Steampunkette

Could we take the Praetorian police and possibly the Resistance Gunner attacks and make them into a Player Blast Set? The powers in play would be: Force Bolts (Basic Blast, Used by PPD Trooper) Force Blast (Slightly Bigger Blast, Used by PPD Warrant Officer) Force Netting (Moderate Damage and a Slow, Used by PPD Enforcer) Force Burst (More Damaging Attack, used by PPD Suppressor) Force Cage (Minor Damage and Sleep, used by PPD Warrant Officer) Force Bomb (Targeted AoE Damage and KB, used by PPD Investigator) Add in Aim and that's 7 powers. We could take the Heavy Burst from Resistance Gunners (Fired from the palm of one hand) or maybe the HE Blast from them... Something. I dunno! Just think it'd be nice to have the Praetorian Attacks available to players in a powerset that could thematically play into the Binary aura and Holographic ideas really easily.

Custom Archetype as a choice... not a -bad- idea on it's face... Here's how I would suggest balancing it! Only attack powers as a Primary. Blasts, Melee, Assault, all options. All other powersets as Secondary. Defense, Control, Support, Pets... But the Defense Sets are as per Sentinel rather than Brute, for example. All Archetype values set to .75. Damage for Ranged and Melee, Pet Health, Control Magnitudes, Etc. Their Inherent grants you four end-costless toggles. One increases Melee and Ranged damage by 20%, One increases Defensive and Control effectiveness by 20%, another increases Pets and Support by 20% and the fourth toggle increases all options by 10%. You've now got a class that hits like a Corruptor without Scourge for Melee and Ranged attacks, has lower defensive functions than a Scrapper, -needs- to stack 2 control effects to lock down Lts, and heals/buffs/debuffs less effectively than a Corruptor. But. When they pop on their damage toggle they hit like a Dominator. Their heals pop up toward Corruptor when they've got the support toggle on, and their controls and defenses can get up toward locking down or protecting themselves like Scrappers and Controllers. And when they do "Everything Mode" they hit like Tankers, take damage like Stalkers, still need 2 powers to really Control anything and offer support like a Corruptor. That's about as "Balanced" as the class could get. It would be able to cover any role, or assist in covering any role, but wouldn't actually be good at any of them. What it -would- do is allow the Staff to test different AT concepts for potential use in the future. So if only for that purpose I suggest having it on the Test Server locked behind an imaginary "Pay Wall/Expansion Tag" and accessible only by the Developers.

If there was a Nemesis System implemented it would need the following things for me. 1) Scale of Villainy. Nemeses aren't all the same bank robbing, museum heisting, love-interest kidnapping, mooks. Some are Dr. No. Others are Doctor Octopus. Give us scale and variety. Have 3 "Tiers" of Scale. Street Level, International, Cosmic. 2) Personality of Villainy. Nemeses can be aggressive, thoughtful, wildly inappropriate, or completely thoughtless beings of incredible power. Give us at least 3 choices for these. 3) Motivation of Villainy. Why does your nemesis do what they do? Revenge against you? World Domination? Just having a Laugh? The problem is that the more of these character choices you have, the bigger the total amount of work gets on an exponential basis. Let's say you've got a Nemesis who is Just having a Laugh and is Thoughtful. At the Cosmic scale this is basically Q from Star Trek. Meanwhile at the city scale its' the Joker or the Riddler. You'd need to write hundreds of individual missions, each one with dozens if not hundreds of variable dialogue options where a character's personality or motivation gets expressed in different ways. It is mind bogglingly complex... and that's why no game has ever even -attempted- to do it "Right"

