Why is Reichsman Reichsman?

I bow to your levels of facepalm use.

The infinite double facepalm is actually the most applicable, while facepalm collage showing a facepalm is just outright genius.

Wrong. Two people can share the exact same enviorment and come out two totally different people.

For everything good that was done to Marcus Cole in one reality, that turned him into Statesman, could have just as easily had the other Marcus Cole feeling trapped and/or angry.

They both could of had the exact same things happen to them and one thought "I should go with plan A" while the other thought "I should go with plan B"

Dot iz a gut hat!

The Electric-Knight ______ Malfaz _____ Zox'Oculox

@Zethustra

"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan

www.pauldamonthomas.com - Original Music

That's what makes writing so much fun. Stories don't write themselves and characters don't develop on their own. Each situation and each set of conditions can produce a variety of responses from different people, and it's up to the author to pick what kind of a person the character is. We just happen to have all the Marcus Coles written the same, I'd say either for lack of imagination or for fear of breaking the mould.

That said, every world's Marcus Cole didn't come out the same, if for no reason because not every world HAD a Marcus Cole. I'm pretty sure the Shadow Shard didn't.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

I think you hit the nail on the head, Sam. When you get into "Alternate Dimensions," then "in theory" anything could happen. Young Marcus Cole in the Shadow Shard blew off his parents' warnings to look both ways and got run over in the street at age 5. Well, it "could" have happened, along with lots of other possible reasons, because anything really goes. But is it well-written? The writing is the key.

I suppose that if one looks inside oneself, one realizes that an "Alternate You" could have made certain choices at certain times that would have greatly affected the outcome of the present. Some possible choices are close calls, and others are simply ludicrous and realistically are just not going to occur. So when you have divergent outcomes as different as being a noble force for justice versus the biggest Nazi of all time (as posed by the OP), the writing has to be up to the task or it will just get silly.

There are heroes that "nobly sacrifice themselves" that we have seen in various venues in which the writing is not up to the task, and the result is Meh, and then there is the very powerful ending of Troy Hickman's "Smoke and Mirrors" arc in the CoH comics, which was so moving to so many that Cyrus Thompson's statue is in Kings Row in the game now. The writing is the key. For all his kidding and modesty, Hickman has the chops to pull those events off, and other folks just make you roll your eyes when presenting identical events and motivations.

An interesting notion was presented, that perhaps every OTHER Marcus Cole was evil, but only the Marcus Cole who became Statesman became a noble hero dedicated to justice. Can that proposition be pulled off successfully by good writing? I think so. Troy Hickman hinted at some complexities in Statesman and it would have been very interesting to see him develop those. (And with Hickman at the helm, "complexities" does not automatically mean "willing to darkly do evil in the name of good" and the like.)

A good perception on your part, Sam. The writing makes or breaks it.

I don't know, I've had some characters stand up and get away from me. Although I am their creator, I have on occasion wondered, "Where the hell did THAT come from?" I suspect most writers experience this at one time or another. I know it's just my subconscious taking the controls for a bit, but... what if it's not? Dun dun dun.

The writing is always the key. Always. You need a good storyteller to take you along. How many times have you repeated a story back to someone and realized just how ridiculous and unbelievable it is? In superhero comics that actually happens a lot, because it's so over the top, wide-screen epically operatic. (For that matter, try retelling some operas and people will just look at you as if you're deranged.) But a good writer can get you to buy into a story, no matter how far-fetched it may be. They do that by connecting you to reality, perhaps even reminding you of your own reality in some way.

I'm not saying there's no spur-of-the-moment inspiration that turns characters on their heads, but that's kind of what I mean. In fact, it's also kind of how I plan my own stories in very loose terms. I'll start with a guy who gets pegged as the hero, and I'll do what I can to incline him towards better deeds, but at some point I might suddenly decide that his opponent makes a better point and HE is the hero, whereas the original protagonist is the villain, whereupon I will re-spin his old actions and tend to incline him towards more questionable deeds. At the end of the day, I might flip a character back and forth any number of times in my head, and even though I'll usually clean up the narrative before I put it to writing, that sort of mental process highlights what I mean - a character himself isn't always good or evil and doesn't always have defined reactions for all situations.

I've seen a lot of people instruct beginning writers to think "What would that character do?" I would actually advise against this, because it means you don't "feel" the character if you HAVE to stop and reason it out, and more importantly because I tend to think about how I want to depict the characters more so than what "they" would do. Every character has good sides and bad sides, it's just a question of which one I want to focus on in that particular time.

