Warkupo

Legend
  • Posts

    1190
  • Joined

  1. I would add a giant red ball that spawned randomly in zones accompanied with a PPD alert along the lines of "HOLY **** A GIANT RED BALL HAS APPEARED IN [...]"

    The Giant Red Ball would take advantage of the physics engine, and can be effected by running into it, or by targeting it and shooting it. Different attacks would result in different trajectory, of course.

    After about 2 hours the ball would pop, and drift off into the wind. Only to return again the next day in another zone.

    After about a year of this, I would release a Task Force centered around the Giant Red Ball, and you and a team of Heroes/Villains must join forces to take down the mastermind who is supplying the Giant Red Ball with power. The ending of course, will shock everyone...
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms View Post
    I have said this a couple of times already, but I am not talking about Praetorian characters. Yes, your comments about someone born and raised in Praetoria are 100% true, but the issue I had from day one concerns the Primal earth Heroes who come to Praetoria to engage in the side switching mechanic. They need to have a reason to join the side that will lead them to darkness, and I truly believed it would be Tyrant that would do that. However, now I realize that it will be the Resistance who is much more likely to show the Heroes what committing crime is like, even though it will be crime 'for a good reason', the destruction of Tyrant's rule.
    I agree. In fact, I think it would *have* to be the resistance. No sane Hero would join Tyrant. I doubt they'd let us into Praetoria without knowing the collected history of the place, as such an action would be... Plainly stupid on Portal Corps' part. However, a hero might get a taste of freedom in the resistance he was denied in Paragon, and he might discover he likes it.

    A hero who joined Tyrant would have to *agree* with Tyrant's philosophy in the firstplace, which would imply he wasn't much of a hero to begin with, he just had the misfortune of being on the wrong landmass. And while we're entertaining that idea, it's not entirely accurate to think that every hero in Paragon Island is a good guy. He may have just joined in the struggle for good, because deep down, he enjoys the power of being on the winning side. He may still want that power in Praetoria. He might be persuaded by Tyrant's constant brainwashing just as the people within it have been. I can think of plenty of reasons a 'hero' might join Tyrant, but they would typically need to start off with a weaker moral compass.
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Westley View Post
    You know, ever since I first saw and heard about the "new Tyrant", I've been getting very much a Superman IV vibe, especially that scene where he goes to the UN and tells them that he's getting rid of all their nukes.
    Don't make me comprehend that film more than I have too... That movie was just horrible.

    It's kind of not too difficult to imagine how Statesman became Tyrant. I beleive in the comics, one of his greatest fears was that he could not protect everyone. I think Tyrant realized he could not protect everyone and allow them to be free. Tyrant is simply far more of a control freak than Statesmen. Anyone who does not agree with his 'vision' is booted off the planet.




    *giggles sheepishly*
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms View Post
    You have a point when I say they aren't against the law, they just believe that the law fails to provide justice. And in this case, Tyrant's rule is just adding more Fail, the additional laws are not making it any easier to punish criminals, but it is giving them the ability to punish the innocent. For much of the law we've seen we're looking at punishment before the crime.



    A price no Hero would pay. No matter what, no harm shall fall to the innocent.



    Up until this thread I was thinking that Tyrant would lead us unto evil. But looking back that just makes no sense. All it would take is the first mission to kidnap and 'disappear' one person who has committed no crime what so ever, and anyone even approaching decent would punch his superior in the face and jump sides. It doesn't matter what kind of person they are, anyone who would harm the innocent was NEVER A HERO TO BEGIN WITH.

    But the Resistance, here's where it gets interesting. They may call it a 'Supply run' but it's still robbery. They may call it 'demoralizing the populous' but it's still beating up police, regardless of the fact that these cops would have no problem killing the people they're supposed to be protecting. They may call it 'disabling Utopian propaganda' but it's still a Mayhem Mission. It's giving a Hero the chance to see how the other side lives. In the Resistance, you ARE breaking the law.
    By and large, us folk from primal earth know Tyrant is a kind of an *******, but a Praetorian does not. I could see playing the 'good guy' who worked for Tyrant, climbing up the ranks, and then realizing how corrupt his government actually is, but being too far along to just back out. So now he's forced to make tough moral decisions constantly.

    The same can work for villains, they want to join the resistance because they want to revel in the destruction, and Calvin is going to give them something to do for it. The 'Freakshow' definitely seem like they would more likely join the Resistance than be subject to all of Tyrant's rules. Judging by some of the hair-do's in the resistance, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them would have been the countless freakshow.

    Villians from primal, however, are probably most likely to just join the Anarchists. Knowing what Tyrant is, and having lived in a fairly anarchist society to begin with, the Syndicate seems obvious.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steampunkette View Post
    *waves at Electric Knight!*

    Ultimately the whole topic is fairly subjective. I prefer to use objective terms on Good and Evil, personally. but some people simply can't accept absolutes, and thus argue the semantics of my point rather than the point itself.

