scott Summers leaves an impression on him. Scott Summers means nothing to Namor in the long run, but he was willing to stand for his "species", as Namor put it, against the Avengers, and frankly the entirety of the U.S. Government. In Summers, who is a human being, Namor found something worth saving, and threw in his lot.

Yeah, ad populatum is a great way to prove a point. Except that it proves absolutely nothing. I'm not alone in my thoughts either. Does that make me right? Anyway, your original point was that the criticisms were unfair. They aren't. They're taken from actual examples of the character in question. Your point is, therefore, rendered invalid. Buddy, nothing in anything I've said has even suggested that people must conform. You're making things up again. You're making up an argument that isn't there. You want to talk about debate rules? That's cool. This is a strawman fallacy. I don't have to consider how "squashed" you might feel in a discussion in which I disagree with your point of view. Disagreeing with you is not a personal attack, no matter how much you may wish it was (because that would lend you validity that you just kind of don't have here.) If you don't like my points? Throw up some counter-points! That's how discussions work. If you don't have any (which it appears as if you don't, and are unfamiliar with the rules that you're claiming to follow), then don't bother. Super impressed by your internet experience. I would like to walk you down what was said, now. Because there's a disconnect here. Let me bridge that for you, as you don't understand jack, and are guilty of the exact thing that you're (baselessly) accusing me of. Which is it's own special kind of hilarious. Anyway, onward: Here's my post. Click these words to read it again, because you didn't read it the first time! Here's how I know you didn't read it: It actually contains a tie-in to a seconding of a favorite comic book hero of mine. That's what we call a cohesive argument. We address the issue being discussed currently (in this case, directly speaking Uther on the matter of Superman), and we latch that right onto the main point of the post. You ignored that, opting instead to feign some kind of exasperation with the very idea that someone doesn't agree with you about a fictional alien from a comic book. Frankly, I don't know why you, or anyone would waste their time and energy on thumbing their nose at a civil discussion with a point/counter-point style of presentation, but you are, evidently, far too experienced and practiced at this here internet for any of us to comprehend what you're getting at (Spoiler: It's nothing. You've got nothing.) You offered nothing to the conversation at hand (which you could have, if you understood how discussions work), and instead decided to complain, in this very post that I'm addressing, that you feel "squashed". Do you sincerely think you're taking a stand for someone here? Who might they be? Because the guy engaged in the conversation with me was having a blast. We continued it in Skype for hours. Ask him! He'll tell you! Then we get to my earlier response to you. And it was a response. Not an attack, a response. They're different. With the situation I have on hand, that of course being: I can only wonder how it is someone arrives at the idea that discussion of any sort, on a forum, that isn't explicitly about the topic proposed in the title (no matter how closely related it may be) is not to be tolerated in a thread. Why can't people ask "why"? Why don't you want them to ask "why"? Why does it appear as if you can't handle the very notion that someone would ask "why"? Why does it appear as if you can't handle someone disagreeing with you? Hell, while we're at it, why don't you adhere to the rules of debate and discussion? The worst part about this is that you think it's clever. Also, you haven't actually pointed out any hypocrisy (I dare you to do it), which makes this accusation baseless. These aren't assumptions, as I'm drawing from the events as they happened, so that accusation is baseless. An epitaph is a poem written in memory of the deceased, or an etching on a tombstone, so that's just straight-up wrong, and it'd only take you like a second to google the words you're attempting to use in order to appear as if you've got a grasp on what it is you're saying (you don't). The discourse was calm and reasonable before you, and whoever else, started bellyaching over someone not liking your pretend hero. I don't care if you're moved. I don't care if you feel squashed. I don't care what you imagined might happen in the other thread, because I honestly don't believe you have the predictive capability to see into the future. Seriously, you can't even string together a cogent argument as to why you started wailing to begin with. Oh, and here's another hint: In order for your point to be cogent, it's gonna need some facts and examples. You get to that, ok? Or don't. I guess you've got a doctorate in "Internet", and are therefore entirely above things like "making points". Mean time, I'm gonna go discuss Superman in the other thread with Uther. And I'm gonna disagree with him. And we're still gonna have a good time with it.

(I dig this IC representation thing.)