You can't spin any character taking any action in any situation, but you CAN spin any character to be good or bad (not evil, just bad), and which you go for is a question of choice. A character can be presented with the clearest, most obvious choice for his personality and he can still get it wrong if he's having a bad day, if he's questioning his morality, if he's under pressure or if he just goofs.

Easy example. One character sees much suffering and fear, so when he gets super powers, he vows to protect others from the same things he suffers because he doesn't want anyone else sharing his fate. Another character sees much suffering and fear, but he learns that people will fear power because power can cause suffering, so when he gets super powers, he uses them to oppress people. Same circumstances, same basic events, two totally different outcomes.

In a good story, nothing should be pre-defined. A character should not respond to situations based on an arbitrary construct. We are shaped by the decisions we make, willingly and knowingly, and each character-defining moment is the result of decision taken and choice made. It may seem like a child who sees his beloved parents murdered would obviously turn to crime fighting, but he could easily have turned to crime as revenge against not just the killer, but all people in general. It is the choices we make that defines us, and every action a fictional character has to be viewed as a choice made, rather than as an in-character response.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Isn't that part of the point of the heroside Dark Mirror arcs?

Alvays remember: Any plan vere you lose you hat iz a BAD PLAN.






Also, adding to the /facepalm images... I can't add bigger guns, but I can add the funny guns:

They could have made him an insurance actuary.

LEGION OF VALOR - Be a part of the Legend!

Ha! Well, it does help that his name actually is (Von) Doom. That may not have the same connotation in Latverian.

LEGION OF VALOR - Be a part of the Legend!

Und remember, eny plen vhere you lose you het is a BAD PLEN!

EDIT: GAH! I'm getting beat all over the place tonight. Maybe someday I'll learn to finish the thread before posting....NAAAAH!

LEGION OF VALOR - Be a part of the Legend!

My characters "live" for me because I determine their characters and backstories from the beginning, and then let them "write themselves" much of the time. Yeah, it's illusory, but no one but Grant Morrison seriously thinks they're actually writing themselves.

And Grant...well, sometimes I think he's been hitting the bong too much.

LEGION OF VALOR - Be a part of the Legend!

I wonder if Maiden Justice was the deciding factor in "our" Statesman being good, if still a dick. I know it is from the books, and they are somewhat "iffy" on some points -but our States married, had a good life, had a daughter, and grand daughter, and in general avoided the worst of the bitter (till his wife died, but then he had a daughter and grand daughter to keep him "good").

Of course, Tyrant has Dominatrix, so apparently he married someone and had a child , who had a child (Dominatrix)... Possibly either a) his Maiden Justice wasn't as "good" as ours, b) he became more bitter after her death (hey immortality isn't that great if your loved ones are mortal) or c) something horrible ™ happened to his original wife that set him on the road to Tyrant

Not a comment about the thread; I just like the pun.

Oo

*stealz* :3

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

Actually, if you look at the Praetorians as they are described in-game NOW, the conditions that gave them life weren't that different, just the Praetorians seem to have been born dicks so they reacted differently. For instance, Dominatrix hated being the daughter of a hero, so she up and killed her mother (if I remember correctly). Miss Liberty doesn't same to hate her mother, and even seems to have followed in her footsteps. So, basically, you have two copies of the same situation - daughter of a super hero - only they turn out completely differently because the two versions of protagonist just react to them differently.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Sorry to cut some of your post but to Durraken...here is a interesting book to read for you clickie(not the greatest but good)

Ms Rachel sums up how the Third Riech came about cause they were the Thule Society before that. Reading books help enlighten and make valid points.

You know, the whole, "Nazis would exist without Hitler" thing shows how right I a about the difference between knowledge and understanding, because when I said "Without hitler there would be no Nazis" it would be assumed that you all would understand what I meant is not the exact words that I said.

What I meant is, before Hitler joined the Nazi party and started his propaganda, they were a small political party that no one cared about. Without Hitler Nazis would likely have never became such a big political party or win any election, and likely would either died out or remained small to this day. So in the form that most people know the Nazi Party would not have existed.

There's that word again, 'assumption' (albeit in another form). I assume nothing, and certainly don't know enough about you, your motives, belief systems, motivations and psychological state to have read that from what you've posted. I simply read what you and others have posted as what has been posted.

Thank you for clarifying that. From now on I will assume that you mean something other than what you say. It all makes so much more sense now.

Really? When I write something for public perusal, I don't think it's safe to assume anything. I *HOPE* that people will read exactly what I wrote and process the exact meaning of the words, without adding in any bias, slant or assumptions of their own.

If they need to guess or assume in order to understand it, then I have failed to communicate effectively.