Samuel_Tow

Why does it have to be the ending of the story? Is it somehow wrong to have a story that's awesome all the way throughout, as opposed to crappy until the very end that I may well not have the patience to stick out to? What's wrong with making the Statesman's death a heroic last stand? Hell, what was wrong with doing the same for Alexis? It takes nothing away from the overall plot line yet it makes their specific plot points much more memorable, or at least memorable for much less unpleasant reasons.

Leaving aside the fact that I HAAATE SSA3 for the pointless shock death delivered for no reason other than to be darker and edgier, I do want to argue about how much mystery the SSAs have. Mind you, I don't disagree with what you said regarding the slow reveal of the SSA plot, but I'm not sure if I'd specifically call that a mystery. Perhaps a semantic argument, but hear me out.

To me, a mystery is the lack of explanation for either a fact or a past event. Who framed Roger Rabbit? What is the true nature of the Rikti? How does Superadine relate to inter-dimensional travel? All of these are mysteries, because they already exist as concepts, we simply don't understand them, and to me, that's the most exciting kind of reveal - when I know something has an explanation, but it simply eludes me.

What isn't a mystery is, ironically enough, "who will die." What will happen in the future is not a mystery, because what will happen in the future is subject to change by means of our actions. You could call it suspense, or even foreboding, but time travel aside (in which case the future actually is the past in terms of plot act sequence), the future is not set. We don't work to uncover the future as we do to uncover our lost past. We work to shape the future, and that's something entirely different.

Mind you, neither history nor suspense are better or worse than each other. They both have their place and, really, I feel a good story should have both. What I am saying, though, is that we've had a lot of suspense in recent storylines, but comparatively little mystery. It's always a question of what happens next and very rarely a question of what happened before. I always emphasise the history of the City of Heroes world, because to me, that really is where so much of its wonder lies. There's only so much you can show in the limited screen time a story arc provides, but there is SO MUCH history you can bring in to shape what you're showing without needing much screen time to do it. History doesn't need to be retold in narrative, because history shapes the future, and if events are shaped to conform to a common history, just going through those events is enough to show us the stories of the past.

Rularuu is an easy example. Pretty much everything we know of his past comes down to two names: Rularuu the Ravager and the Dream Doctor. There are specifics about the Shadow Shard, but for all the times the Soldiers of Rularuu have been involved in other people's content, they never seem to bring any sort of history or culture with them. We see them as replace-the-name monsters from time to time, but they never act in a way which infers the history that brought them to be or the nature of their existence.

I want to point back to a single line from one of the game's worst TFs - the Dr. Quaterfield TF:

This is never followed upon, obviously, but the implications of this are very interesting. Yes, it's part of that TF's plot, but it implies that the Rularuu are not just mindless monsters who attack anything on sight. It implies that they are highly intelligent, goal-driven and even technologically-savvy creatures, and you really wouldn't guess that from looking at them. That's the kind of revelation and the kind of mystery that really makes me sit up in my chair and start paying attention to my briefings and clues. Because this matters, because it's interesting, and because it represents a mystery I really want to solve.

The difference is that if she's an impostor, you CAN prove it. It really is that dead simple. If we know Countess Crey is Julianne Thompson, then it's a simple matter of exhuming Julianne's body and testing it, then discovering it is Clarissa's body, instead. In the story arc this comes up with, this is as simple as "Hand me that bowl of chicken bones... And the identity of the body is... Clarissa von Dorn?!?"

At this point, it's not a hunch or a case of insufficient evidence. Her real identity IS the evidence that she's a murderer. All of Crey's other crimes can never be linked to the countess directly, but a crime she committed with her own two hands very much can.

Well, of course. If you don't care, you don't care and there's nothing to be done about it. But I care, and I see no reason to spoil a story I care about when you wouldn't have cared either way. Overall, I find "I don't care about this" arguments to be somewhat unfair as a general thing, because they gain the person making them nothing while taking away from those who do care.

