Natural Concept Characters

Jade_Dragon · 08-10-2006 05:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
As I was reading the section on motivation, there was one back story that I saw was missing -- Family history or Mentoring. The prime example is the Phantom. The "Ghost Who Walks" has been through how many generations of fathers and sons? A person might inherit the role as the protector of a group of people or a special item. As seen in the "Mask of Zorro" movie, the mantle of the hero can be passed from one person to the next, as the next is trained to take the place of the prior.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen that brought up before, and you're right, I agree with it. I was trying to come from the official descriptions, though (just because I disagree with one part of it doesn't mean I disagree with all of it) and they seem to suggest more direct motivations. Certainly family, loyalty, and tradition are good driving forces, though, and enough to motivate a person to become more than he is.

The villain version of the description, in fact, hints a little at Mob or "Family" connections, implying that you beat the money and influence you needed out of others, or otherwise coerced them.

Really, if there's one thing the Natural Origin and the Natural Concept share, it's this motivation, to strive for perfection. The Phantom doesn't HAVE to be a superhero, but he chooses to be one because it's important to him. That he doesn't have powers is irrelevant, although that certainly does make him worthy of respect, that he's willing to stick to his beliefs even WITHOUT extraordinary abilities. Which is why a lot of players would like to emulate him.

Enantiodromos · 08-10-2006 07:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You skip mentioning the Fighting Pool completely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's an oversight like some of the other pool powers. It's too bad fitness is mediocre-to-gimp, all four powers are great additions to this kind of character.

[ QUOTE ]
I think what others are getting upset about is that they see this as less a guideline to a concept, and more as a commentary on the proper way they should define their characters. You can see how this misunderstanding can make people feel a little touchy.

[/ QUOTE ]
Heh. I don't think it would make much sense if I asked them to apologise to themselves in addition to me.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder how "Natural Concept" would apply to someone like Capt. Kirk from the original Star Trek. I kind of doubt he could build a transporter from scratch

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I can tell, transporters are off the shelf tech in that setting. Could be wrong. The relevance of natural concept characters in science fiction settings where people are often born with unfamiliar powers, and often weild incomprehensibly advanced technology, is obviously reduced. But. ::shrug:: He does, for that setting, evoke many of the traits of the natural concept pretty well, despite transporter use.

[ QUOTE ]
Family history or Mentoring.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, good call. Perumations of training and inheritence like you mention are great components of backstory. I really only scratched the surface of great ideas out there.

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I just can't sit well with a guide that tells others their concept is "weak" because they explain why they have a "Powered Travel".

It may not have been Enantiodromos intention to come across that way, but I'll be damned if it didn't. I wasn't the first to post my objection to it either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damned out of your own mouth, then. ::shrug:: If a thousand people come to the thread and say that I said they built thier characters wrong, or their concepts are weak, or whatever, it'll mean only that a thousand people should be embarassed at having let their weird insecurity goad them into making wildly false reports about what I've said.

[ QUOTE ]
How do you feel about the /Ninjitsu secondary for Stalkers in terms of how appropriate it is for Natural villains?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to read it more closely. I go the impression it referenced strongly magical abilities attributed to folkloric/cinematic ninjas, so, I dunno.

[ QUOTE ]
Thus, the very gameplay contradicts the description.

Since you DON'T remember the Superior Human origin, it isn't correct to say that, at least in your memory, CoH once had an Origin pertaining to it. The Natural Origin, whatever the description, has always included the possibility of other concepts besides the ordinary human. That's all I'm saying.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your 'evidence' about the concept behind the previous origin is the vagaries of game mechanics. Mine is a direct description of what was conceptually intended. The first is negligable weighed against the second. A direct answer to the question: what was natural origin, trumps inference like yours.

You surely realize this is not the subject of this guide.

[ QUOTE ]
I am not undermining your guide, I am merely adding on a commentary about the Natural Origin, in response to some of the replies that have dealt with the ORIGIN, and not the CONCEPT. Consider it an afterthought, an Appendix, if you will.
It is not my intention to attack your suggestions or invalidate them in any way. If you wish to percieve my posts as an attack, I am sorry, but I assure you that's not the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guide explicitly is there to clarify a concept that is contrastive with the origin, so obviously rattling on with strong definitions of the origin is not just silly, it's malicious, even if not an 'attack.' Please quit trying to undermine my guide?

