The Last Hurrah (adventure for your use)

[Agent X]

> I read them. He brings up that he made changes in the scenario from his
> campaign world to make it a bit more accessible for others to use

... because in his campaign's own timeline, the Minutemen are on their *second* attempt to end the world in nuclear fire, and he thinks that might prove a bit hard to put into the backstory of other campaigns. So he suggests having the 16-years-later meltdown run be their 1st, not their 2nd.

That is the *only* 'adapting' change he suggests until after Trebuchet's post about the mentalist driving people insane.

AAMOF, up until that point, here's CJ's posts on just just why the Minutemen went nuts...









These are from the four posts, in order, that CJ wrote before Trebuchet posted his mass insanity idea.

Notice a common trend?

In every post, the Minutemen are *explicitly* stated as to have been fucking crazy -- violent, nationalistic, neo-fascist thug-brains -- all along. No supervillain mentalist coming along and driving them nuts. No nothing. Nope, they were recruited *because* they were unstable, kept on all the while they were unstable, and got even more unstable after their 'master' Reagan died.

If you are going to claim that CJ meant all along that the Minutemen had their nihilistic insanity caused by an outside force, and simply didn't make that clear early on, and that his 'umm, some supervillain must have mindwhacked them all' post is merely a clarification and *not* a back-pedalling retcon...

... then you are flying in complete and total contradiction of what's repeatedly on the page in black and white, and I call bullshit to the max.

Read more carefully. 1st post: 'They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible.' Later post: 'This was taken advantage of by the German Villain guy who planted a "seed" in the mind of Justice.'

No retcon, no back-pedalling.

[Chuckg]

Right, so, they were recruited because they were nuts, kept on because they were nuts, and were stated at least three times to have reached the belief that Reagan wanted to nuke the world all by themselves...

... and then later on it's suddenly -- "No! No! It was this German guy with telepathy all along!"

... and that's *not* a retcon?

Dude, that's more than completely out of whack, that's downright insulting.


Edit -- oh, all right, I went back and 'read more carefully'.

Know what I found?

The quote you claimed "They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible" not only appears absolutely nowhere in the first post, unless the text-search engine has completely crashed, it's not even anywhere on the first page.

Or the second.

Or the third.

Agent X, you're a liar.

[Agent X]

Right, so, they were recruited because they were nuts, kept on because they were nuts, and were stated at least three times to have reached the belief that Reagan wanted to nuke the world all by themselves...

... and then later on it's suddenly -- "No! No! It was this German guy with telepathy all along!"

... and that's *not* a retcon?

Dude, that's more than completely out of whack, that's downright insulting.

Not really, but you've got your guns on Crackerjacker so it really doesn't matter, does it?

[Chuckg]

(moves PS from last post to down here)

Agent X, you have absolutely no business talking now...

... now that I've checked out your supposed quote ("'They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible")...

... and found out that not only is it *not* in the first post, it's nowhere even on the first *page*.

You are a liar. You're making this shit up completely as you go along. Fuck you.

[Agent X]

(moves PS from last post to down here)

Agent X, you have absolutely no business talking now...

... now that I've checked out your supposed quote ("'They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible")...

... and found out that not only is it *not* in the first post, it's nowhere even on the first *page*.

You are a liar. You're making this shit up completely as you go along. Fuck you.

I'll let your words speak for themselves. I have just looked at his posts and I will make this correction. First post: 'They went rogue.' Later post: 'They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible.' Later, Later post: 'The German villain used their instability to turn them.'

And when it's 'xxx' instead of "xxx" it's paraphrasing.

[Trebuchet]

(moves PS from last post to down here)

Agent X, you have absolutely no business talking now...

... now that I've checked out your supposed quote ("'They were chosen because they were unstable and suggestible")...

... and found out that not only is it *not* in the first post, it's nowhere even on the first *page*.

You are a liar. You're making this shit up completely as you go along. Fuck you.

Whoa! Waaaay out of line, Chuckg. That was utterly uncalled for.

[Chuckg]

... really?

Trebuchet, the man 'quoted' something that was never actually said, and then topped it off with a sneer that I should 'read more carefully'.

This is, by any definition of the word, lying.

If he wants to forge quotes, he doesn't magically become an icon of truthfulness because I appended my message to him with the f-word, now does he?

I don't care how long he's been here, how popular he is, or who is friends are. If he can't bring himself to avoid deliberately falsifying things in order to bolster up a failing argument then he is a liar, and will be called one to his face.

[Chuckg]

> First post: 'They went rogue.'

Nope. Not said.

> ' Later post: 'They were chosen because they were unstable and
> suggestible.'

The word 'suggestible' appears nowhere within the first three pages of this thread.

> Later, Later post: 'The German villain used their instability to turn them.'

