Welcome to Gaia! ::

Goddamn it, Vizz.



... Alright.

The Overlord Clause (stolen from HoH) basically lets a judge nerf, change, or otherwise make a decision on an ability at any given moment. Or to make any decision they see fit for the sake of the tournament, really.

So if an ability says "chains as strong as steel" a judge can step in and go "You know what? I think that's a bit much. They're weaker from no on for the sake of balance." In this case, the judges decided that the quality of the chains being breakable was more pertinent than their likeness to steel.

Like I said before though, if it was an issue.. the judges should have seen to it in profile grading. But this sort of hindsight judging on abilities does happen, rarely. Normally it comes up when the wording of something is vague and a person makes it definite in a way that the judges had not desired or interpreted. Such has "I make a fireball" being "I make a sphere of all consuming holocaust flames capable of incinerating flesh from bone."

Is it fun to deal with? Not particularly. Much you can do about it? Not really, it's an instance of making a judgment call on an ability's potency, not on the logic of it. So saying "But they're strong as steel!" isn't relevant anymore, because the judges have decided that no, they aren't, by interpreting the breakable aspect to be more important than the steel part in the sense that they've decided how breakable they are, rather than utilizing the likeness-of-steel description.

Such is life in the GTB.

WoW has better porn

What? WoW is a dickfest.

KoF has a bajillion female characters-- hot ones too.

someone's a f*****t.

Well, the Overlord Clause has a purpose, and judicious use is perfectly acceptable where required 'cause people make mistakes and sometimes you have to make a decision on the fly to fix it. Like with that rule on NPC fatality.

But yeah, this is kind of why I argue for s**t like transparency and accountability, and why I think people need to speak up when staff does something out of line if it's something that make absolutely no sense, or is unethical. You can't expect people to improve if they have carte blanche to just do ******** they want to do without having to care about s**t like fairness.

I can't say whether or not the change to your ability was unwarranted or not.. I don't have access to your profile, and I don't know what Vin is using in regards to acceptable scale of power. Not that anyone else knows the latter either, though. Generally speaking, the reason we take our lumps in profile grading is because we assume - or hope, at least - that judging is roughly equal across the board and no one comes in with too much power, or is nerfed into oblivion.

In this instance, if Vin didn't want your chains to be as strong as steel, or to be easier to break, it should have been addressed in profile grading, not in the second round of the tournament. But like I said - people make mistakes, so maybe in tandem with the character's whole kit, the change is warranted based on whatever standard Vin is using for overall character strength. I dunno.

Also, who the ******** bought Pabst Blue Ribbon and put it in my fridge, and why am I drinking it? God.

Yeah. It's all good.


WoW porn is superior. Fact. Not that I'd know anything about any of that, because I have never seen nor ever intend to see any pornographic materials of any kind.

Beastiality is the king of all porn.