[ QUOTE ]
However, in PRACTICE of playing a natural concept character to level 32, I can tell you that after a while, no travel powers gets frustrating. Really frustrating. So the question becomes not "does this Power fit my concept", but "am I so wedded to my concept that I cannot allow myself to come up with an explanation that I can make fit it".

[/ QUOTE ]

I swift/hurdle/sprinted my first toon to 50. It's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. I was only occasionally last to arrive in missions even in the 30s and 40s in PuGs, and you quickly come to realize that way that, in cases where people have an issue with it, it's more likely because they're just a pain, not because you're actually posing any problem for the team.

But "the question" does not become that at all. Because this is not a guide to "what's frustrating." If that subject interests you, I'm sure a "Guide to miscellaneous build considerations to make play comfortable," would be well received.

[ QUOTE ]
Who's to say what's "off the shelf"? What if I can walk into Image, Inc. and buy a jetpack? What if I can buy a personal teleporter?

[/ QUOTE ]

Know where the nearest hardware, sporting goods, martial arts, outdoor surival, and electronics stores are? There you go. The natural concept is keyed, as I've said repeatedly, to what we, the players can identify with and imagine doing. You and I will never in our lifetimes walk into a health food store and buy a jetpack or teleporter module, and the absence of ordinary pedestrians ever appearing to use such gadgets argues rather strongly that they're both still guarded and exotic technologies.

Stop for a second and figure out whether you're contemplating the natural concept, or contemplating ways you can explain somebody having a given power (hint: you're doing the latter, not the former). "Bitten by radioactive spider," "Exposed to gamma radiation," and "descended from Gods," are all explanations. We're not talking about whether there's a compelling explanation that can be voiced for any given power. We're talking about a conceptual category.

...I have an idea, at the risk of sounding irritable. You all can go on talking about "all the cool ways to explain powers" and "What the origins mean," in your own guides. Howabout that? In fact, judging from people's willingness to invent the topic wholesale where it obviously doesn't belong, I bet there'd be a large audience for a guide on "Why your character concept sux."

You write 'em, I'd love to read 'em. Once you all have it out of your systems, maybe I'll feel like publishing the guide I'm working on to science accident concept characters.

Natsuki · 08-10-2006 08:50 PM

Post deleted by Natsuki

Damage Proc Mini-FAQ

Just noticed Damage Proc Mini-FAQ wasn't working with new forums, it's been updated.

Signal · 08-11-2006 01:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How do you feel about the /Ninjitsu secondary for Stalkers in terms of how appropriate it is for Natural villains?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to read it more closely. I go the impression it referenced strongly magical abilities attributed to folkloric/cinematic ninjas, so, I dunno.

[/ QUOTE ] Does this help any?

Enantiodromos · 08-11-2006 09:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The natural concept is keyed, as I've said repeatedly, to what we, the players, can identify with and imagine doing. You and I will never in our lifetimes walk into a health food store and buy a jetpack or teleporter module, and the absence of ordinary pedestrians ever appearing to use such gadgets argues rather strongly that they're both still guarded and exotic technologies.

[/ QUOTE ]Why in the world would[n't] Pedestrian's have access to the same things a registered Hero does?

[/ QUOTE ]

(If my interpretation of your first sentence is mistaken, I'll need you to explain what you meant. Otherwise 1) I said they don't appear to, not that they 'wouldn't,' but the answer to that question is: because it's an exotic, guarded technology, even in the CoH setting. 2) I'm not sure, from your response, that you got the point. So, more bluntly: there's no such thing as a registered hero, and no such thing as a teleportation device, and if maneuverable, sustained flight jetpacks exist at all, they are an exotic, guarded technology, much like nuclear warheads (which definitely exist). Which is why, as I said, you and I will never go buy them in a healthfood store. And if this somehow sounds irrelevant to you, please, reread my post abovequoted and the entire thread as many times as it takes to get why it IS essential to what we're discussing, before you make further remarks about what natural origins or guarded-tech secret espionage groups have access to.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Damned out of your own mouth, then. ... should be embarassed at having let their weird insecurity goad them into making wildly false reports about what I've said.

[/ QUOTE ]So, you're telling me that you didn't intend it that way, fine...