On live I had a permalight PB. It was THE BEST. I loved being able to throw out big AoEs and heavy impact melee attacks without feeling like I was going to fall over if someone came out of CC. Unfortunately, I don't remember what my build exactly was, other than knowing I had permanent Lightform. So. I tried to recreate that build in Pines and also went ahead and specced it to have a static 99% Damage increase. I figured with permahasten and permalight I'd be able to throw out a lot more overall damage that way. I also went ahead and specced high into Accuracy and ToHit so that even when enemies pop shields or other defenses I'd be able to keep landing hits and ensure their defense kept getting lowered so my teammates can keep smashing their faces in. I realize Group Fly is often looked at as a cringe power, and I'm clearly not building for Softcap Defense, here. But I do wind up with 4 magnitudes of protection to almost every mez type and spend between 55% and 25% under control effects that do overcome my status resistance. Take a look and tell me what you think? Hero Plan by Mids' Hero Designer 1.962 http://www.cohplanner.com/ Click this DataLink to open the build! Khamsen: Level 50 Natural Peacebringer Primary Power Set: Luminous Blast Secondary Power Set: Luminous Aura Power Pool: Speed Hero Profile: Level 1: Gleaming Bolt (A) Decimation - Accuracy/Damage (3) Decimation - Damage/Endurance (3) Decimation - Accuracy/Endurance/Recharge (5) Decimation - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (5) Decimation - Chance of Build Up Level 1: Incandescence (A) Steadfast Protection - Knockback Protection Level 2: Gleaming Blast (A) Apocalypse - Damage (7) Apocalypse - Damage/Recharge (7) Apocalypse - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (9) Apocalypse - Accuracy/Recharge (9) Apocalypse - Damage/Endurance Level 4: Shining Shield (A) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance (11) Impervious Skin - Status Resistance (11) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Recharge (13) Impervious Skin - Endurance/Recharge (13) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance/Recharge Level 6: Radiant Strike (A) Hecatomb - Damage (15) Hecatomb - Damage/Recharge (15) Hecatomb - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (17) Hecatomb - Accuracy/Recharge (17) Hecatomb - Damage/Endurance Level 8: Proton Scatter (A) Ragnarok - Accuracy/Recharge (19) Ragnarok - Damage/Endurance (19) Ragnarok - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (21) Ragnarok - Damage/Recharge (21) Ragnarok - Damage Level 10: Thermal Shield (A) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance (23) Impervious Skin - Status Resistance (23) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Recharge (25) Impervious Skin - Endurance/Recharge (25) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance/Recharge Level 12: Hasten (A) Recharge Reduction IO (34) Recharge Reduction IO (36) Recharge Reduction IO Level 14: Essence Boost (A) Doctored Wounds - Heal (45) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance (45) Doctored Wounds - Endurance/Recharge (45) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Recharge (50) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance/Recharge Level 16: Luminous Detonation (A) Positron's Blast - Accuracy/Damage (27) Positron's Blast - Accuracy/Damage/Endurance (27) Positron's Blast - Damage/Endurance (29) Positron's Blast - Damage/Recharge (29) Positron's Blast - Damage/Range Level 18: Quantum Shield (A) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance (31) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Recharge (31) Impervious Skin - Endurance/Recharge (31) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance/Recharge (33) Impervious Skin - Status Resistance Level 20: Incandescent Strike (A) Crushing Impact - Accuracy/Damage (33) Crushing Impact - Damage/Endurance (33) Crushing Impact - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (34) Crushing Impact - Damage/Endurance/Recharge (34) Crushing Impact - Accuracy/Damage/Endurance Level 22: Reform Essence (A) Panacea - +Hit Points/Endurance (48) Panacea - Endurance/Recharge (48) Panacea - Hea/Recharge (50) Panacea - Heal/Endurance/Recharge (50) Panacea - Heal/Endurance Level 24: Conserve Energy (A) Recharge Reduction IO (43) Recharge Reduction IO Level 26: Solar Flare (A) Armageddon - Damage/Endurance (36) Armageddon - Damage (36) Armageddon - Damage/Recharge (37) Armageddon - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (37) Armageddon - Accuracy/Recharge Level 28: Glowing Touch (A) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance (37) Doctored Wounds - Endurance/Recharge (39) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Recharge (39) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance/Recharge (39) Doctored Wounds - Recharge Level 30: Inner Light (A) Recharge Reduction IO Level 32: Photon Seekers (A) Recharge Reduction IO Level 35: Dawn Strike (A) Obliteration - Damage (40) Obliteration - Accuracy/Recharge (40) Obliteration - Damage/Recharge (40) Obliteration - Accuracy/Damage/Recharge (42) Obliteration - Accuracy/Damage/Endurance/Recharge Level 38: Light Form (A) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance (42) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Recharge (42) Impervious Skin - Endurance/Recharge (43) Impervious Skin - Resistance/Endurance/Recharge (43) Impervious Skin - Status Resistance Level 41: Restore Essence (A) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance (46) Doctored Wounds - Endurance/Recharge (46) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Recharge (46) Doctored Wounds - Heal/Endurance/Recharge (48) Doctored Wounds - Recharge Level 44: Pulsar (A) Accuracy IO Level 47: Group Energy Flight (A) Flight Speed IO Level 49: Quantum Acceleration (A) Flight Speed IO Level 1: Brawl (A) Empty Level 1: Cosmic Balance Level 1: Energy Flight (A) Flight Speed IO Level 1: Prestige Power Dash (A) Empty Level 1: Prestige Power Slide (A) Empty Level 1: Prestige Power Quick (A) Empty Level 1: Prestige Power Rush (A) Empty Level 1: Prestige Power Surge (A) Empty Level 1: Sprint (A) Empty Level 2: Rest (A) Empty Level 4: Ninja Run Level 10: Combat Flight (A) Flight Speed IO Level 2: Swift (A) Empty Level 2: Health (A) Empty Level 2: Hurdle (A) Empty Level 2: Stamina (A) Endurance Modification IO ------------ ------------