Yes, that's the retcon post.

> And when it's 'xxx' instead of "xxx" it's paraphrasing.

Oh, please. You tell me to go 'read more carefully', and that it's over there in black-and-white, and when I don't find it or anything close to it, you *then* cry paraphrase?

Absolutely shameless.

Your so-called 'evidence', that was supposedly so obvious (but missed by me due to my inability to read), is actually nothing of the kind. In you come, interpreting CJ's posts however you want to, even if it's damn near a total 180 from what's actually written, and then going around acting like anybody who won't do the same is an idiot.

And *I'm* the one out of line? Seriously, people. Seriously.

[Chuckg]

Further data re: paraphrase...

After running the 'thread search' function multiple times, the results are this:

* the word 'suggestible' appears nowhere in the first 3-4 pages (i.e. -- before the retcon post), and only in posts by Agent X and replies to same

* the word 'controllable', ditto

* the word 'control', ditto, except for usages in such phrases as "control room" and "control codes", etc.

* the term 'brainwash*', virtually nowhere, and in no posts by Crackerjacker.

So precisely what the hell are you allegedly 'paraphrasing', again? Pre-retcon, there aren't even any *synonyms* claiming that the Minutemen are so wide open mentally. Indeed, the emphasis was on how they were unstoppable soldier fanatics.

[Agent X]

First Post: "The Minutemen, disgraced superhuman champions and former enforcers of the Reagan administration, who have been in hiding for more than a decade, are out to commit suicide, taking the world with them in a nuclear hellfire. They beleive that as former retainers of the late President, that this is the only way they can redeem themselves as soldiers and true americans… The background story is that the Minutemen went rouge and tried to seize America's nuclear weapons for immediate use against the rest of the world, thinking it was in their President's wishes. Instead they were apprehended by a international supergroup and while the whole thing was kept under wraps it traumatized the Minutemen so much that despite each of their escapes (except one casaulty) they never made contact with Reagan again. Only his recent death has caued them to reunite for this one last mission, the last hurrah…."

In-between posts: some remarks that indicate his view of the mental state of the Minutemen

Later, Later Post: But the idea is that the Minutemen were picked by Reagan because they were the most susceptible to suggestion out of America's most powerful superhumans. They all underwent severe psionic and just old fashion conditioning to the point where they would never betray the president and become his assassin. However this all did not help their mental stability, so when the Utopian (actually the Nazi supergenius Meister-Verstander in deep cover) planted the seed of the idea in the leader and most political of any of them, Justice, it didnt take much to convince the rest of them to join in the plot to capture and destroy the nuclear devices of the world.

Guys, if you are going to rabidly criticize someone's offering and attack their character it's going to discourage further sharing of ideas on these boards - and I thought that was one of the primary purposes for these genre threads.

[Chuckg]

"The background story is that the Minutemen went rouge"

Since trying to launch America's nuclear arsenal w/o the legitimate chain of command's permission is highly illegal, yes, this is a rogue act. Legally.

It does not in any foreshadow, however, that these guys are actually the puppets of a sinister German mentalist. The whole original presentation is that these guys were recruited unstable despite Reagan knowing they were unstable, only got worse the further they went along, and eventually completely melted down in the cabeza. Home-grown fascist government enforcer nutbags, no outside mentalist required, just like, mmmm, Major Victory and the Force of July (DC), Captain America IV/The Grand Director (Marvel), International Ops (Wildstorm), etc, etc... and that's just the ones who were *officially* on the US government's payroll at one time or another.

Edit -- or to underline it even more blatantly, "they went rogue" is in no way, shape, manner or form usable foreshadowing for "they were mind puppets".

As you yourself pointed out a couple days ago, the rogue agent subplot is as common as dirt. And in that very common subplot, the rogue agent is going rogue, 99 times out of 100, because he *chose* to go rogue, not because he got Jedi Mind Tricked into it.

So how is the one here usable as foreshadowing of the other? It ain't.

> In-between posts: some remarks that indicate his view of the mental
> state of the Minutemen

... posts you are carefully snipping out because that view of said mental state was 'they're fanatics', 'they're nuts', 'they were recruited because they were nuts', and lots of things that *don't* even *begin* to foreshadow sinister mentalist puppet plots, but instead are going down the classic track of these guys are just plain bent that way.

And then the later post...

... in case you've forgotten, the entire crux of our disagremeent is whether that later post was either:

a) something intended and foreshadowed all along, or

b) a backpedal-and-retcon

Either way, you can hardly quote the post *itself* as proof of a), becuase HTF can you foreshadow yourself at the same moment you're actually arriving? It's not relevant to the debate.