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm saying you should be embarassed to be caught making such a wildly false report about what I've said. Whether it 'came across' to you that way, it canNOT be attributed to what I said. The perception arises solely out GROSS errors you made or worse-- for which you're responsible. Asserting that it's anything to do with what I said is blatantly dishonest in addition to (in this case) insulting and disruptive.

[ QUOTE ]
You came across as saying that taking Teleportation weakens the character's concepts (In your guide), then later you even said so out of your own mouth that a certain example was weakened

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the remark under discussion. This is what you said:

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I just can't sit well with a guide that tells others their concept is "weak" because they explain why they have a "Powered Travel". [emphasis mine]

[/ QUOTE ]

The guide never comments negatively on any character concept. It does not examine character concepts generally, so obviously could not possibly have anything to say about whether a given character concept was weak. I've repeatedly pointed out the distinction between saying "Concept X is weak," and "Power Y is a poor fit to, and weakens, a natural concept charcter." Everywhere there are good character concepts that are not natural concept characters.

Suppose I said, "having a body wreathed in searing flame weakens a the concept of natural concept character." It is PATENTLY OBVIOUS that I have NOT said the Human Torch is a weak concept. I have not said that such flame powers weaken character concepts. NOT said that an alien born to a race of fire-dwellers is a weak concept. NOT said a guy in a setting where off-the-shelf technology includes super-high-temperature hazmat suits rigged with a network of flame-gouting tubes, is a bad character concept.

In fact, considering that I give careful attention, in the guide, to the necessity of give-and-take with the coherence vs utility of powers in natural concept characters, it's farfetched even to suppose that I've suggested he is not, or is a weak, natural concept character in a setting where such is NOT off-the-shelf technology.

The only reason somebody would turn around and complain that I've "said their character concept is weak because they have wreathed-in-searing-flame powers," is that they want to start a fight about something I definitely didn't say or come close to saying.

Enantiodromos · 08-11-2006 09:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Does this help any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, having never seen that before, yes, the names allow me to take slightly more educated guesses, but really, I'd have to go find out what the powers do then find somebody to show me the animations. As I said in my guide, it's a question of power effect, animation, and fudge factors that are more or less understood by convention, in the game.

Signal · 08-11-2006 11:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does this help any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, having never seen that before, yes, the names allow me to take slightly more educated guesses, but really, I'd have to go find out what the powers do then find somebody to show me the animations. As I said in my guide, it's a question of power effect, animation, and fudge factors that are more or less understood by convention, in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, I took the time to take an individual screenshot of the description of each and every power, then cut and paste them all into one easily viewable format.

So does this help you with an answer?

ClawsandEffect · 08-11-2006 01:26 PM

I have three Natural origin characters. Wraithwind is stretching the "natural definition a bit, as he is an entity from another dimension transported here in a teleport accident. He is actually *less* powerful than he would be on his home plane as a number of his inherent abilities don't function here. Point Blanque on the other hand is a true natural human, he's a former Olympic gold medal winning archer who got sick of watching his neighborhood taken over by gangs. Pyranus is another one that stretches it a bit, he's a vocanic life form that has always been on Earth, we just lacked the neccesary equipment to detect them, kind of along the lines of the Igneous, which he despises.
Over all, natural origin can work based on how well you explain it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

Nemo_Utopia · 08-11-2006 01:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]

No, I'm saying you should be embarassed to be caught making such a wildly false report about what I've said. Whether it 'came across' to you that way, it canNOT be attributed to what I said. The perception arises solely out GROSS errors you made or worse-- for which you're responsible. Asserting that it's anything to do with what I said is blatantly dishonest in addition to (in this case) insulting and disruptive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think herein lies the core of your own misunderstanding of others, Enant. That someone else interpreting the words (creation) of yourself (the creator/writer/artist) in the context it exists as different from your intended meaning somehow invalidates it. It doesn't make them wrong and you infallible, it makes their view of your own piecing together of words show an inherint error in the context matchup. If I said to you, "I need to go out back and burn a fa-ggot," but meant "I need to go out back and burn a bundle of wood" it wouldn't change the fact the someone else interpreted my words (because of context) to mean that I was bashing someone based on their orientation. Intent is well and good, and I personally think you did a good job of differentiating your meaning...but I appear to be a more discerning reader (I'm a "Herbert reader" as opposed to a "comic reader", in your own words). This simply means that the method of reaching the target audience didn't quite hit home with a portion of them...and would need clarification (clarity, the thing you yourself say aids creativity).