What? Are you kidding me right now? You can't handle a discussion on why/why not as the natural evolution of a conversation? It's not like there was even any back-and-forth on the matter, we just stated our opinions one way or the other, and I'm quite sure everyone was prepared to move on. I sincerely can't even fathom the kind of mindset where you can make up denigration in a post that borrows actual events from the comic character in question. That's not unfair criticism! That's an example! You've even used the wrong accusation in your made-up complaint. It's like you honestly believe that being disagreed with makes you some kind of victim, deserving of special treatment. It doesn't. It means that someone disagrees with you, and eventually (maybe not here, maybe not in the next internet clubhouse any one of us signs up to), you're gonna have to learn to deal with it. Christ on a cracker. On topic (OH NO, HERE COMES SOME MORE DISAGREEMENT! HUDDLE IN YOUR SHELTERS!): There's a problem with this comparison. Steve Rogers (the original Captain America) was a soldier. He didn't claim that he always knew what was right and wrong, and he in fact didn't have the ability to enforce his personal viewpoint everywhere on the globe, at once. Rogers had things he believed were right, and he tried to keep himself and those around him on the right track. He didn't always succeed. And that's a crazy-important differentiation. Superman could be likened to a tyrant. His power is absolute. Therefore, his will in any matter he involves himself in is absolute. What he considers right? Well, not everybody would agree, but that's too bad, because he is the Sun God, and you will obey him, or he'll ruin your shit in ways you can't even imagine. Let's take, for example, his adherence to Truth and Justice. Already, he's a hypocrite on the first count. His life is a lie. Like...actually a lie. It's bullshit, he's not Clark Kent, a normal motherfucker like you and me. He's Superman. He doesn't need to go to work. He doesn't really need to do anything, but just be who he is. If he's willing to impose that double-standard, what else might he be a hair's width away from doing? Them's prospects I do not like.

Seriously? I can't even have a civil discussion with another guild member of mine, where we both state our bits, and talk for a while without someone outside the conversation entirely complaining about it, and wanting it removed? How do you justify that? I mean...really, is it just my posts? When do you guys put a stop to that? Am I allowed to just report whatever I see from people I happen to not like, and get it shunted to anywhere else, simply because. God damn, guys. You can't just bubble-wrap us all. May as well shut down the entire forum to protect people's super-fragile feelings from maybe getting hurt. On topic: [align=center][/align] This guy right here. I am convinced he is the single greatest Green Lantern of all time, and now I'm gonna tell you why: It all starts back when he was introduced. Jordan had ordered Mr. Stewart here to protect an overtly racist politician from an assassination attempt. It was, at the time, the Lantern's job to kind of play "police". John had some serious reservations about the issue, but went along with Jordan right up until it was time to intervene. That's when he said "nope". The whole thing turned out to be a set-up by the politician himself to garner the sympathy vote, and when Stewart didn't try to protect him, it exposed the whole thing. Now, this is important because it shows John Stewart is willing to analyze a situation before riding in on his white horse. He's an architect. He builds things, he takes them apart, he understands them. Jordan, Rayner and Gardner? They kind of...don't. They lack foresight. Also, at one point, Stewart reconstructs a planet and blows a willpower fuse in his ring. Fact.

FINALLY! I have someone to argue about Superman with! Ok. So. Counterpoint on Superman: Even when he's written "well", there's something about this character that irks the crap out of me. Mostly in that he's named himself the absolute arbiter of justice. Everywhere. Forever. With no attention paid to whatever personal shortcomings he's got. To say his power simply doesn't color his perceptions of the world is a massive oversight. Every day, Superman picks and chooses who he does, and does not save. A man who could be just about everywhere at once, and he'll skip right over you if he feels like it. Sure, he's made it a point to stop a sad girl from jumping off a building. But how many people in Metropolis were murdered in range of his super-hearing at that moment? He catches a plane, but makes no effort to say...keep that security guard facing down Lex Luthor's secret Spec Ops crew from getting gunned down and dissolved in super-acid later. Perhaps my biggest issue with Superman is that he's reactive, rather than proactive. He doesn't really prevent these disasters from happening. He just handicaps our ability to handle them by swooping in and doing it all for us. Superman's actions show something that writers never out and out say: He doesn't trust us for shit. He's gonna tell us what's right. He's gonna tell us who gets to be saved, and who doesn't. He's gonna tell us when we need him, and when we don't. Honestly, I find myself in the same boat as Mr. Luthor. I look at him, and I think "Who asked you?" And, now a segway into thoughts on Rorschach, 'cause he poses a question I think we should all ask about Superman (And Batman, frankly): Rorschach asks the audience, quite plainly, if we really want someone with an unwavering moral compass. Someone who doesn't see grey. Someone who decides that they know better than anyone around them. Rorschach, like Superman, forges on without turning any of his thoughts inward, and it destroys countless lives. Did the child murderer he butchered deserve to be punished? Sure, but nobody deserves to be hacked to bits by a madman in possibly the coolest mask ever. This is the road that heroes like Superman and Batman are on. Particularly the former. Superman can get away with just about anything. The fact that he hasn't yet is pretty much just luck. After all, he has a human psyche. He doesn't have a super-strong sense of identity, or an unending reserve of mental resilience. He can't choose not to be scarred by trauma without diving into a world of utter fantasy. He's well beyond genius-level as far as intellect is concerned, but that comes with it's own set of issues, not the least of which would be his ability to actually relate to the people he's trying to protect. And we see these same sorts of things come back and bite Rorschach in every way possible. He's a smart guy, and his ability to recall events and bridge logical gaps just means that his trauma and stresses dig that much deeper. His moral compass is unwavering, but that leaves him unable to adapt to a changing world. He's named himself the absolute authority on right and wrong, and that makes him a monster. You guys. Guys. Seriously. I am so happy to argue about comic characters right now.