It may seem like a double standard, but you're completely right. Players need to be allowed the freedom to write their own stories as they see fit, because those stories affect only the players who wish to acknowledge them. They are not canon. Writers who write canon stories cannot and should not try to do the same. Their stories affect all players that play through them and fit together to create a consistent, persistent world.

Players should be allowed to write whatever they can get away with, but staff writers really need to follow a more structured, consistent approach.

A heroic sacrifice is equally heroic when it wins a great victory as when it staves off a horrible defeat. There are plenty of ways to make the Statesman's sacrifice mean something without altering any of the major plot points, and I people have already suggested ways to do this.

I don't want to play Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, either, but we really don't have to. It's a question of presentation and story structure. Most Crey arcs shouldn't be told as a fight against a paramilitary organisation, but rather as a hunt for clues and evidence, with Crey personnel always inventing some weak excuse for why they're getting involved. In fact, the hero-side Crey story arc that eventually unmasks Clarissa/Julianne is a perfect example of this, at least right at the start.

You're asked to check out a warehouse in relation to a missing girl and you find Crey there, looking to cover up evidence. Their own presence is an admission that they are involved even if clues to that effect don't exist yet, and Crey can claim that they were just securing the warehouse. You go looking for clues about Julianne, with Crey hounding you at every step, proving that they have something to hide. Only towards the end when you get enough evidence against Crey in general and Clarissa in particular does your contact start sending you to Crey facilities without saying how "Your reputation is shot, you might as well do this." Said contact even mentions warrants repeatedly.

That's really the key thing. Crey arcs need to be handled like detective stories. Fighting them head-on isn't the issue. It's finding enough evidence to get a court order permitting you to raid their facilities, THEN fighting them openly that's the real heart of the story.

Once upon a time, I postulate that one of the biggest rewards from story arcs was the revelations they brought about the enemy groups they dealt with. I was always eager to run another story arc just because each one was, in its own way, a mystery, and I was eager to learn what other exciting and cool ideas the writers had come up with for giving what at first appeared to be bland enemies some added depth. Yeah, the actual writing in terms of style, spelling, grammar and presentation wasn't all that great, but it spoon-fed me a conga-line of amazing ideas that really kept me interested well into my first year of playing this game.

Then City of Villains came out, and it seemed like all the good ideas had run out, so now out story arcs were all thug work. Go there, beat up that guy, come back to me, get paid. Plot? What plot? You do as you're told, that's your plot. You're a thug for hire. Do you expect to have a story to follow? Your story is you do as I say and you get paid. Revalations? What revelations. City of Villains factions don't have the kind of depth it takes to support any revelations. What you see is what you get. These factions don't have any secrets you can't learn from reading the various members' info windows.

This really bugs me, honestly. There's very little mystery left in the game. And, OK, you can argue that that's to be expected. I've been here for coming on eight years now and I know everything. I'll give you that. But if all of this new content since 2004 had incorporated a bit more of a mystery that ISN'T resolved within three missions of being brought up (or in extreme cases, within the same paragraph it's brought up in), then I'd have had a LOT more mysteries to tackle. And even though I'd probably know all of that stuff anyway, I would and do enjoy going through the old storylines, pretending I don't know the plot that my character really shouldn't, and that's still enjoyable after all these years.

We need mysteries. Much as I decry the Letter Writer, I ma genuinely excited to learn who it is and what his plan is. Yeah, it took FAR too long for that to develop, but now that I know it is... I want to know. I'm not a big fan of Darrin Wade as the evil Batman, but to be honest, I was really looking forward to learning who it was that was standing always just out of shot. Hell, even First Ward counts, even if it feels like three consecutive arcs are just a retread of the "What are the Apparitions? Well, do this side quest before you can learn that." Or it WOULD count if the hole in the sky above the Gozer building were ever explained, if the Claws of Vengeance were ever explained, if Circe the Sorceress were ever really explored or if the whole story arc weren't paced so 3/4 of its runtime is devoted to 1/3 of its plot. But that's just splitting hairs, really.