That said, the confusion which your meaning vs interpretation of your actual text has caused is (and something you've pointed out a few times, if I'm not mistaken):

Natural ORIGIN vs Natural CONCEPT. I'll try to lay this out. You are defending the natural CONCEPT. Others are arguing over the Natural ORIGIN. For clarity's sake: The Natural ORIGIN, despite its original oversight definition, has come to loosley mean those that are not within what is exluded. Meaning anything not a mutant, science origin, tech, or magic origin. Therefore it includes by necessity aliens from planets with non-Earth norms and certain people with access to otherwise advanced tech displaced by another through time. The Natural CONCEPT, however, is not completely included or excluded by the Natural Origin, however, as certain techs and magic types (those rely on skill but may perhaps use "high-tech" arrows or the like). This CONCEPT has been covered well in the guide, as well as covering the exact overlap I just described and making required allowances for things like chi and faith. Whether the character chooses their in-game ORIGIN as Magic, Tech, or Natural based on their own perception is their choice, and does not weaken their concept (something Enant has said repeatedly and people seem to keep ingnoring ) but is simply a different interpretation than his own of the CONCEPT.

A further elaboration, however. Enant refers to "guarded, mysterious [not "common"] tech" as the basis of difference. Instead of arguing the point, people need to refer back to my last tid-bit and their characters own time-frame of origin. Someone displaced from a future where things like nuclear fission is commonplace would be "natural" by above definitions...but this wouldn't change the fact that people would likely make the toon Sci/Tech in game. Someone displaced from the past would actually be a Tech toon for using technology that hasn't even been invented yet (for them)!! This would not change the choice to make this toon Nat/Mag in game. Origin and Concept are two completely seperate things, and there's a lot of overlap. I think both sides of the "argument" are at an impasse based on not seeing this simple fact when they should be in agreement (since all I've seen so far is semantics, not argument).

I hope that helps.

Enantiodromos · 08-11-2006 02:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, I took the time to take an individual screenshot of the description of each and every power, then cut and paste them all into one easily viewable format.

So does this help you with an answer?

[/ QUOTE ]

What is your deal? I already told you, I'd have to go find out what the powers do then find somebody to show me the animations. I've never seen ninja powers in action, and there's a LOT of guesswork involved with going from description to actual mechanical power effect. I mean, sorry, but I just don't know the set.

Enantiodromos · 08-11-2006 04:09 PM

I had trouble following the initial statement of your view. I'm going to paraphrase it. If I'm wrong, sue me.

"The core of your misunderstanding, Enant, is that someone else interpreting your words in context as different from your intended meaning somehow invalidates it."

Now if you can explain what "it," is, I'll probably get your point. IOW, did you mean to say: interpretation can't invalidate meaning, or that meaning can't invalidate interpretation?

Not to get ahead of you, but in the mean time I note there's something you left out, besides meaning and interpretation. That is, what was actually said. What was said can absolutely invalidate interpretation.

This is true, BTW, even where we substitute art for words, and the issue becomes: are there some experiences of an artistic work that are flat out invalid? Yes, there absolutely are. Rolling up Magritte's "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" and trying to smoke it would be hilariously funny. It would even be funny and clever to contend that the the painting is a revelation that artistic representations *are* what they represent. But if what you got from that painting was a sober message: treat artistic representations as the things they are, you would NOT have a valid personal interpretation of the art painting. It would just mean you didn't get it (and let's defenestrate some po-mo art critics while we're at it).

Enantiodromos · 08-11-2006 04:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He is actually *less* powerful than he would be on his home plane as a number of his inherent abilities don't function here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting twist on the genre, that.

Signal · 08-11-2006 04:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What is your deal? I already told you, I'd have to go find out what the powers do then find somebody to show me the animations. I've never seen ninja powers in action, and there's a LOT of guesswork involved with going from description to actual mechanical power effect. I mean, sorry, but I just don't know the set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well 'scuse me for livin'! I figured since you wrote a long exhaustive guide about "Natural" characters you could at least take your best guess at this one. Forget I even asked.

JayWarr · 08-12-2006 12:15 AM

Oh, I have a relatively Natural Concept stalker(Magic Origined). He is NRG/Ninjitsu.