Still super-thankful that you introduced me to this. Excellent read, excellent character. To contribute a few more: [align=center][/align] Iron Man. And not because of the recent surge in popularity, or Robert Downy Junior's performance (though I do maintain that he is accidentally the best method actor for the part of Tony Stark). Instead, we've got a few reasons he makes the top of my list. The first of which is that Iron Man makes a promise that no other superhero has, or even could make. Superman promises that there will always be someone watching out for you. Batman promises that no one can escape their comeuppance. A whole myriad of superheroes promise that there is an immutable "right", and that all it takes is one person to stand up for it, and eventually, it'll all get smoothed over. Iron Man promises that someday? We'll all be Iron Man. Every last one of us. This is a man who built a machine that fights creatures who call themselves gods. He demonstrates, time and again, that there's absolutely nothing that keeps humanity from reaching into the hostile, exceptionally dangerous universe it exists in, and snatching back not only our survival, but our autonomy as a species. He shows us that we don't have to bow our heads to things that were simply born "better" than us. Through our ability to adapt and invent, we can overcome anything. On the flip: Iron Man shows us that it's never going to be an outside threat that wipes Humanity out. Whatever curveball comes our way, we'll handle it. Our biggest issue is ourselves. Tony Stark is largely his own worst enemy. "Demon in a Bottle" gets a ton of talk on this issue, but self-medication is a symptom of a greater issue. The trouble that this character runs into is a fear of greatness, and a fear of choice. With the kind of freedom that Stark's money buys him, and the kind of level his exploits as a superhero raise him to, he kind of buckles under the weight of reality. When you've got the tools to tell a god to fly up it's own ass and disappear, there's not a lot that's gonna stop you from making...like any decision at all. As much as Iron Man promises us that one day, we'll all shrug our shoulders at a hostile world, the stories also ask "Are we ready for that?" In your usual story, you'd see the protagonist come to a definite affirmative, but I appreciate that the better writers Iron Man has seen have had the balls to say "Y'know what? I don't think we are, and I don't know when we will be." Because, let's face it: We're not infallible. We're going to stumble, and fall, and sabotage ourselves, and we might make one misstep too many. Then again, we might not, and it's worth the shot anyway. Next up, we've got: [align=center][/align] Spiderman. Now, he makes the list on some less lofty grounds than Iron Man does. Mostly in that he's just kind of in a perpetual state of ruin. Doesn't even matter which "Spiderman" we're talking about. In any iteration, of any timeline, we find an individual who projects competence and confidence, but is basically falling apart in their real-world existence. On this end, I see Spiderman in the same light I see Captain Ahab. This is a guy so possessed by, so utterly consumed by their own mission that they slowly but surely sacrifice absolutely everything that they've ever held dear. They kill bits and pieces of themselves in their pursuits, and, in my opinion, are at their most interesting during the aftermath. When Peter Parker tracks his uncle's killer, what exactly does he gain? There's no closure there. There's no thrill of revenge. There's just the hollow realization that this all could've been different, if he'd cared/thought ahead/done X,Y,Z a bit more. He spends the rest of his life obsessively trying to prevent the next incident that would create another "Uncle Ben" to the exclusion of all else. And what does it get him? A heap more trouble and a shrinking list of friends and family. Spiderman never truly "wins". He can't. Somewhere, he knows he can't. But he's kind of too committed to the fight to quit. Anyway, I bring up these two (I could go on forever about this list of favorites) for the purposes of the sub-question here. There's a bit of Iron Man and Spiderman in Isaac. There's the struggle against the inevitable present in the character, as well as a similar promise that Iron Man makes. He's a firm believer in the democratization of power. At the same time, he's not nearly as stable or sure as he would project, and his past is riddled with some exceptionally poor decisions in pursuit of something he may never achieve. More thoughts later.

