|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:59 am
Vintrict From what I have seen, Strikers have been an excuse for to-the-back attacks or instant-maiming-attacks. Maybe if people stopped trying to KILL each other -in a non lethal tournament-, that wouldn't happen.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:02 am
Yessum ^w^ sweatdrop I don't chump shot people, boyo, just a bit grumpy.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:02 am
C. Fox Vintrict From what I have seen, Strikers have been an excuse for to-the-back attacks or instant-maiming-attacks. Maybe if people stopped trying to KILL each other -in a non lethal tournament-, that wouldn't happen. lol This is truth.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:09 am
We can also fix this by banning strikes to the back of someones head.
Or the whole back for that matter. Except the legs. But people would still take advantage of that and then nothing much would change.
So the back all together.
By forcing people to engage, we can avoid early KOs, bullshit reactions, post disorders and sneaky bastards. Thus, better outcomes.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:20 am
Gamma's never tried to kill anyone in HoH. And despite all this OMG THEY'RE TRYING TO KILL ME like, one person has ever died. It's a retarded-edged sword to argue for the fairness of 'honorable' fighting and not maiming and cheapshots when they're a legitimate part of combat, and to not argue the fairness of people shooting lasers out of their eyes while being made of adamantium, or whatever the hell else people enter.
Pretty sure setting someone on fire is in the same cheapshot neighborhood as gouging an eye out. Same with being six and a half size classes larger than your opponent and having the ability to juggle American cars.
But hey, as long as nobody gets poked in the eye or stabbed.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:25 am
C. Fox Maybe if people stopped trying to KILL each other -in a non lethal tournament-, that wouldn't happen. What about all those guys that won't die even if you kill them? People die when they're killed.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:28 am
YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO KILL THEM
GODDAMN IT
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:30 am
Unless everyone gets the exact same stock character and everyone fights in a five-foot by five-foot cage, there are going to be fundamental disparities between the fighters and the tactics used. It's something that needs to be accepted. I'm not saying it's not a worthwhile goal to limit outright douchebaggery, but going too far with that risks cutting into the creative aspect of the fights, and a lot of those fights are boring as all hell as is.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:32 am
Gamma has 27 points in douchebaggery.
Don't nerf my character.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:34 am
Man, +8 douchebag modifier. He'll automatically win an opposed douchebag check against anyone except Orcy, who doesn't have a douchebag score but will substitute his strength score. Since he substitutes his strength score for everything.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:35 am
"It's your turn."
"I'd like to use Douchebag."
"Roll your dice."
"I've got 18 with a +99 modifier."
"That beats my manners check by 100. I'm offended."
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:42 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:45 am
Essentially, if you go into a fight with the best of intentions, your going to meet a douchebag, simply because there's always someone that'll feel they have to take advantage of the fact you've gone in with good intentions.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:51 am
s**t happens when you fight Lawful Evil characters.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:59 am
Vintrict No. I was waiting for a couple of people to post that they were moving ahead, but I'll just have to push them along this afternoon. I'll be making a GM post later, so watch out for it. I'm excited and watching.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|