    Good and Evil, as I've defined them, are objective. If it causes emotional or physical distress and pain it is evil. If it fosters positive emotional wellbeing then it's good.

    Right and Wrong are, to me, the subjective versions of Good and Evil.

    For example: Killing a baby to bring in a good harvest for the village. Good or Evil? Well the -act- is evil, even if the intent and result are good. is it the Right thing to do? Possibly, based on the community's moral and ethical structure. But the act itself, the murder of the baby, is still evil.

    By the definition I've set forth, that Evil spreads (or in this case inflicts) emotional or physical pain, killing the baby is an evil act. If you're working with a different definition of evil, feel free to define it. And then show me how the murder of an innocent is not, in fact, evil.

    -Rachel-
    I think we more or less agree then, just with different semantics for different words.

    It's similiar to how I don't see 'argument' and 'debate' being different, but many people would disagree with me.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rodion View Post
    Similarly, killing and torturing people who have done evil things is also evil.

    However, it is often necessary to do evil things for the greater good, such as fighting a war in self defense or killing someone who is trying to kill innocents. But anyone who does these things will have to answer for those actions in whatever court of law is applicable.

    But saying that these necessary evil deeds are not evil, or lying about having done them, or failing to admit your guilt, or reveling in those evil deeds, or finding other excuses for those evil deeds, unquestionably marks you as being evil.

    In the case of legally declared wars, soldiers are not evil when they kill if they abide the laws of war. Similarly, law enforcement officers performing their duties according to the laws of the land are not evil if they must kill. But when someone in those positions employs deadly force and finds pleasure in it, they are evil.

    However, if the laws themselves are evil, then even "legal" actions performed by military or law enforcement personnel are evil. Soldiers and law enforcement personnel must not obey illegal orders or follow unethical or immoral laws. If forced to choose, they must refuse the order or resign their positions or they become evil themselves.

    Of course, what's evil is defined by the religious, moral and ethical beliefs of the population involved. But acts that cause irreparable harm are unquestionably evil regardless of whatever moral compass you might have: murder and torture are always evil. Whether they are justifiable is another question that must be answered on a case-by-case basis.
    Again, that's why I consider evil and good largely based upon perception. Keep in mind that self preservation is largely a selfish decision. Does self defense give you the right to kill? Are you protecting others or protecting yourself? Could you have done better by taking the far more difficult route, which is not to kill at all? Does upholding law make you a good person, even if you don't agree with the law? Does torturing someone to protect others make the act of torture any less evil? Are you an evil person because you tortured, and are you an evil person for letting it happen? Did you enjoy the torture, the feeling of having power over those that did ill to you? All these questions only have you and your maker as their answer, and yet you must be mindful of everyone else, as you live within their perception as often as you do your own.

    Evil and Good are not clear and easy answers, because the world does not have clear and easy decisions. I do not beleive most people, outside of comic books, wake up in the morning and think "let's do something evil today". We are all a result of each other's actions.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
    I think you're all missing some details...

    When Aurora volunteered to host Praetor Tilman's consciousness, Scott didn't believe it. His wife wouldn't have done such a thing without at least talking to him first.

    See that. Reason to believe his wife wasn't even doing this willingly.

    He questioned the Praetor about his wife's decision, but those questions were ignored by both Praetor Tilman and Emperor Cole. Shortly after he questioned the Emperor, Calvin found himself admitted to the Mother of Mercy Psychiatric Hospital by the Emperor's decree and placed under Tilman's personal care. Tormented by the demon wearing his wife's body, something inside Calvin--a sensation he had never really felt before--rose to the surface: a pure, burning rage.

    Then there's the rest of it.

    He's not looking to just get that piece of tail back. He's trying to save his wife.

    His whole bio reads to me that his wife was taken against her will. And if not against her will, something more was done to her after the fact (ie...Sure I'll help you. It won't hurt my life will it? Of course not. You'll never even know I'm there. HAHAHA SUCKER! *traps her psyche deep down and takes control*).

    This doesn't read to me "I got dumped. Now I'll get her back or I'll get even."

    Now mind you...in good story fashion, Calvin can be put through the questions...

    What if he's wrong? What if she did just change out of the blue? What then? Does he keep fighting? If so, what are his reasons for fighting now?

    Right now, he's fighting to get his wife back, because he basically thinks she's been taken against her will (which could be the case).
    I especially think that last line in his biography is a major clue that Calvin will not always be asking us to do things we feel are morally justified. Vengeance is a hell of a motivator, sure, but anger makes it difficult to have sound judgment. It very much sounds like he is more focused on revenge rather than freedom.