My most powerful live character was Hardcastle, an SS/Inv Brute. I used Tough and Weave and Hasten, had Hover and Fly. Went Hero to Vigilante so I could grab Superior Conditioning from Energy Mastery. I soft capped her positional defenses when fighting 3 or more targets (Thanks, Invincibility!) and fighting 2 or less I obviously didn't -need- softcap thanks to my high resistance values. Add Incarnates on the top? She became utterly impossible to kill outside of the Incarnate Trials, and even then she was always the last to go down unless a stalker placated themselves out. All in all, SS/Inv can be one of the most visually and mechanically rewarding powerset combos.

I agree with this. Whip as an assault set and then make an Assault primary class, damn it! >_<

You're either for changing it, against changing it, or don't care. You are against changing it, based on your statement. Your reason for being against changing it is that you don't like the reasons presented to support changing it. This is an entirely valid position to take. It's very simple. This isn't computer science. There's no need to add in a Null State for this one. I am not for or against this specific change. I am not for or against change in general. I am against changes to null state that are presented with flawed logic. I will only consider a change that is presented syllogistically. These statements are incongruous. This is not a subroutine. This is not a program. There is no Null State, here. You're not coming back with no data and not changing the program. You are making a Value Judgement to the strength of the argument that the OP initially provided. This is not a Null State result. This is a rejection of input data in order to determine a decision. Your penchant for obfuscating noncomplex logical conclusions through superflous circumlocution is positively exasperating. Syllogistic Logic? Really? For those who don't know what Syllogism is, it's a situation where you have two statements and based on those two statements create a third, whether it's true or not is irrelevant. "All dogs are animals. All animals have four legs. Thus all dogs have four legs." The first statement is true, the last statement is true barring deformity or injury, but the middle statement? Not true. Syllogistic reasoning is why Diogenes ran into Socrates' classroom holding up a plucked chicken screaming "Behold a Man!" when Socrates described men as Featherless Bipeds. You misunderstand syllogistic reasoning, and have engaged in traps in syllogism. Here is a clear definition A syllogism (Greek; syllogismos, "conclusion, inference") is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two or more propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true. I perceive a misconception of null state. Here is the basis of null, and it's use in argumentation Adjective English borrowed "null" from the Anglo-French nul, meaning "not any." That word, in turn, traces to the Latin word nullus, from ne-, meaning "not," and ullus, meaning "any." Null state, not any change. Colloquially, current state. Used in statistics, argumentation and analytical fields. Again, you do not tell me how I think, and I do not make value judgements on things that have irrational suppositions. I do not even consider them, rendering a vote of no change from null state. YET. SO. I thank you for your perspective, I respect your feelings about the subject, I ask you to stop assigning things to me. Fade, I'm sitting here citing incidents in which Di freaking Ogenes the dog-life philosopher countered a syllogistic argument with simple (hilarious) proof that it was wrong. I don't need a lesson in the etymology for you to provide semantic clarity. I will reiterate that your position is ridiculous. It's like you're trying to surround the arguments being provided by being on no side while simultaneously declaring that there should be no change 'cause 'Null State". In the context of people discussing whether there should be a change or not, stating things should remain as they are? S'not nothing. If you're not going to contribute to the actual discussion, say by countering the provided arguments with some of your own or choosing a side in the debate to offer your support or even to simply abstain from said debate declaring that it has no effect on you whether it changes or not..? It might be best to exclude yourself from continuing discussion. As it is you've only added confusion and digression.

You're either for changing it, against changing it, or don't care. You are against changing it, based on your statement. Your reason for being against changing it is that you don't like the reasons presented to support changing it. This is an entirely valid position to take. It's very simple. This isn't computer science. There's no need to add in a Null State for this one. I am not for or against this specific change. I am not for or against change in general. I am against changes to null state that are presented with flawed logic. I will only consider a change that is presented syllogistically. These statements are incongruous. This is not a subroutine. This is not a program. There is no Null State, here. You're not coming back with no data and not changing the program. You are making a Value Judgement to the strength of the argument that the OP initially provided. This is not a Null State result. This is a rejection of input data in order to determine a decision. Your penchant for obfuscating noncomplex logical conclusions through superflous circumlocution is positively exasperating. Syllogistic Logic? Really? For those who don't know what Syllogism is, it's a situation where you have two statements and based on those two statements create a third, whether it's true or not is irrelevant. "All dogs are animals. All animals have four legs. Thus all dogs have four legs." The first statement is true, the last statement is true barring deformity or injury, but the middle statement? Not true. Syllogistic reasoning is why Diogenes ran into Socrates' classroom holding up a plucked chicken screaming "Behold a Man!" when Socrates described men as Featherless Bipeds.

You're either for changing it, against changing it, or don't care. You are against changing it, based on your statement. Your reason for being against changing it is that you don't like the reasons presented to support changing it. This is an entirely valid position to take. It's very simple. This isn't computer science. There's no need to add in a Null State for this one.

So you are fine with just "killing people" for fun, but "killing a female" because a psycho can't handle rejection is too much? Every time a villain character goes about a mission that results in the death of innocents that are accepting that as "right". Period. Rather than looking at the characters as having an option to agree that this was right, what should stand out here is that they have an option to decide that the mission was wrong. "Hey villain, I need you to go here and kill these guys for not paying their protection". A few minutes later they are all dead, you are getting rewarded, and the contact is pointing you towards your next victim. Here, in this case, you get to say "No. That was wrong, and while I did the larger mission in service to Arachnos/Lord Recluse, what you asked of me was wrong, and now you will pay for that". That is not a common occurrence. The issue is that by and large society accepts that killing people for money is bad and there's not really any discussion around it. It's just... what is. But with men killing women over rejection, there's people who cheer for it. Who -laud- it. Same thing for racists killings. There are people who basically cheer on Reddit whenever one of these bigoted murder sprees happens. Makes it a particularly touchy subject for some people. Like I said, before, put a note on it so people who would be made uncomfortable can avoid it and that should be enough, largely, to fix the perceived problem.