I don't want to see old mysteries "spoiled." On the contrary, I want new ones introduced.

You keep missing or outright ignoring the point. It doesn't matter WHO Countess Crey really is so much as that she's a MURDERER. Once we know she stole another woman's identity, she can no longer hide behind lawyers. The only reason she can hide behind lawyers in the first place is Crey Security are very good at making evidence disappear. Countess Crey's true identity IS evidence that she's a murderer and a con artist.

Revealing her true identity, regardless of what the name of that identity is, removes her singularly defining character trait - the ability to commit crimes and escape justice. That's not just a spoiler, that's an utter ruination of pre-40 Crey as a whole.

I finally realise one major reason why I like the new jeans so much - they DON'T show off the woman's rear. I have nothing against women's rears, but there's something about clothes that look practical without appearing outwardly seductive that I just enjoy.

Actually, sure. Why not. Here's what I made for Crash:



The left costume is an update of my "Faultline ripoff" costume that I made without knowing I had, for which the new jeans really helped, and the other other is... I'm not entirely sure. I wanted to give her a costume with a long coat and the cowboy hat really seemed to go well with that. But it has another version of the jeans, so it still counts, right?

I may have misspoken, or I may simply not know the facts, but exactly HOW long have these people lived? I mean, the ones who aren't dead yet.

I'm not saying it's unreasonable, I just can't accept someone like that being at the very centre stage of the whole game. His face is on every poster, loading screen and backdrop. He is THE hero of the game. I firmly believe that we should have expected better from him. I would have like to see him do more.

The truth is I don't see 100+ years as a long life and I rarely buy into the "I've lived long enough" argument that a lot of movie old guys make. Yeah, in real life, when you're old and broken and sick, maybe. It's only gonna' get worse. But when you're eternally young, healthy and indestructible? Yeah, I wish I had your problems, States. He just comes off as having won the literal god lottery and ticked every box on the way down, but still isn't satisfied and has to find reasons to be unhappy. There's just no pleasing some people.

To be honest, I'm greatly disappointed that this game doesn't really have almost any heroes who are older the regular human lifespan, at least not in their canon roster. It seems like a lot of avenues of diversity are being passed up to tell the same old tired stories again and again. And it's a cryin' shame to do that in a game with potential for such fantastic, outlandish stories.

Ignoring the fact that the Statesman is no normal man... Wouldn't that have been cool? I really dislike how cheap the death comes off, like "Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect $200." Wouldn't it have been cool to have Darrin go through all this preparation and expect the spell to just one-shot him, but have the Statesman get up and fight it?

This, to me, is one of the most awesome kinds of character scenes. It's when a character has been hurt so badly that he really should be dead, but he is so stubborn and so wilful that he keeps on going, prompting his killer to yell "What does it take to KILL YOU!?!" This works for both a hero and a villain, and is an INCREDIBLY strong moment when a character proves that this means which was supposed to be so overkill he'd never even have a chance to react still isn't enough to to make him stop fighting.

Obviously, you had to have the man die. Fine, I get that. But why not do something else? Why not have Darrin catch the Statesman in his trap, bring him down, but then the Statesman fights it and gets up. You then have to fight the Aspect of Ruladak alongside the Statesman, but here's the thing - the Statesman cannot be healed, and he has a self-damage aura that's constantly draining his health at a rapid pace. Even though the man is obviously and irreversibly dying, he's still a tough enough ******* to get up and keep fighting until literally his last breath.

Because to me, that is how a hero should go down - swinging and engaging in his final moment of glory. Not curled up in a ball, hoping for someone to tell him it's OK to give up and stop fighting, utterly defeated both physically and psychologically. Because, really, what DID the Statesman do in this arc? Really. He yelled at Ms. Liberty off-camera, then showed up to die. That's a hell of a sendoff story, I have to say.