    Alternatively, I imagine you'll be forced to make tough decisions while sided with Tyrant as well, the main difference being that if you sided with Tyrant, you probably *wanted* to be evil and have power, so the choice may not actually be that difficult.

    Then there's the Syndicate, who I have a feeling I'll like the best.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by bAss_ackwards View Post
    Y'know that you get booted out of Praetoria at level 20, don't you? Which means there is a high chance that you will be fighting Desdemona (or Maelstrom) before or at level 20. Wouldn't that mean the future you would also be kicking her *** at level 20?
    You make a very good point.

    I vote for myself, and because I killed both of them, so does everyone else.
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bitt_Player View Post

    But then, killing Hitler as a child would be evil, because he hadn't done anything wrong at that point.
    I always hated this plot in time travel science fiction. You don't have to kill the *******. That's the easiest method, sure. Instead remove him from the scenario that enabled him to become a tyrannical *******.
  10. 'evil' and 'good' are largely based upon who is perceiving the action.

    Freedom Fighters think they are doing good.

    The country that calls them a Terrorist Organization would disagree.

    Rarely is the world so comically black and white that you can look at any situation, and decide for certainty, that someone was evil. I think very few people in the world would ever label themselves as evil, and so you must also ask yourself who is judging good or evil, and are they worthy to do so?


    But to play with your question, I beleive the intent is more important than the action. If you were *trying* to slaughter everyone, but wound up making the cure for cancer instead, you were still *trying* to slaughter everyone. Actually slaughtering them just gets you our attention, but it doesn't make you any more or less evil, just more infamous.

    Conversely, someone who was trying to save everyone, but did it by capturing random people off the streets, preforming experimentation on them, and recreating them into horrible abominations in the belief that doing so would cure them of all disease and grant them immortality meant well, but committed actions that broke a number of Laws, and is likely to be perceived as something they ought not have done. They will be punished for their actions, and they may even be met with hatred for their actions, but this does not make *them* evil. Misguided, perhaps, but not evil.


    Law and Chaos are the missing factors of your example, and are guiding factors for good and evil. Unlike Good and Evil, Law and Chaos are set in stone, and are not changed by someone's perception. The choice to break the Law can have either good or evil intent just as often as choosing to uphold it can. Which still leads us back to the same place; Good and Evil are decided by intent. *actions* are what make them matter.
  11. Warkupo

    Noooooooo!

    It could work, it could fail miserably. It really depends upon the story.

    I'm typically more accepting of a 'bitter-sweet' ending. A real hero might screw up along the way, but he's not just going to tuck in his cape in go home either. It's not realistic, to me, that after the villian blows up the school bus, I would just be like "Well darn!" unless I am also dead. It would irritate me to no end if the story just forced me into not going after the villian or doing anything at all.

    After we get the villian, play up all the horrible atrocities he committed, and then force us to question if we couldn't have done better. But don't just force me to quit.
  12. I'm going to throw Tactics in there as well, mostly because Gaussin': Chance for Build-Up is just so sexy and I can take tactics on everyone.
  13. Seriously? I vote for Desdemona because Infernal is a push over. I mean, seriously, I kicked his *** at level 20.
  14. Kinetics. All of it.

    Even Repel.
  15. You're all forgetting something significant about Dr. V in that he perceived himself as a Good Guy. Praetorian Dr. V, as a fully evil bad ***, might have decided to put his medical knowledge to a far more sinister application than 'Good Guy' Dr. V, who was already pretty far off into the ****** up territory.

    It's fully likely that Praetorian Dr. V is working *for* Tyrant. Tyrant gives him access to dead bodies, likely people who have stood against him, and sicks him upon the sewer system where he knows the resistance is gathered. It's a win/win for everyone, really.

    Assuming he's behind any of that at all, of course. It could be something we've never even heard about, but the giant red collars point to a 'tech' based aspect, and Dr. V is the most obvious person to have scientifically created undeath.
  16. From the scrapper forum:

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Werner

    Archvillains are immune while the purple triangles are up, and if you can survive while the triangles are up, you might as well just keep doing damage while they're down instead of wasting DPS trying to lock them down.
  17. Clearly this is proof that the Praetorian Epic Archetype is going to be mannequins with developed muscles.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex View Post
    Well, this thread is about powers that suck, but since it came up, I'll chime in and agree that Seeds of Confusion is ridiculously overpowered. IMO it really does upset the overall balance of Control sets, which tend to either offer decent damage and lighter controls, or heavy controls and low damage. I would definitely not call Mass Confusion a bad power. The issue is Seeds of Confusion is far too good, and really should have a more appropriate Recharge time and lower duration (since it's an AoE with the same duration as the single target Confusion power Illusion and Mind get). I'm sure I'll be set on fire for that opinion, but there it is.
    I'm readying the gasoline as we speak =D
  19. how is he getting his pants to glow?
  20. I do think they're somehow affiliated with Dr. Vahzilok.

