[Calamity Spoilers] Calamity's Consequences

[Mckeedee123]

Maybe having them just being very similar looking dizygotic twins could work, I'll have to think about it.

 

Seems like the simplest solution besides handwaving

Edited February 18, 2016 by Mckeedee123

[Blackhoof]

It seems like that is the only option.

Maybe changing their backstory/weakness is necessary too. After all, it is better to retcon stuff like that then actual canon posts.

[Kobold King]

Maybe changing their backstory/weakness is necessary too. After all, it is better to retcon stuff like that then actual canon posts.

 

 

But I like their backstory and weakness. If we're all resigned to not being canon anyway, why are we all so worried about this?

[Voidus]

But I like their backstory and weakness. If we're all resigned to not being canon anyway, why are we all so worried about this?

Because when Voidus breaks canon unnecessarily his head explodes.

Then again it does grow back so I suppose it's no big deal.

[Mailliw73]

I'm here! Finally finished and now I just want more from this world.

 

I didn't like what Sanderson did with the weaknesses, and I didn't like the way he tied them back to Calamity. Firefight made them into PTSD triggers, which was so deep and complex and added so many more layers to the Epics we knew….and then Calamity shifted the focus back onto Epics being smug and imperious because Calamity was smug and imperious. And the way Calamity could just take a normal fear and punch it up to insane levels felt shallow. So, if we're going to deviate from canon, I recommend we stay with the assumed definition of weaknesses as tying back to an Epic's past trauma, and being resolved by the Epic facing that trauma for the sake of someone else. I confess: I suggest this partly because the way I have Funtimes' redemption sequence planned, it wouldn't work nearly as well if the "to save someone else" caveat were observed. But I also think that the canon definition risks making Epics more shallow, and it plays into the way we've been writing our Epics better. 

 

Thoughts? Opinions? Angry rants for the Dark Lord Zorblag? 

For the most part, I think the weaknesses are still tied to the person themself. David was afraid of water before Calamity touched him. Megan was the same. Prof too. He did enhance them, but I feel like that was a consequence of having the power. It needed a fear to be its weakness, so it took an existing fear and made it a phobia. Something stronger than it had been ever before. Your way of redeeming Epics sounds the same as what Megan and Prof and David all did, so I don't see the difference.

 

Also, I'd like to voice my opposition to people playing meta-Epics, in particular Assumers and, for lack of a better word, Cancelers. They are too powerful, and greatly upset the balance of the game. To pose an example, imagine either an Assumer or a Canceler with a PI that isn't resurrection, entering Astoria. Said Epic could, quite easily, waltz through the entire city and slowly but surely plant a bullet into the skull of every single Epic there. The ability to be immune to powers is already so powerful that someone having more than one PI is unheard of. To then allow a character to actively remove powers from characters is, in my opinion, way too strong an ability. The only way I would be even mildly comfortable with it is if the character was required to not have a PI, and even then their ability to kill Epics who don't know them/their power is off the charts.

 

That said, Detectors and Copiers don't bother me, so long as the characters they are detecting/copying retain their powers.

Assumers never play a part except for Calamity himself and he breaks just about every rule. All we get about other assumers is that they're only temporary thefts, and we could limit them, but I don't think we need to eliminate them entirely.

[Edgedancer]

But I like their backstory and weakness. If we're all resigned to not being canon anyway, why are we all so worried about this?

Apart from the want to apply to canon as much as possible (I can symapthize with Voidus on that point) there's also how retconing out the twins connection would mean we also retcone out Motivators, given that they work by the same principle.

[Voidus]

Why would we retcon motivators?

[Edgedancer]

Why would we retcon motivators?

Because twins essentially are just very sophisitacted motivators for each other. Both work on the cells having the same genetic make up that Calamity somehow can't keep apart from each other. That's probably also why both cause location sensing pain for the (other) Epic when used.

[Voidus]

Oh right, sorry misunderstood your first post, thought you meant retconning them as not being twins would mean we can't have motivators.

[Edgedancer]

Oh right, sorry misunderstood your first post, thought you meant retconning them as not being twins would mean we can't have motivators.

Ah yes, I can see how that would be confusing.

[Blaze1616]

Assumers never play a part except for Calamity himself and he breaks just about every rule. All we get about other assumers is that they're only temporary thefts, and we could limit them, but I don't think we need to eliminate them entirely.