Oh, hey, Leo. Because of our discussion I went ahead and looked at page 60+ of his Manifesto. At 17 he was still spending a week with his dad and a week with his mom, alternating between the two. He says at 18, and I'm gonna quote, here, 'cause it's just -so- hilarious with your rejection of the premise of the impact of media: "At father's house, we watched the movie Alpha Dog after dinner one night. This movie depicts a lot of teenagers and young people partying and having sex with beautiful girls, living the life that I've desired for so long. The main character is a fifteen year old kid who has sex with two hot girls in a swimming pool. I was so envious that I delighted at his death in the end. I remember thinking that I would rather live his life than mine, even though he died. He had sex and I didn't. The movie deeply affected me, emotionally, and I would think about it for some time afterwards." Media. Has. Impact. It shapes people's perspectives by creating a culture of shared values. Not all of those values are good.

I suggested making it into a 0 endurance toggle with a 1 minute recharge rate. What part of that doesn't deal with the short duration and enormous recharge time and the uselessness of a pet? The uselessness would only happen when the toggle gets taken off... but that's only liable to happen when the pet is killed or between missions as team composition changes so... *shrug* Like I said, changing the buffs it gives doesn’t solve the problem it has. Your suggestion solves the actual problem, then keeps going and also changes what the power does. Why? That’s just changing it for the sake of changing it. oh! That... yeah. I just never found the Serum power to be interesting or engaging. You slap it on the Commando on cooldown and that's the whole playstyle of it. It needs some options is all.

You understand the "poisoned orphan" metaphor was someone else's, right? And that it's essentially a placeholder for "obscure but horrific crime?" I'm saying that a crime's frequency or probability has no bearing on the injustice dealt to its victims. Men are physically victimized far less frequently by women than women are by men. That's no consolation to the man who's had his bully wife crack his skull with a baseball bat (and believe me, that does happen). We shouldn't be telling him that his pain is less significant than that of a woman who has been beaten. I assume you mean in fiction (of course all violence should be taboo in real society). But in fiction? Yes, all or nothing. We have age-based ratings to keep shockingly violent entertainment away from young children. But in product meant for adults? Who's to tell you what fictionalized violence is appropriate for your entertainment? I'm certainly not. Maybe a little iffier with a T-rated game, but if you're saying violence against women specifically should be kept out of that age range then that's a separate argument, and one that would be pretty difficult to enforce. I mean, what's "violence against women" vs. "violence that involves both men and women"? The Devil doesn't need an Advocate. Being contrary for the purposes of being contrary can be useful in some circumstances, but it's a really narrow set of circumstances. As to special fictims as a category: It's a simple understanding that there are crimes and violence which impact some groups more than others. People outside of that group have a tendency to ignore thos crims 'cause "If it doesn't happen to me it's not really a problem" see pretty much all of racism forever. White people in New York largely didn't care about Stop and Frisk 'til months after the protests and activism against it started. As to my final joke line: Kant is a deontologist who believed that any action was either unilaterally moral or immoral with circumstances and consequences being irrelevant. 'Cause binarism is a self-blinding viewpoint.

I don't see how this arc is any different from Terra or blinding the two children so the guy can creep on their mother. If you can't see the connection i can't help you. Are you literally ignoring anything I say that you don't wanna acknowledge? I've said: Yeah. This discussion might spark other discussions of problematic arc. Like Terra in particular. That's not a slippery slope. That's people continuing a conversation. The slippery slope part comes from the idea that such continuing discussions WILL result in the banning of female NPCs. Or result in them becoming immune to damage. Or some other "All Violence is unnacceptable!" ending. The part where you go from A to B right over over to P238 and hit cricial mass. I don't know how to convey that to you. I can't help you if you're dedicated to not comprehending.