This is a fair enough origin story, and serves as a nice, reasonable jumping point to have this character travel the world. Here's some ways to make it even better: 1. Let's explain why the calamity pushed him to leave his tribe once he'd already "refused" the call to adventure, so to speak. What was it about the rock dropping out of the sky that said "Hey kid, go live life"? You don't need much, just a little touch-up. 2. Not something you need to publish on the Wiki, or via any kind of extensive writing, but why Chocobos? Why not sheep? Why not marmots? Opo-opo's? Everyone's got their favorite something or other, and that's a given, but I would suggest that you think about the "why" in regards to the character themselves. More as I think on it, but these are the most obvious areas of (admittedly minimal) improvement that I can spot.

Goofy sniping aside (which I'll note is unnecessary, and does nothing to actually help your point), I'll shed some light here: As someone who was present, I'll go ahead and correct you. It was the primary topic of part of the discussion, and lead to another series of questions/statements that we all went back and forth on for a bit in a kind of microcosm example of this exact exchange here.

I do want to point something out. That's from the initial meeting. Now, we have a good amount of transparency, but I would mark this particular event as where my push for more started. I whole-heartedly encourage folks to take Kylin up on his offer here, and I still throw my vote on the side of "One more step in the direction of total transparency", in the form of folks who want to watch being allowed to watch. 'Cause, let's be honest: None of us that have been present to these things has any kind of vow of silence on what gets talked about. Now, I haven't been keeping records, but I'll double-down on Kylin's offer so that he's not hanging out there alone. I will freely talk about whatever (so long as it doesn't involve things like Private Messages. Because that's just unreasonable) with anybody that asks. Anyway, I'm not sure where the idea of paranoia has come from. You can want to know what's up without expecting the gubmint to come and take your baby. And really, that's all I see here. I don't see hostility. I see some statements? I don't understand how you can suss tone out of text. If I were to read this out loud, with an upward inflection, it would all sound like questions, even if it isn't. I'd sound angry if I were to shout it. But none of those things are conveyable via this particular medium. A-goddamned-men. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Disagreement doesn't equate to hostility, and the cry of "YOU'RE BEING HOSTILE" in a civil disagreement shouldn't be used as a bludgeon to end any conversation someone is unable, or unwilling to continue. That's not how we learn, and grow as a community. That's how you stagnate. That's not good for anyone.

Nobody's gonna be surprised, but I am totally behind this. I'm not looking to burn anyone at the stake. Believe me. I've done my fair share already, and we don't need heads on pikes here. Then again, I don't think anyone's calling for that. But this kind of behavior tends to just tear people apart. I had suggested in the LS Leader's meeting that the heads of these groups get to know eachother better, so that we could help new people (and people just free-floating and searching) get to where they might be happiest, as quickly as possible. So far, I'll admit that I haven't had as much time as I would like to track people down, and talk with them, but I'm trying to move forward on that. I'd hope that others (aside from the one leader I've already spoken with, and who I'll keep the name of, and let them step forward on this on their own) have taken up this plan of action. I'm not sure where this idea has come from that any of us are in competition. For my 'Shell/Free Company's part? We sincerely don't see ourselves as being in any kind of tug-of-war for members with any of the other linkshells. Our discussions and acknowledgements in our thread are really...pretty much to say "Hey, I see you're interested, I'll get in touch with you." There's a kind of undercurrent here that's really, really counterposed to the welcoming and inclusive message you guys have worked to put out there.

Not only do I not have a problem with transparency, I insist on it. I've insisted on it since the initial meeting. Creating the kind of separation that filtered information creates has never been a good idea, and never will be. That being said, I do want to take some responsibility for a piece of the redacted content: I had requested that a PM that was sent to me (brought up as evidence of what I see to be a growing issue), as well as the user's name, be redacted in order to keep them out of the proverbial frey. Not sure if that's what people are referring to (as there's a /ton/ of content cut out of these minutes. A ton.) But I can't very well throw my voice into the "let's not pretend we're a secret cabal" without accepting my part in it.