Ninjitsu is fine and dandy for a Natural Concept, but you're going to have to ignore little things like all the Kujin-In powers looking like your character is casting a spell. If the effects overlay of the sigils wasn't there it would be just fine(the animation is basically the character pauses a moment to collect his thoughts, which is what the power is supposably doing), and as stated before there is alot of "wiggle room" when it comes to just effects. After all, if you ignore the glowy energy(and that it's doing energy damage instead of smashing) around my monks hands, he really is just boxing, something anyone can understand an accept as being nonpowered.

I tend to look at the game as if we're seeing things the normal ingame bystander(yes, I'm trying to look through the eyes of a ficticious character) can't. You can tell when your teammates health endurance is low, even if they're across the map from you, right? Well, a normal person can't. Just like I'm going to assume that a normal ingame person won't notice the brilliant green glowing aura of my Kat/Regen character, even if other players do. It was mentioned in Web of Arachnos that often powered people in the City of Heroes world can identify other powered people by their aura when they use their powers. A golden glow around their fists when boxing with Super Strength powers, or around their feet and legs when kicking with MartialArts powers. Kinda like how it looks in the game.

Of note: Daredevil could be a great Natural Concept character(depending on how the writers treat him). He has no fancy gadgets that can't be designed by any average mechanic, and his abilities are olympic level but not beyond human reach. If not for his radar sense(heightened senses similar to a radar sense would be /SR or /Ninjitsu) he would merely be a highly trained and determined human. Because of that Radar sense however, he's Science Origined. Once more I repeat, this is depending on how the comic writers treat him and if they play up his radioactive accident and superhuman senses or not. I've seen the same writer go both ways in two different comics even(one issue he was a superhuman unstoppable force, the next just a determined man who wouldn't give up despite being beat down really badly). As a natural concept hero Daredevil is pushing, and at times just barely stepping outside of, the boundries. As a character concept I think he's a pretty good one.

I really don't want to get into listing all possible Natural Concept heroes, I'm just trying to point out the really off the wall ones. Best to define by setting boundries.

Martian Manhunter I believe was mentioned. Yes, if I remember him correctly, he's entirely Natural Origined. He is not, however, Natural Concept. His powers are, for his planet and species, perfectly natural(albeit, their version of Olympic level). For our world and species however, they are not.

Oh... one thing... apparently jump boosters are not uncommon in the City of Heroes world. A level 1 Hellion can superjump to catch you on top of a three story building. Heck, a homeless person taken hostage by the Lost can do the same when you rescue them. Sometimes concept has to bend to game physics...

UncleYuan · 08-12-2006 06:37 AM

From my point of view I must disagree on the alien/elf is "natural." While I can see the point, to me a natural is Batman or Green Arrow. Even Captain America can squeeze in there since he is not personally superhuman despite getting "maximal" in a decidedly science-y way.

Aliens are the stock and trade of science fiction, so to me aliens come under the "science" origin. Granted this doesn't strictly fit the definition, but to call Superman a natural doesn't seem right to me either. I figure if it took some outlandish tech to get them here in the first place, then science or tech is the proper origin.

Supernatural creatures, however, I feel belong squarely in the "magic" category. Gods, monsters, races are all the products of supernatural forces. Again, "normal" elf or not, without magic they would not be here.

But then, my feelings about what constitutes a "natural" is even more limited than the OP. For example, nearly every one of his "adequate" sets, and even more of the "dubious" are outside of the origin as far as I'm concerned.

That being said, a strictly "natural" character would be have very few power sets to choose from in this game. There are certainly isolated powers within many sets that might qualify, but taking a power set and only choosing two powers strikes me as being a very good way to very badly nerf your character. Being a practical person I will admit that some flexiblity is neccesary to give naturals a decent scope in the game. But then, origins are fairly pointless for anything but enhancements anyway, so why not call a spade a spade and take the origin that really fits?

To really make the origin work there needs to either be more powersets appropriate to the origin (especially a good movement power - "Vehicles" anyone?), or a more open powers structure that allows you to pick and choose without the restraints of power sets.

In the end, it's a game. If you're having fun it doesn't really matter.

