ak-73 wrote:
No, you just show that you didn't understand the original post. The original poster was speculating about whether the CS might be Nxla's greatest threat and he outlined a scenario, his take on the situation. Various people have responded and stated their assessment of the situation. All good and fine here.
The problem with you and specifically you is that you do cast in stone as if only your reading of the situation was right, when it ain't.
And the problem with you and only you is that you see my assessment of the situation as my way of saying that the outcome can ONLY go one way.
When, in fact, my series of rebuttals in this Thread have only served as a counter to d-brand's initial premise -that Nxla is a pushover.
D-brand used Canon readings of Nxla's stats and abilities to say why he believed 'X;' my
rebuttal used Canon readings of Nxla's stats and abilities to say I thought that 'X' was a flawed outcome on d-brandon's part.
EVERY question can potentially be solved by "Whatever the GM says."
Even that is beside the point. The problem is you seem to think (and we have been through this in the debate on the scrupulous alignment before) that there if Nxla was to come to Earth it would have to work out a specific way, namely the way you proposed.
You NEVER saw me say that in ANY post in this Thread.
You merely saw me saying, repeatedly, 'D-brandon, why do you say that Nxla would fall in the manner that you say when he also has A,B, and C at his disposal??"
How you got "that is the ONLY way for a scenario to progress," nobody knows but you -and even then I might be hoping for too much.
When this is just of many possible scenarios. You criticized Dark Brandon for making Nxla dumb in his entering Earth; at the same time you proposed a different scenario as if this was the actual (or even only truth).
Wrong again, for the reasons listed above.
Now if you had said that you would have handled Nxla differently and that you as a Gm would given him magic scrolls, etc etc etc, that would have been a different thing.
I don't have to give Nxla this that or the other thing "as a GM" because d-brandon didn't open up a "What would you as a GM do?" discussion.
He opened a discussion based on Book Canon.
But at least give the appearance of challenging the legitimacy of Nxla coming to Earth as proposed by Dark Brandon and that is a challenge that cannot go unanswered.
I don't even know what you're getting at here; the syntax of the sentence is a little weird.
Try explaining it again in a different fashion.
If Dark Brandon or any other GM was to decide that Nxla would enter Earth and got quickly destroyed the CS (for example because the CS had sufficient psychic intelligence and Nxla had vastly understimated the CS), then this would an interpretation fully equal to yours.
Only if he makes up a
House Rule Scenario in which Nxla makes a series of mistakes that don't at all match his known or implied behaviours, abilities, or resources.
His main logical flaw was to set up, from Canon, a listing of Nxla's weaknesses and the Coalition's strengths....and then
dump Canon in order to make Nxla act in such a non-canon way that he would just sit there and turn himself into an easy target.
For the most part, it is logically inconsistent to mix both Canon
and House Rule into one, cohesive Argument such as the one presented here in the OP; all that such an artificial construct serves to do is to artificially get a cheap 'win' for one side or the other.
What he proposed was much akin to me saying "Palladium Va,pires are SO easy to kill; all that I have to do is walk up to them and stake 'em in the heart" without mentioning that they can, and do, fight back in a variety of ways.
Now that we got that out the way, let's proceed.
You can't properly "proceed" until you get to the right place to start with.
So far you've failed to do even that.
HOWEVER........people don't ask questions within the Forums to get the standard answer, "GM's Call" -unless, of course, they specify such beforehand. They ask questions because they want answers based on canon declarations of things like Raw Stats, Story Setting, Battlefield Conditions, Comparative Power Levels, etc.
That shows that you might not be a newbie but that you haven't truly understood what goes on these boards. Most people here don't see it as strictly as you.
Wow.
That's a weird observation that you've got there.
At a glance, I can look around the entire series of Forums, and safely guesstimate that at least 75-80% of all of the Threads, in EVERY Forum asks
Canon questions with the expectation of
Canon answers (yes I routinely scan them all, even the Modules for which I don't own the Books).
As opposed to those Threads which are in the minority (to my eyes) wherein the Authors of the Threads who want to know how Players homebrew their Games, CLEARLY ask the other Forum Members to do so (we're doing just that in the "Dead Reign" section at this very moment; players who have the module are frustrated at how hard the Zombies are to kill and are bringing forth interesting modifications).
See the difference??
As evidenced by Dark Brandon's remark: "Dude...you're arguing awfully hard on a thread that was obviously not meant to be taken quite so serious. I suggest a vacation...in the Bahamas. Mmm...beach front property." I would submit this to you as the first piece of evidence that a substantial part of the board, including me, doesn't give that much of a damn about what you consider to be Canon.
Since most Threads in most of the sub-Forums are PRECISELY about Players asking Canon questions -both old and new -
I would submit that
you don't know what you're talking about.