Dealing with women and relationships is more than sex. Masculinity is more than chasing women. The guy had such a complex, he hated people in relationships. He needed a DAD to smack in straight and give him confidence. Instead, he had a mother that turned him against his father. The situation between BOTH his parents contributed to the issue. I suppose I shouldn't have said his father could have fixed the situation, but blaming romance in media is just as foolish. So much conjecture and ignores just....SO MUCH. But oh, those romance comedies are definitely the ticket lol No meme. It's gotten worse. Stop and think about it. Dude had at least 15 years with his dad, and I can't say he had more than that 'cause I stopped reading after that point. He lived with both of his parents up to that point on a weekly basis, swapping back and forth. Dude had plenty of time for his dad to smack him upside the head on masculinity. His dad didn't. Why? Fucked if I know. I find it interesting you think his Dad needed to knock some sense into him and his mother had only negative impact on him in the matter... Nevermind the fact that he grew up with his Dad's girlfriend Soumaya and his Uncle Dan going through girlfriends every few months...Wonder what kind of impact it had on him when he realized his Dad had been cheating on his Mom before the divorce... huh. Yeah. Maybe his Dad couldn't have fixed him. Maybe he could've. But the idea that boys "Need" a father to teach them about masculinity or relationships is just mindboggling. It's based entirely on conjecture because you can't make an experiment to test the hypothesis. In such an experiment you'd need a control group, all the families functioning identically outside of testing conditions, and then the testing conditions themselves presented in Single Father families presenting appropriate and inappropriate masculinity, Single Mother families presenting appropriate and inappropriate masculinity, and Nuclear Families presenting appropriate and inappropriate masculinity. And the control group would just raise their kids however they feel is appropriate. And you'd need thousands of kids in each group to get a decent sample size. It's a massively unethical concept since you'd be willingly training at least some portion of the subject to be shitty people, denying them appropriate care and relationships. Thus it's conjecture. An untestable declaration of a belief as fact. Yeeeah... Now I remember why I had you ignored on the live forums!

You're entirely avoiding the point just to dismiss me and its becoming annoying. I don't want this changed because i don't think its a problem and i wouldn't want anything else to be changed for the same reasons this one is suggested be changed for. Its not a leap or stretch to make the assumption that this will continue forward to more and more especially when its been boiled down to a claim of misogynistic writing. You don't have a point is the problem, Atom. You have an emotionally charge conjecture that "At some point" terrible things will happen because of a decision made on this topic based on a long series of other discussions that will all, obviously, come out in the perfect way to create that catastrophic ending. That's what the Slippery Slope is. At any point between "Yeah, we should maybe change this or add some kind of note to it" and "That's it! No violence against women at all!" people could say "Nah. There's a point where this makes sense to do, and this point is beyond it, so let's not." and end the "Slope" you're trying to grease up. There's no slippery slope. There's a series of potential discussions that may not even happen. And at any point people can decide one way or the other. In fact, people could decide one way on some of them, and another way on others. And they could do it in different orders! No one here is invalidating your argument, Atom. It was invalid from the start. We're just trying to explain to you -why- it's invalid.

Women who need rescuing from domestic violence don't exist? Cool story bro. Maybe she just needed to suddenly become an Uberfrau like in your dialog edit. What are you talking about? It's not a real story...It's a story that HE wrote...Are we in such a place that we can't even criticize our own writing? Seriously...If you don't like the changes he's suggesting than don't like them - but attacking people's morality over this? Seems unnecessary This is where that whole "self awareness" concept I was talking about. Nowhere in the post you quoted, did he attack someone's morality. He literally just made a post about not liking the suggested changes and nothing more. Seriously, he suggested that the poster doesn't think women of domestic violence are worth rescuing. Seems like a morality attack to me That is literally NOT what was said. ^This The guy made the rhetorical suggestion "Oh so women who need protection don't exist?" as a nice Strawman Argument to shove over. 'Cause logical fallacies are a big part of the internet...