 

Again, temporary is all an Assumer or Canceler needs to kill an Epic with a PI. So long as the powers remain transferred/removed for a few minutes, which I don't think anyone would want to play an Assumer that only steals for less, then stealing/removing, killing, and laughing is all that's needed. Suck the PI away, kill via method of choice, and then laugh as their body reaches the point in which brain and heart activity cease (a few minutes for the brain), and thus when their PI returns they don't come back.

 

However, if I'm the only one who has an issue with the amount of power such Epics would have over every other character, then there's no reason to ban them. They don't really effect my characters much anyways, since most Epics in the game can already kill them.

[Voidus]

Again, temporary is all an Assumer or Canceler needs to kill an Epic with a PI. So long as the powers remain transferred/removed for a few minutes, which I don't think anyone would want to play an Assumer that only steals for less, then stealing/removing, killing, and laughing is all that's needed. Suck the PI away, kill via method of choice, and then laugh as their body reaches the point in which brain and heart activity cease (a few minutes for the brain), and thus when their PI returns they don't come back.

 

However, if I'm the only one who has an issue with the amount of power such Epics would have over every other character, then there's no reason to ban them. They don't really effect my characters much anyways, since most Epics in the game can already kill them.

Cancelers can't cancel passives which means most PIs still work.

Also given the restrictions on assuming abilities (Touch) most High Epics wouldn't have a problem killing an Assumer before they got assumed.

Also also, I'm not completely opposed to having a method by which High Epics can actually be killed, it gives them some tension and we still control the characters, there's still the rule against killing other players characters without permission.

[Kobold King]

Cancelers can't cancel passives which means most PIs still work.

Also given the restrictions on assuming abilities (Touch) most High Epics wouldn't have a problem killing an Assumer before they got assumed.

Also also, I'm not completely opposed to having a method by which High Epics can actually be killed, it gives them some tension and we still control the characters, there's still the rule against killing other players characters without permission.

 

 

Exactly. Half the characters in the RP could be killed by a stray bullet ricocheting in the fight scene. They aren't because this isn't a rigid simulation of reality or a competition; it's a collaborative writing experience.

 

An assumer isn't necessarily a gamebreaker anymore than a High Epic with an insta-kill offensive ability is. An assumer is a source of potential drama that we shouldn't forbid ourselves from mining.

[Mestiv]

And regarding Assumers, IIRC they need some time touching to get the ability out of their victim. During this time, the victim may fight, break the contact and, as a result, reset the counter of time required to get the ability.

 

If you start assuming High Epics PI and don't succeed first time, your gonna have baaaad time...

[Voidus]

And regarding Assumers, IIRC they need some time touching to get the ability out of their victim. During this time, the victim may fight, break the contact and, as a result, reset the counter of time required to get the ability.

 

If you start assuming High Epics PI and don't succeed first time, your gonna have baaaad time...

Honestly even if you succeed you're still going to have a bad time, every High Epic in the area is going to want to murder you.

[Mestiv]

Honestly even if you succeed you're still going to have a bad time, every High Epic in the area is going to want to murder you.

 

Only if they find out that you are an Assumer... which only makes things more interesting! Although, if it comes to Player vs Player with one person being an Assumer, it will be hard to decide if his stealing succeeds or not, because any result means the death of one side or another... We'll need some official dice rolling or something I guess.

 

Also: what if two assumers meet and try to steal from one another?

[Blaze1616]

And regarding Assumers, IIRC they need some time touching to get the ability out of their victim. During this time, the victim may fight, break the contact and, as a result, reset the counter of time required to get the ability.

 

I don't know how true this is. When Larcener was stealing, the scenes made it seem like once contact was made there was no escape. Particularly when he was stealing Prof's powers. I'd need to reread the two scenes though.

[Mestiv]

I was under the impression that Prof simply didn't care any more at that point so he didn't fight it, but as I'm not native speaker maybe I didn't get it right.

 

Well, it seems I might be wrong, as this is a bit unclear:

 

(Mega important quote from Calamity!)