Give him his final moment of glory, THEN kill him. That way, we are left to admire the man's greatness as he passes away.

With all due respect, **** him, then. I know heroes are not indebted to society, and so are not obligated to fight crime even when they don't want to, but that's what sets up the true heroes from the powerful supers - the willingness to do the right thing and fight the good fight even when it's unpleasant, even when it's hard, even when it hurts. Everyone can get struck by lightning and develop super powers. Not everyone has stomach to be a hero with them. Because, really, it's not the powers that make the hero. Plenty of real life heroes have no special powers at all. What they have is the courage and dedication to do what must be done, no matter the cost.

In a sense, wanting to stay dead is the final ruination of what should have been a great and inspiring hero. Maybe the Web of Arachnos novels say otherwise, but if they do, I don't want to read them. The fact of the matter is that even if the Statesman were dead before the vision even started, THAT is not what he should have taken solace in. It's not a case of "You don't have to fight any more! You finally have an excuse!" as much as it's a case of "You have to fight, but you simply can't. You did your best." Which he really didn't. He died like an idiot without putting up the smidgen of a fight.

Frankly, outside of meta-story knowledge that I as a player have, there really isn't anything in that story to suggest that the Statesman deserved that kind of out. Because, again, what did he do? Really. What did he do in that whole chain of arcs?

I wasn't really referring to resurrection powers available to players, so much as storylines revolving around canon deaths and canon resurrections. Thankfully, City of Heroes doesn't have this many, and when they do exist, they tend to be very special cases. This is probably the first one that I feel is dangerous, as it suggests you can pick a dead person of your choice and go resurrect that person with a ritual that could have work on anyone else, some small catches notwithstanding.

Time travel is the one which concerns me the most, as the presence of Ouroboros - specifically, their need for "me" who has the greatest access to the past - could render a LOT of plot points moot. The Menders don't really seem to have any qualms with you riding their time machines into the ground, sending you on past adventures over and over again for no reason other than to get a vial of bees or some such. Yes, they don't like unauthorised time travel since that makes it hard to tell who's causing what change, but they don't seem to mind time travel they can monitor. So, really, why NOT go back in time to before Alexis even left Paragon City and warn her? Or step in and stop the ambush? Or travel back 10 years and shoot Darrin in the head? Or a whole other host of ways to prevent various tragedies.

The most common answer seems to be "don't think about it too hard," but it just seems irresponsible to make time travel this widely available and yet not account for the effect widely available time travel would have on a story.

You edited my quote to use the alternate spelling of Aeris/Aerith!

This is what I mean when I say a world of super heroes needs to be handled with care. Once things like resurrection become reproducible, concepts like a "resurrection ritual factory" really do crop up, and naturally. This isn't even a nit-pick, it's human nature to see a solution to someone else's problem and ask why it can't be applied to MY problem, as well.

Killing and resurrecting people is a bad idea to do more than once in a blue moon because it raises those exact questions.

And that's a bad moral because...?

This is why you budget the power creep of your fictional world. This is why you don't make time travel and resurrection commonplace. Because then you have people asking why you couldn't just use a Phoenix Down on Aeris.

The City of Heroes of the past always had reclimators, yes, but if those failed and you DID die, you were dead for good. No reclaiming the dead. The City of Heroes of the past also didn't have time travel. Yes, there as always Holsten Armitage, but the man was widely regarded to be insane and delusional and he had no way to actually travel through time past his original journey into his past, which is our present.

When you institute "reset buttons" williy-nilly in large numbers, you introduce plot holes which CANNOT be filled in.

Huh... Imagine that. It worked! Spring attack was left unslotted for some reason, but I didn't think Mids' could do this. Thank you!