    It would make sense if he was ordered to flood the underground with zombies, or was just given free reign to do whatever his "evil" (Dr. V was TECHNICALLY a good guy) mind felt like doing, in order to get to the resistance. Instead of sending people to try and sniff the Resistance out, it makes far much more sense to just flood the place with zombies to keep them occupied/dead.
  21. *questioning eyebrow* Vazhilok? Is that you?
  22. I got most of my levels on a team. I beleive I picked Freedom specifically so that I could team on my peacebringer. Most of my solo stuff has been for the Kheldian Specific Missions with Sunstorm so I could appreciate the story without being rushed. Yes, Cosmic Balance is pretty kick ***. Yesterday I was teamed with about 6 defenders, a blaster and me. When I punched things they died.

    It seems like any team make up would be good for my dwarf form. Assuming a lot of blasters or scrappers my resistance goes up, assuming a lot of defenders I'm probably getting buffed anyway, and controllers will be holding things all over the place to mitigate damage further. Seems like a win in my book.

    I'll probably make a dual build at some point that focuses mostly on Nova and Dwarf, just so I can fully appreciate Nova. I'm sort of in the transitioning phase of DO's -> SO', so I'm a little too broke to be slotting up another independent build at the moment, but I'm definitely interested in it.

    On that note, a mighty thank you for whoever made up dual builds. I think one of my biggest hang-up's with the AT is that I couldn't figure out where to put a focus. Now I don't have too~
  23. I recently got on my Peacebringer again after a 628 day hiatus. Partially intrigued by the updates I had been hearing over the years to Kheldians, and deciding whether or not to delete the character, I hit up a team and was pretty happy with how I was doing. My single target blasts didn't feel so anemic, and my melee attacks felt freakishly deadly. I was only 18, but I could tell this guy had potential.

    So I started making a build for it, ultimately decided to just scrap Nova altogether, as I was able to achieve pretty similiar damage without it. Focusing mostly on recharge set bonuses, and taking advantage of Dwarf's naturally high resistances, I pieced together a build I was pretty happy with. All that was left was to play the damn thing.

    The human form, as mentioned, is a blast. I only have Incandescent and Radiant Strike, but both make the enemy hurt and both usually knock the enemy on it's back. While I would find this annoying on a scrapper or tanker, I found it offered pretty good mitigation with my PB, especially since I could then just shoot at the enemy until he got up again.

    I hit 22 tonight and unlocked Dwarf, and even without any slotting in the thing I already love it. It is very nice to be able to switch into dwarf form if the pressure is a bit much, or I get mezzed. I usually open up the form with that foot stomp clone, and then proceed to beat enemies faces in. Usually on the second footstomp I'll drop back into human form and use my melee attacks to finish whatever I'm fighting off before it can get back up. It's ridiculous fun.

    The Voids don't seem like a huge deal to me either. Perhaps it's because I'm used to fighting Malta Sappers (I completed every single mission in Indigo and Crimson's arc because I thought the Malta were a refreshing challenge on my scrapper) or maybe because they do reduced damage than during my initial introduction. I typically find that hovering above them, dropping down, hitting build up, and smashing their faces works pretty good, and is incredibly satisfying. On teams I like to charge at the Voids, splattering them across the wall with my ridiculous amount of KB effects while my team looks at me with what I can only imagine is concern.

    I'm also midly roleplaying my Kheldian as a ridiculously naive and polite person, which is fun for me while I'm vaporizing people's faces with solar energy.

    I wasn't really expecting to ever like this AT, but I have to say, it's quite fun.
  24. No, because I want you to suffer.
  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrMike2000 View Post
    I always enjoyed keeping everyone buffed on large teams, even with Kinetics.

    Its not massivley different from the core gameplay of chasing down AIs and using a damage power on them - I've never really got why one is considered fun and the other isn't.

    I find the Empathy buffs annoying because of the ocnstant vigilance required to check if something has recharged. Single target buffbot sets like Kin, FF and Sonic are preferable for me better because you go into buff mode, do everyone (mid combat is the best time because people move less) and then resume blasting when you're done.
    Oddly enough, I always thought the best part of Speed boost was that it made the person I cast it on violently arch back as though I had just hit them with a giant, lead pillow.

    Perhaps that says something on what sort of activities I find 'fun'.

    Point remains, for whatever reason, I find reapplying buffs constantly to be annoying. Perhaps because there isn't a real challenge in it. It's just a constant, mundane, task that I wish could take care of itself while I go do something more interesting.