Megan didn’t object. She joined me. Together, we walked away from Prof.
“Who’s the coward now?” he demanded, kneeling in shadows and flickering firelight. Weeping. “David Charleston! Killer of Epics. You’re supposed to stop me.”
“That,” a new voice said, “can be arranged.”
I turned, completely astonished, as Larcener strolled from the shadows of a stone overhang nearby. Had he been there all along? It defied reason. But—

He reached Prof and lightly rested his fingers on the man’s neck. Prof screamed, going stiff.
“Like ice water in the veins, I’m told,” Larcener said.
I charged toward them across the open cavern. “What are you doing?”
“Ending your problem,” Larcener said, holding on to Prof. “You wish me to stop?”
“I…” I swallowed.
“Too late anyway,” Larcener said, pulling his fingers away and inspecting them. He looked into Prof’s eyes. “Excellent. It worked this time. I did need to check, after our little…problem with your girlfriend.”

Edited February 19, 2016 by Mestiv

[Blaze1616]

See, I felt that the phrasing of "rested his fingers on the man's neck" combined with Prof's screams from the cold but not pulling away meant that once skin contact was made it was impossible to break unless the Assumer wills it. That said, it also mentions that Larcener was "holding on to Prof"...

 

Edit: 

Actually, I'm sold on the contact being forced, because it then says that Larcener "pulled his fingers away". 

Edited February 19, 2016 by Blaze1616

[Kobold King]

See, I felt that the phrasing of "rested his fingers on the man's neck" combined with Prof's screams from the cold but not pulling away meant that once skin contact was made it was impossible to break unless the Assumer wills it. That said, it also mentions that Larcener was "holding on to Prof"...

 

Edit: 

Actually, I'm sold on the contact being forced, because it then says that Larcener "pulled his fingers away". 

 

 

Keep in mind that Larcener is Calamity, not just some two-bit assumer off the street. We haven't seen a normal assumer.

[Voidus]

See, I felt that the phrasing of "rested his fingers on the man's neck" combined with Prof's screams from the cold but not pulling away meant that once skin contact was made it was impossible to break unless the Assumer wills it. That said, it also mentions that Larcener was "holding on to Prof"...

 

Edit: 

Actually, I'm sold on the contact being forced, because it then says that Larcener "pulled his fingers away". 

Larcener does have the advantage of being an all powerful superbeing so we can't really tell if that's standard for the profile.

Wasn't there also some kind of reference that Larcener was also unique in the strength of the abilities he could steal? So another point in favour is that an Assumer might not even be able to steal PIs.

[Blaze1616]

Keep in mind that Larcener is Calamity, not just some two-bit assumer off the street. We haven't seen a normal assumer.

 

I don't feel the Larcener is Calamity argument works because yes, he is Calamity, but keep in mind that his powers are the ones he gives to the Epics.

 

That said, I don't think we'll know for certain without WoB.

 

Larcener does have the advantage of being an all powerful superbeing so we can't really tell if that's standard for the profile.

Wasn't there also some kind of reference that Larcener was also unique in the strength of the abilities he could steal? So another point in favour is that an Assumer might not even be able to steal PIs.

 

The uniqueness was that Larcener never lost the abilities he had gained. In other words, the only abnormal thing is that unlike all other Assumers, Larcener's thefts weren't temporary.

[Edgedancer]

Cancelers can't cancel passives which means most PIs still work.

Also given the restrictions on assuming abilities (Touch) most High Epics wouldn't have a problem killing an Assumer before they got assumed.

Also also, I'm not completely opposed to having a method by which High Epics can actually be killed, it gives them some tension and we still control the characters, there's still the rule against killing other players characters without permission.

Actually David says Wiper isn't strong enough to cancel inert abilities, not that cancelers can't do so in general.

Similairly, there's also nothing stating that an Assumer can't have their own portfolio of powers to help them in getting to an Epic and/or defending themselves in case an attempt to steal powers goes wrong.

 

Now, I myself wouldn't be for banning meta powers in general but I think we should be regulating them very carefully.

[Kobold King]

Whoah, I just thought of something.

 

We know Obliteration has a cooldown for his teleportation, one which was apparently removed in Firefight. We as the readers are lead to assume that his powers themselves have been altered.

 

How do we know he wasn't just using the motivator tech based on his flesh underneath his jacket?

[Edgedancer]

Whoah, I just thought of something.

 

We know Obliteration has a cooldown for his teleportation, one which was apparently removed in Firefight. We as the readers are lead to assume that his powers themselves have been altered.

 

How do we know he wasn't just using the motivator tech based on his flesh underneath his jacket?

Because the fact that Regalia made a motivator for teleportation from him was specifically keept as a secret from him, meaning he doesn't know, meaning he couldn't use it.