Elysienne
-
Posts
275 -
Joined
-
Wasn't the Valyard erased from the timeline at the end of Trial of a Timelord? I thought the whole scheme was to allow the Valyard to remain in existence by stealing the Doctor's regenerations. He was, if you like, a potential future for the Doctor's existence to go down. And if he'd been successful, then that possible future would become the dominant future, with the Doctor as he was becoming a divergent timeline.
That's how I understood it, anyway. I could be wrong. -
Quote:Er.. others? I may be being very dense here, but haven't there only been 11 in-canon Doctors now, including Smith?Originally Posted by Rookery.
I think New guy is officially suppossed to be Number 11 as the others aren't suppossed to count. :P
William Hartnell,
Patrick Troughton,
Jon Pertwee,
Tom Baker,
Peter Davidson,
Colin Baker,
Sylvester McCoy,
Paul McGann,
Christopher Eccleston,
David Tennant,
Matt Smith. -
Indeed.
So until then, he's immortal. Any danger he gets into at all will have no suspense involved in it. -
Neh... I don't find him interesting. Largely because the way his immortality seems to affect him is.. it.. doesn't? He gets a little mopey sometimes, but then it's right back to cheap nods and winks to the fact that he's pansexual and that doesn't get old really fast at all!
-
Quote:Oh, great. *Sigh* We'll have to suffer another round of The Man With No Dramatic Tension then.Originally Posted by Tripp Hazzard
Much as I hate bursting bubbles (yeah, right!), I saw a teaser for the next season, and I'm pretty sure I saw Jack.
He's immortal! Immortality is BORING! He'll win whatever he sets out to achieve by sheer stint of standing around the longest! -
I wouldn't say the writing has ALWAYS been good...
In fact, frankly, I won't be too sorry to see Davis go. It means Jack "Most boring character ever" Harkness probably won't be coming back. -
Quote:The final David Tennant special was broadcast by the BBC as a two-parter over Christmas and New Year's. The new series with Matt Smith is scheduled for some time Spring this year.Originally Posted by Pogothulu
when and where was this on!!???!! I havent seen ANY of the new season yet..I'm not even going to look at that clip!
-
Then you should be happy to know, Dragonslay, that the new head man now that Russell T Davis is gone is one mr. Stephen Moffat. The man responsible for writing The Empty Child and The Doctor Dances, along with the Silence in the Library two-parter, the Girl Inside The Fireplace, and (in my opinion the best of the new series so far) Blink.
-
"The Malkavians aren't Mind Controllers"
I beg your what pardon Dementation?
Or heck, ignoring the antitribu... they still have access to Domination. -
Because there is apparently no force on this earth that will stop me from being a shameless pedant..
Rookery., it's spelt allons-y. It's the French imperative for "Let's go!"
Er.. sorry. And happy new year! And sorry. -
Happy new year from England, Virtue! Just 11 minutes after the fact! Get 'em while they're fresh!
-
Ohh, so THAT'S why the help channel wasn't working. Strange that, seeing as I'd just given it its own tab and was planning on talking by using the "active channel" button. Guess that doesn't work anymore since the /hc switch. If it ever did work, I don't really know.. never used the help channel before.
-
Huh.. I went there and got no response. Oh, well! Thanks for the reply, I'll check it out again!
-
Quote:Well, I was, but... then all my cultists ended up drinking the koolaid..Originally Posted by DumpleBerry
Ely, I'm not even going to dignify your post with a response. We all know that you've been a personality-cult-person since before Gemini Park.
Oops.
It wasn't poisoned, I'd just left it out too long. Time makes fools of us all, I guess. -
Okay, so I've been bouncing around the Rogue Isles for a while now, shouting on Broadcast because for some reason I can't post in the Help channel ("Usage:h takes 0 args, you gave 19. Show help window h") and so I figured I'd ask here too.
What's the most likely zone redside in which I can get in on a Winter Lord present opening eventy thing? -
What? Being nice with no ulterior motive? What kind of human being does she call herself?
-
Ah, hypocricy. It lets you get away with so much.
-
Alan Moore is a certifiable genius. The emphasis there is on certifiable, mind. He's a brilliant storyteller, though he has occasionally get a little self-indulgent. But yes, he really is a nutjob. He never likes any adaptations of his works. And I can certainly understand that in the League of Extrodinary Gentlemen, and V for Vendetta had its bad moments.
Still, you'd think by now he'd have learned to keep his intellectual property close to his chest if he didn't like what people did with it. -
Hmm... you may have a point there.
Of course, technically "she" is really an "it." An asexual conflation of several different personalities, male and female, crushed together in an interdimensional singularity and spat out into Virtue as an amorphous pile of matter that holds itself in human shape through sheer force of will...
... but then, that shape has boobs.
Oddly, this is a character that makes me really wish you could have ugly female characters. Not disfigured or scarred or rotting, just... ugly. Heck, even just plain would do. -
I think Captain Starstorm just summed up my last four (feels like four thousand) posts in one succinct, easy-to-read passage.
So he wins. -
I've suffered many times from "Asocial Character Syndrome" where I've come up with what I think is a fantastic RP hook and background, finally been satisfied with the look and stormed to the nearest RP hotspot for a test-drive...
... Only to discover that the character has no reason to broadcast themselves because of their personality, or because it doesn't make sense for the character to blurt out their hook to every passing stranger. Its an oversight that doesn't work with transient RP. A character might have their hook and story teased out of them over a period of RP sessions, but it doesn't have IMMEDIATE impact. And people are too busy with their own stuff to run after MY character and woo their story out of them.
Sometimes, I rework the character a bit and it works... sometimes you just have to consign them to the great Alt Junk Pile in the sky.