Perhaps you'll bother yourself to give a damn about
that.
All that Dark Brandon did was talk about this thought experiment of his. It has been informat chit-chat by nature, not because he was looking for you about canon declarations about Nxla. In fact, it's my impression that there are a good deal of people around who couldn't care less what you (or anyone else) considers canon declaration.
Almost as important as the words themselves, is the ability to "read between the lines."
To wit:
A]] d-brandon
wanted a
Canon discussion of how easy Nxla would be to take out because he kept presenting Nxla's weaknesses against the Coalition in Canon terms.
B]] Just as importantly, d-brandon
wanted a discussion because he expended the energy to print out the Thread in the first place; with very rare exception, no one puts out a Thread without wanting anybody to say anything about it.
C]] Third, the very fact that d-brandon CONTINUED to engage me with Canon to buttress his arguments, and didn't tell me that he wanted to take it in another, possibly non-canon direction, indicates that he did, indeed, want to create a canon scenario.
I just did my part by pointing out the Canon that
also applies to Nxla and which he
didn't consider, as a counterpoint.
And to prove that your above remark my inexperience is incorrect I would like to point out that I did raise the term Canon in my last post because I knew that you'd bother me with that nonsense again.
If you think that Canon is nonsense, then don't participate in Canon discussions.
Just pop in every time you see a Thread, type out, "GM's Call!!" and then excuse yourself again.
I haven't gone back to look at how long you've been a member here, so just a little bit of friendly rebuke (and take it in the spirit in which it is intended): "GM's Call," used as an answer to a given Forum Question where a canon response is expected, marks you as an utter noob to the Forums no matter how long you might have been playing the Game in RL.
Talking about Canon where
informal talk about a
thought experiment has been clearly expected by Dark Brandon marks you as an ideologist, someone who is prone to misreading reality based on his own interests/conceptions.
If d-brandon wanted something other than Canon, he would've said so; he's one of the Board's veterans, and he has had NO trouble whatsoever in creating non-Canon threads in the past.
And he has ALWAYS been clear about when he wants one type of answer or the other.
And that in turn depends on the degree of military intelligence that the GM deems fit. Which may for the most part rely on the quality of Psychic visions. Which in turn are again a GM's call.
I guess that I'll just keep repeating the same thing until it sinks in:
d-brand asked a Canon-specific question. Psychic visions, in canon, aren't anywhere near as detailed as some folks make them out to be (which is what makes them fun to play with).
See above missive for the aforementioned friendly rebuke about using "GM's Call" as an answer.
You are simply mistaken about the nature of this forum if you think that the only or even the major purpose of this forum is talking about what's Canon and what's not.
Covered above; most Players specifically specify when they want to see the one or the other.
You're simply going to have to put more effort in your Responses.
I am content with the quality of my responses if they manage to reduce an opposing debater into someone who just claims that my responses aren't good instead of sticking to the issue and providing argument.
Once your arguments are determined to be poor ones, it isn't my job to 'provide argument' on flawed logic...or follow the person who is putting forth that flawed logic further down the road.
Here's another, basic 'rule' about "X versus Y" scenarios: the more that you have to 'handicap' one side versus the other in order to score a 'win' for your side of the argument, the more you confirm that your position/argument is the weaker one.
No, you misunderstand what I am trying to convey to you: your acting as if the rules only allow for one interpretation and according this one interpretation, namely coincidentally your interpretation (the one which makes most sense to you), things would have to work like this and then this and then that.
Once again, you are incorrect in stating that the body of my responses to d.b. are "this can ONLY happen this way!" scenarios.
They are, again, merely ways of pointing out how he was flawed in effectively saying "Nxla uses these powers here but not those over there."
BIG difference between that Argument and saying "Nxla can ONLY do things this way!!"
As for the issue at hand: you say that I am handicapping one side vs the other. This is a slanted interpretation. For example, I could argue that in my world psychic sensitives could always gets such visions in the case of impending doom.
To make it abundantly clear to you: I am not arguing for any possible scenario or against anyone's thoughts on how it would go.
Neither am I.....something else that you continue to misunderstand.
I am arguing against you attitude of: "It would have to be like this, this and this. This is Canon and everything else is wrong."
When you see me saying, "it can ONLY be like this!!" point it out to me.
I say, and have said all along, in answer to d-bran, questions to the effect of "how is it that you're using ONLY these capabilities and not those if you're setting up a canon scenario as to what Nxla would do? Aren't you artificially stacking the deck when you do that? Why are you assuming only flawless actions on the part of the CS, but loading down Nxla with a whole series of tactical and operational mistakes and not granting him the ability to make smart preparations of his own in return?"
Show me where, in the body of my Posts to this Thread, I have done otherwise.
And bring up SPECIFIC examples of it.