I suggested making it into a 0 endurance toggle with a 1 minute recharge rate. What part of that doesn't deal with the short duration and enormous recharge time and the uselessness of a pet? The uselessness would only happen when the toggle gets taken off... but that's only liable to happen when the pet is killed or between missions as team composition changes so... *shrug*

Have you looked into the Elliot Rodger story? I'd sooner blame the fact he grew up in a broken home as a momma's boy taught to hate his father who is the person in his life meant to teach him about women and relationships. Media had nothing to do with it, unless you want to bring up media depictions of mothers getting undue custody of children when, in reality, it's probably better if the father raises the children after age 8 (especially for boys). But I guess that's a media depiction we've been socialize to reject... ... not only has it been commented on, it's also not a pervasive cultural issue in the modern world..? Ooooh ho ho ho...ho oh no...lol no no no. You don't want to touch on the modern acceptance of poisoned orphans subject. No no no... Woof. Let's unpack this... Elliot Rodger had his Dad in his manifesto. And his dad's girlfriend. Lived with them through at least 15 for a week at a time. I dunno about you, but I had every "Birds and the Bees" variation from parents, grandparents, and sex ed classes by 13... so... *shrug!* I didn't read his manifesto after age 15 'cause good god the indulgent bullshit of the whole thing became far too much to bear. Don't think his dad being gone had nearly as much impact as you're suggesting... Also the idea that boys need their dad more than their moms for learning relationships is just... so much conjecture and ignores just... SO MUCH. Like. If Elliot Rodger had eventually had kids instead of committing mass murder, with all this shit that's in his manifesto still in his mind: Do you still believe he'd be better to teach his kids how to have relationships over their mother? As to "Media had no impact on it" I just laugh. No one is immune to societal depictions of interactions. You get exposed to a specific perspective long enough and it becomes the one you believe is normal. That's how you get extremists. Whether Incel or Nazi or Daesh. They're all people who have focused in on a narrow enough band of socialization that it becomes the core of their understanding. And media is a powerful tool for it, for good or ill. As to the modern acceptance of poisoned orphans subject... I'm gonna assume you're trolling? Haha. Meme. Good job.

Imagine telling the victim of a crime that they have to shelve their sense of disenfranchisement because the offense against them isn't, I dunno, fashionable or something. Were you a poisoned orphan or something? I ... I don't understand where you're going with this, here. Why is this example so key to your identity when there's several missions about lawyers getting killed or kidnapped for not getting their clients off on all charges, endless muggings, and so forth which are all much more common than poisoning of orphans..? Are you trying to suggest that it's a binary situation where ALL violence must be taboo or no violence is? I Kant understand that.

and again i urge you to think for longer than 5 seconds. This arc is similar to the terra arc. She is forced to become a monster and lay eggs. Slippery slope absolutely applies because there is enough evidence to point that this is the next "This is sexist" arc to get changed hence "slippery slope". I don't think you understand this, yet... Slippery Slope NEVER APPLIES. It's a logical fallacy. Maybe someone will present the Terra arc as being problematic. Maybe they'll do it as a result of this discussion. But any argument about that is a separate argument. Not a "Continual Trend" And it absolutely won't lead to "Female Characters are Immune to attack!" See, it's that last part of it where you go from a reasonable discussion "If this arc is a problem, would this other arc also be a problem for similar reasons?" straight to "PANIC and DESTRUCTION!" "A is B. Is C also B?" is a continuing discussion. "A is B, therefore C, D, E, F, G, and all other letters are also and thus we can't have anything related to A or B unless we ignore A is B!" is a logical fallacy. It presents an emotionally charged potential outcome of -many- different discussions down the line as the logical outcome of making the current decision. It is maddening. Stop it. Also, the patronizing ad hominem "Think for 5 seconds"? REALLY not conducive to constructive discussion.