Oddly, my actively antisocial character gets a fair amount of transient RP. She's caustic, arrogant and snide. And for that to work, I have to make sure she's either a) regularly funny, b) actually quite insightful (definitely not easy to pull off on a regular basis with complete strangers) or c) I-the-player am willing to lose arguments, because the people with the biggest egos are always fun to deflate. Somehow I seem to scrape by on a combination of all three. -
So defensive!
You can't dictate whether there would or would not be any roleplay-based ideal reaction to your hypothetical argument because you don't know the extent of any given character. Its impossible to try and impress your own values on other people over the internet, and to try makes you come off as a self-important jerk (why yes, I have been drinking the irony juice today...) As I've said over and over again, consent is key in all RP reactions if you want to avoid drama. No matter how much you'd like roleplaying to move in a strictly logical fashion, it never will. Roleplaying is collaborative, not objective, and so trying to apply objective reasoning to it is an exercise in frustration and futility.
As for sound, reasoned arguments, I love 'em. Don't get enough of 'em on the internet, you really don't. But as you become more and more aggressive towards me, when I've already put down my reasons and you don't address them in any real way, I can't help but feel that your troll character in-game may reflect your posting style to a certain degree.
To reiterate my main points for the last three posts; Nobody can dictate terms on roleplaying interaction. Nobody SHOULD dictate terms on roleplaying interaction. Good roleplaying can only be achieved through solid cooperation, communication and consent. It should not be a game of "one-upmanship." You cannot "win" roleplaying in this kind of medium. Anyone who believes that their own fun is more important than another persons, anyone who finds their enjoyment at the expense of another person's character is "bad, and they should feel bad." Anyone who believes they have that entitlement is just as much of a "super special perfect snowflake RPer" as the person they antagonise, as they believe their vision of the character interaction comes first. That's some pretty big Mary Sue-ism right there. -
Quote:I thought you were against people dismissing things entirely from their RP. I've just offered up some vaguely feasible ways for the mother to escape from the situation without resorting to OOC complaints or IC dismissal. Apparently that isn't good enough for you, so I'll use some facts plucked from the air and apply them too.Originally Posted by MondoCool
I'm dismissing the opposing argument implicitly by not even bothering to recap it. I'll just gloss over it with some pithy editing.
People can often judge the reactions of others before they manifest themselves for a variety of reasons. Empathy/sympathy, interpretations of body language and subconscious 'tells,' prior knowledge or suspicion that the person they're interacting with doesn't have their best interests at heart.
Also, the human body (and most animal bodies, so I'd extrapolate that pretty much all sentient species) have self-preservation routines in their nervous system that mean they react faster than they think. Like when you touch something hot and jerk your hand away before you've even registered more in your mind than "Hot!" It could be said that, as soon as the mother felt "sharp!" she moved to preserve herself and her child. And, really, there is no such thing as "instantaneous movement." Extrusion of matter through other matter is a process, with much dilation and complex muscular movement. And while, yes, dodging the attack may harm the child, it'd probably harm the child significantly less than being rent in twain.
But here's the important part; it isn't the attacker's decision.
The attacker does not get to impose consequences on the defender. The defender does not get to impose consequences on the attacker. If there were some sort of GM, then he or she would decide in both cases, from physical attacks to psychological damage, to social implications. But the best we've got is the in-game mechanics. Which is why people have to talk over their RP plans and come to a compromise. Or not, in which case the RP interaction should be written off as a bad idea before it's even begun.
I'm not here to argue physics and biology, I'm here to argue RP etiquette. And frankly, the vehemence with which you're arguing the attacker's case makes me wonder if you have a specific and similar circumstance in mind. -
And equally the person that roleplays the aggressive character is godmoding if they state as a simple statement of fact that they perform that villainous act.
What I'm talking about here is the word "tries." It is, and always will be, the roleplayer's friend. For example:
Spineygal place her hand on the pregnant girl's stomach to feel the baby... then suddenly form spines/claws and stabs the child in the womb! ... is bad roleplaying.
Spineygal place her hand on the pregnant girl's stomach to feel the baby... then suddenly form spines/claws and TRIES TO stab the child in the womb! ... is good roleplaying.
The first dictates the event as a statement of pure fact, with no getout clauses or consideration for the other player's desires. All I'm saying is, if Spineygal can dictate terms like that without any kind of compromise or discussion of consent, then Ultramother is well within her rights to write off the entire event as if it never happened. Or suddenly discover she mutated a womb of solid steel. Or discover that her baby partially exists in the land of dreams, so all she has to worry about is getting herself patched up.
One person's desires for RP to move in a direction does not dictate RP's direction. Compromise and consent are the keys to the RP world.
Now, if you were complaining about Ultramother consenting to being given a sudden abortion, then turning around the next day as if nothing's changed then yes, that would be strange and very poor roleplaying. But other than that... well, speaking for myself, if I'm going to be godmoded at... especially concerning something like the example stated where physical harm is being inflicted... then I'm going to godmode right BACK, but with sillier examples.
As for the original example, though...
Spineygal place her hand on the pregnant girl's stomach to feel the baby... then suddenly form spines/claws and stabs the child in the womb!
Ultramother smiles as Spineygal places her hand on the swell of her stomach... then staggers backwards in horror as the claws slide from Spineygal's fingers, screaming and falling on her backside, narrowly avoiding being stabbed!
Done and done. -
Well, if that player didn't want their pregnant character to be stabbed in the gut, they could have just emoted being able to avoid said stabbing. There's nothing that can be done to your character that you don't ALLOW to happen. Godmoding, after all, does work both ways. If they don't want to get involved in a storyline where their unborn child is killed in a brutal fashion (not for everyone, you have to admit) then that's their right. Allowing it to happen and then retconning it just seems.. weird. And far more trouble than just emote-escaping.