Lord_Apollon · 08-12-2006 09:29 AM

Well,let me explain my Natural Concept hero:

He's an Archery/Fire, his Archery skill is, well, skill. His Fire Manipulation is a direct result of the training he undertook to achieve his mastery of the Bow. He went to master bowsmen in Japan, China, Korea and Mongolia throughout his youth and into his teenaged years, training for the olympics. One of his last trainers was on the plains of Mongolia, and had learned how to use his mind to focus his inner fire into the real world. He taught this to Apollon, resulting in a solid fire control capacity. It's not magic, nor technology, nor science. it's focused chi, that is focused natural energy. While not the "norm" it is not beyond concept. As for his flight, it's the same kind of innate training, focusing his will to rise above the situation.

Enantiodromos · 08-12-2006 09:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Of note: Daredevil could be a great Natural Concept character(depending on how the writers treat him). He has no fancy gadgets that can't be designed by any average mechanic, and his abilities are olympic level but not beyond human reach. If not for his radar sense(heightened senses similar to a radar sense would be /SR or /Ninjitsu) he would merely be a highly trained and determined human.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, daredevil is a perplexing case. I'm sure the writers must be aware of the mileage they can get out of him by making him a highly sympathetic guy: blind guy with no superpowers who basically is just incredibly trained, and is "without fear."

And sometimes they seem to be playing to that-- indeed I get the impression, though I've never been a Daredevil afficionado, that there's often some question about the real nature of his senses. Of course, other times his senses are clearly portrayed as way superhuman, and he loses a touch of that appeal.

Ossuary · 08-12-2006 08:37 PM

Well, this is wierd. I read the guide, thought it was great, then had the unfortunate idea that I should read the responses, as opposed to simply replying, "Hey, great guide!"

From what I can tell, and this is just my interpretation, Enantiodromos here is just a guy that enjoys the natural concept character in comic books, and has written out a guide for others who also happen to like such comic characters. I see nothing more than that. I have no idea how, or why, people got offended by that.

For the record, my Earth/FF Controller is of natural origin. How can this be, you ask? First, he was made for fun. Second, I simply described it to come across as a "natural" ability that maybe ALL humans posses, that he simply discovered during extreme stress.

I realize that my Controller doesn't fit the natural concept in any way. Nor would I try to argue that it does. Given that, however, at no point did I feel that Enantiodromos was insulting me, calling my character's concept "weak", or anything else he's since been accused of.

I guess it just irks me a bit that an entire guide is being thrown down over a debate on what "natural concept/origin" means, when it was VERY CLEARLY stated in the guide what Enantiodromos meant. I mean, the minute I began reading it, I knew what he was going for. I knew what kind of character he was talking about. It wasn't hidden.

As I tend to be more of a concept player myself, I thought the guide was great, and a good way of seeing how we can fit certain sets in CoH/V into a concept we may not at first think about. Concept is not, and never was, defined by the "origins" of characters in CoH/V. Which is why I can have an Earth/FF Natural Controller without batting an eye. Enantiodromos was, quite obviously, discussing natural human characters. Humans who pushed themselves to the limit of their respective ability. How Superman and Khelds got into this, I don't know.

We often sit and think of you,
We often speak your name;
There is nothing left to answer,
But your photo in the frame.
-Anon.

JackONight · 08-12-2006 09:22 PM

Dang it Ossuary ya beat me to it. And ya probably did it more eloquently than I could've...Bravo. *golf clap*

Yup.. definitely more eloquently.

Raindog · 08-12-2006 09:57 PM

I can't believe people are giving Enant such a hard time either. What a bunch of insecure whinners. "Whaa, based on nothing he actually said I got the interpetation and he may cast dispersion on my 'natural' character! No one calls my char concept weak, not even imaginative inferrals!"

Enant, you wrote a very nice summation of what power sets work best for a natural character in the CoH setting. I for one completely get what you mean when you say fudge-factors or off the shelf tech. These people that are splitting hairs for no good reason are obviously just griefing for the sake of it and I would slap them on the ignore list and move on.

BTW, I would like to see that science origin guide!

JayWarr · 08-13-2006 12:34 PM

Raindog, first, it would be Science Accident Concept, since this is a guide for concepts, not origins, and there are several different ways for the science origin to be interperated(Super-Solider concept, ect). Secondly, look at the post that UncleYuan made just above yours. He is, politely and understandably or not, telling us the "proper origin" for our characters of certain concepts. Enantiodromos was not doing that, but also was noticably less polite about his phrasing. In the end that's sometimes how things go.