*edit*
Oh, I see why Spring Attack got unslotted. According to Mids', it can't take any sets whatsoever. Well, according to mine, anyway. Wait, no, it seems to have drawn some other Spring Attack from somewhere else, since it hasn't marked the one from Leaping. The power's description is "You have been hit with Spring Attack," so I imagine that's the power of the pseudo-pet that Spring Attack summons. Huh... Well, that's easily fixed.

*edit*
Or not. How DO you remove a power which doesn't show up in any of your power sets or power pools?

I slotted six Titanium Coatings, myself - three in the passives, two in the toggles and one in Unstoppable. It's OK by me. I'm wasting some bonuses, but I can live with it

While I know this isn't ALWAYS the case (it's always been possible to gimp yourself on purpose, at least), I really appreciate that sentiment. Honestly, one of the biggest reasons I was apprehensive about Inventions is it felt like they took away my control over my own character. I MUST build for "this," which means I MUST have "these" particular enhancements, which means I MUST play in this particular way in order to have them. Yeah, I admit I may have bought into the extreme min-maxers a bit too much and believed their presentation of "must," so that's my own failing there.

Generally, though, knowing that there really are no truly wrong decisions is... Liberating. Obviously, there are some fairly wrong ones nevertheless, but I feel confident enough to identify those before I make them. It means I'll spend somewhat more time on every decision, but since we're talking about Inventions at 50 only, that's easily a very small percentage of my characters, so it's no big.

Incidentally, could you possibly post the data chunk for that build? I mean, I commented on your explanation of it, but I honestly can't read the build itself off text. It's possible I might feel differently if I knew what all of that stuff was, but I just don't know enough about Set Inventions to be able to extrapolate from the short form.

As well, thank you for your help I don't know if you've seen the way I handle feedback before, but even if I reject a specific suggestion, I'm still grateful for it, and I never want to make it seem like a suggestion is not welcome. I'm just very... Particular about the way I do things. I guess that's why I got yelled at for not listening the other day - I listen, but I just can't take advise on face value. It's a personality type thing.

It's not a shocker, but it's still not something I'm comfortable doing. The build I suggested is entirely made up of Commons and Uncommons, all of which were fairly easy to obtain save one, which I could have simply overpaid for. Maybe the others are also easy to acquire, maybe I'm still gimping myself, if slightly less so, but I know I've finally found a way to deal with Inventions in a way I'm comfortable with. I'd like to rest on that success for a while until I actually feel confident enough with it to not have to reboot my brain every time I deal with it. I'm still not there yet.

More practically, I keep seeing people comment on how useless the defence Common is in Invincibility, yet no-one seem to acknowledge that the resistance Common in Unyielding only really accounts for 0.6% extra resistance for elements and energies and 0.3 extra for physical. I put that in there out of habit, but I'm more than convinced that there wasn't any point to it.

I'll consider removing the "final" slots in my attacks, but I can tell you right now that I am not comfortable doing it. The numbers may make sense, but I just don't like doing it. It's a psychological thing.

I suspect part of the problem is that I can't actually read the Mids' printout. The others I've seen had data chunks included, which I could import into my own Mids' Hero and Villain Designer and then look at them directly, but in plain text and in short form, I honestly don't know what most of that is. For instance, I read "C'ngImp" as "CNGLMP" until I read it thought back to what I'd slotted in those powers, realising it stands for "Crushing Impact."

I may also be tired. It's past 4 AM.

That's what I mean, yeah. That and Temp Invulnerability and Unyielding. I was looking at the enhancement values and it looked like a good idea, but when I did it in-game, it just seemed pointless. They're Common, so they don't carry any bonuses, and it seems to me like their presence contributes LESS to overall protection than even the passives, and if it's not strictly less, the difference can't be that big.

It'll salvage three slots. I can use two of those to bring in Spring Attack and the other to, um... Four-slot Stamina? Four-slot Rage? I don't know. I can't say I need more recovery, but I wouldn't mind having a longer overlap of double Rage.