It's exactly that. Soon we're changing terra arc and then the orphanage arc, and then we're removing "Hellion girlfriends" and soon there just won't be target-able women in the game. This entire thread is one person over-reacting to a story line. Changing this story line just because shes a women and therefor nothing bad should happen to her is probably more sexist than the actual story line. "Shes a women so she shouldn't get killed" ok bud On a side, the nav text could probably be changed to "Defeat the longbow" or "Defeat lt page". The girlfriend thing doesn't make too much sense given the story. Pat Robertson once said that it's a long downward slide to legalizing sex with ducks if two men can stand side by side in marriage. Slippery Slopes are a fallacy. An argument from emotion presenting a terrible outcome as the clear result from an only tangentially related topic (In Robertson's case: Expanding marriage rights to gay couples being equated to expanding marriage rights to bestiality. In yours, explicit targeting of women in retaliation for rejection becoming an outright ban on violence against female characters at all) Stop it.

Which is always great consolation to lone victims everywhere. I'm... trying to parse your reasoning, here, but I just can't. Because individual children are poisoned (Typically by their mothers, fathers generally pull the trigger or use another weapon because, again, cultural conditioning!) in rare instances (because no matter how you slice it that's a pretty rare freaking occurence) we should place the same level of cultural weight to poisoning an orphanage (which... has that even happened in a hundred years?) that should be applied to women being murdered by would be paramours (Which happens with shocking regularity)? ... I mean... that's a unique hill to die on, friend, but so long as you're on it rather than me... Go for it. ... not only has it been commented on, it's also not a pervasive cultural issue in the modern world..? Like... you get that's why this is being brought up, right? Not "It's a bad thing to do!" but "It's a bad thing to do that is frighteningly common in the world today and based entirely on the sort of sexist/misogynistic violence which is so pervasive to western culture that you can hardly play a video game, read a comic, or see a movie/tv-show without it being placed front and center" If people poisoned Orphanages on the regular it'd make sense to compare the two... but they don't. So it doesn't. That is fair, and that is what I get for only having a moment to look and respond. That said, isnt this potentially a slippery slope if this is changed on the reasoning of having a real world analogue? Like, instances where you are using violence by a Male player character to defeat female npcs... as ludicrous an example that is, isnt that worse since you are actually doing it especially if you're a Male villain beating up female protagonists? Slippery Slopes are a logical fallacy. They assume that because A to B, therefore C through Z must occur. As if humans can't draw a line of difference at any point between B and Z. A superhero punching criminals regardless of their gender on the basis of the socially acceptable nature of punching criminals is not sexist. If he were to ONLY punch female criminals, or ONLY punch male criminals, then sexism could hold weight in the discussion (either a personal hatred of women leading him to ignore crimes committed by mens, or a more traditionalist 'benevolent sexism' based on cultural assumptions of women's weakness) Similarly, a villain kills whoever between him and his goal is probably not going to be targeted with calls of sexism unless he explicitly targets only shit that women own or otherwise are in control of/protect.

You're right! I forgot about that in seven freaking years. (SO GLAD to have City back!) The whole "They'll just cycle the fastest attack" issue. Could make it to an aggro-buff for that one merc. Sort of an "I'll die to keep the rest of the squad safe!" Point is: Create some extra function to it that is unique to each Merc type, make it a toggle for constant effect, drop the recharge to maybe 1 minute. It'd still be a unique ability to empower your troops, but it'd be more fun and tactically useful to apply it to different pets in different situations.

... not only has it been commented on, it's also not a pervasive cultural issue in the modern world..? Like... you get that's why this is being brought up, right? Not "It's a bad thing to do!" but "It's a bad thing to do that is frighteningly common in the world today and based entirely on the sort of sexist/misogynistic violence which is so pervasive to western culture that you can hardly play a video game, read a comic, or see a movie/tv-show without it being placed front and center" If people poisoned Orphanages on the regular it'd make sense to compare the two... but they don't. So it doesn't.