For referance the early Superman was Natural. His abilities were shared by his entire race and universally accepted as "normal". The current Superman has a photonucleaic effect that lets him absorb solar radiation, something his race didn't have natural access to. Radiation bombardment = Science Enhancement. With, of course, any interpretation the writers want to put on him(Spider-man has gone from Science to Natural to Magic origined recently in the comics). It all depends on what the writer wants to write in the end.

Remind me to write a Magician Concept character guide and Armored Concept character guide when Enantiodromos writes his Science Accident Concept character guide. Heck, Doctor Strange could be Natural Origined(his powers come not from the deities he calls on but from his skill and training), but he's pretty clearly Magic Concept.

Lord_Apollon · 08-15-2006 04:00 AM

Just for curiosity, where would you fit psionics in such a case?

Nemo_Utopia · 08-15-2006 05:41 AM

It depends on your interpretation of psionics, and how your character gains it. I, personally, use the following guide for that:

1) Psionic powers were clearly unlocked or accessed in some way (mutant gene, tech device, magic spell, whadevuh) and Origin is clearly dictated.

2) Natural human mind at maximum potential. This one is, for most people, "Natural Origin." I think most can agree it's fairly natural concept, depending on how you play. However, some might still play it as a mutant or magic, depending on how they see "natural" psionics.

3) Accessed through mental training such as Ki/Chi. This once more depends on your interpretation. It can still be natural concept, and I'd say it's Natural Origin. But others would say Magic (under the idea that accessing Chi/Ki is simply a subtle form of Magic) and a few might even go Mutant (under the logic that accessing Chi/Ki to such potential is not normally possible, and therefore an offshoot of humanity...a mutant).

In short, it's all about how you see it. And I've considered writing the "Armored Hero" concept guide myself...if I ever stop being lazy and get around to it

Enantiodromos · 08-15-2006 08:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Enantiodromos was not doing that, but also was noticably less polite about his phrasing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your sense of 'polite' eludes me. I've certainly not threatened, used crass langauge, or argued ad hominem. I've very mildly expressed my irritation with people willfully and grossly misrepresenting what I said, and have refused to compromise with flat wrong views, but if either of those is where I fall short on politeness in your view, I fault your views re: politeness.

[ QUOTE ]
Just for curiosity, where would you fit psionics in such a case?

[/ QUOTE ]

Psionic powers are a genre element that has all the usual hallmarks of non-ordinariness that magical abilities and mutant powers have. They fit most closely somewhere in that family of concepts. They're also widely recognized not to exist, and even where claims of their existence are made, the implication is always that one is dealing with someone of extra-ordinary gifts. It is *certainly* an exotic speculative fiction claim to suppose that everyone has them in any strong sense. Hence they're definitely inappropriate to a natural concept character. (Which is, again, not to say that characters with some of the appeal of a natural concept character can't have them, and not to say that there aren't ordinary human abilities that resemble them.)

NemoUtopia,

What's under discussion here is definitely not natural origins, though you persist in addressing them. As you point out, whether something is appropriate to that origin all depends on "how you see it." Which is why it can't mean anything at all, to say something is or isn't natural origin. Which is why this isn't a guide on that topic.

BTW, my heartfelt thanks to those of you who posted on page 7 and seemed to "get it." I don't mind being perpetually assailed by willful misunderstanding, but it's nice to know somebody understood.

Nemo_Utopia · 08-15-2006 09:01 AM

Yeah, the problem is that there are still people who don't. You addressed the psionics thing better, and got across what I was trying to say, which was something along the lines of "it depends on whether your concept bases on all humans having psionic potentical (or not)." And for this game, that's something the devs have also kind of left speculative...there seem to be people who have unlocked a deeper potential...but there is at least something to suggest each case is special or unique or gifted. The origin of the Rikti themselves and prevalance of psionics among them (unlocked through scientific mutation) as well as heroes like Sister Psyche (naturally psychic) suggests it's more common than in most comic universes but not widespread enough to truly be considered "natural." I'd say this line is the best summation:
[ QUOTE ]
Which is, again, not to say that characters with some of the appeal of a natural concept character can't have them, and not to say that there aren't ordinary human abilities that resemble them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is true of any concept hero, in a sense: any can have certain of the "natural concept" appeals and not actually be "natural concept" simply due to being a little too fantastic/extraordinary/beyond-the-norm.