> Guys, if you are going to rabidly criticize someone's offering and attack
> their character it's going to discourage further sharing of ideas on these
> boards - and I thought that was one of the primary purposes for these
> genre threads.

1) If you want uncritical acceptance of your every whim, buy a dog.

2) Another one of the primary purposes of this board is *discussion* -- which includes criticism and analysis. Which means that you can't throw the free speech card to shut up people who don't like it.

3) I'm not attacking CJ's character for having posted this, merely his good judgement. The character I'm attacking right now is *yours*, not for having chosen to defend him, but for having chosen completely dishonest, untrue, and outright lying methods in the attempt.

And, well, if I can genuinely catch you lying to me, then I have a genuine complaint to lodge against your character.

[Trebuchet]

Guys, if you are going to rabidly criticize someone's offering and attack their character it's going to discourage further sharing of ideas on these boards - and I thought that was one of the primary purposes for these genre threads.

I strongly object to the characterization of my criticism of this scenario as "rabid." My response was reasoned and I offered suggestions for improvement. Not only did the author retcon his story without even acknowleging he was doing so, but you've been even worse in your defense of his radically altered plotline.

Chuckg's vulgar language was way over the top (and I have expressed that opinion in a PM); his observations of your general conduct in this thread was not. I'm sorry, Doug, but that's how I honestly see it. You were patently in the wrong here.

I strongly suggest we abandon this thread before it gets any worse. Nothing further will be accomplished here.

[Agent X]

"The background story is that the Minutemen went rouge"

Since trying to launch America's nuclear arsenal w/o the legitimate chain of command's permission is highly illegal, yes, this is a rogue act. Legally.

It does not in any foreshadow, however, that these guys are actually the puppets of a sinister German mentalist. The whole original presentation is that these guys were recruited unstable despite Reagan knowing they were unstable, only got worse the further they went along, and eventually completely melted down in the cabeza. Home-grown fascist government enforcer nutbags, no outside mentalist required, just like, mmmm, Major Victory and the Force of July (DC), Captain America IV/The Grand Director (Marvel), International Ops (Wildstorm), etc, etc... and that's just the ones who were *officially* on the US government's payroll at one time or another.

Edit -- or to underline it even more blatantly, "they went rogue" is in no way, shape, manner or form usable foreshadowing for "they were mind puppets".

As you yourself pointed out a couple days ago, the rogue agent subplot is as common as dirt. And in that very common subplot, the rogue agent is going rogue, 99 times out of 100, because he *chose* to go rogue, not because he got Jedi Mind Tricked into it.

So how is the one here usable as foreshadowing of the other? It ain't.

> In-between posts: some remarks that indicate his view of the mental
> state of the Minutemen

... posts you are carefully snipping out because that view of said mental state was 'they're fanatics', 'they're nuts', 'they were recruited because they were nuts', and lots of things that *don't* even *begin* to foreshadow sinister mentalist puppet plots, but instead are going down the classic track of these guys are just plain bent that way.

And then the later post...

... in case you've forgotten, the entire crux of our disagremeent is whether that later post was either:

a) something intended and foreshadowed all along, or

b) a backpedal-and-retcon

Either way, you can hardly quote the post *itself* as proof of a), becuase HTF can you foreshadow yourself at the same moment you're actually arriving? It's not relevant to the debate.

> Guys, if you are going to rabidly criticize someone's offering and attack
> their character it's going to discourage further sharing of ideas on these
> boards - and I thought that was one of the primary purposes for these
> genre threads.

1) If you want uncritical acceptance of your every whim, buy a dog.

2) Another one of the primary purposes of this board is *discussion* -- which includes criticism and analysis. Which means that you can't throw the free speech card to shut up people who don't like it.

3) I'm not attacking CJ's character for having posted this, merely his good judgement. The character I'm attacking right now is *yours*, not for having chosen to defend him, but for having chosen completely dishonest, untrue, and outright lying methods in the attempt.

And, well, if I can genuinely catch you lying to me, then I have a genuine complaint to lodge against your character.

Chuck, I'm not going to get worked up about your dislike and ad hominem attacks on me. I am concerned about the way this kid's offering was received. It's a poor precedent for the Champions threads. He didn't ask for anyone to rake him over the coals. He just wanted to know whether anybody found it useful and was probably hoping for a pat on the back.

Instead, he was accused of being a Reagan-Hater, cliched, and of Covering for any perceived flaws in his post. There wasn't any need for it. If you want to see a positive response to his post, check out Superskrull's response.

[Agent X]

I strongly object to the characterization of my criticism of this scenario as "rabid." My response was reasoned and I offered suggestions for improvement. Not only did the author retcon his story without even acknowleging he was doing so, but you've been even worse in your defense of his radically altered plotline.

Chuckg's vulgar language was way over the top (and I have expressed that opinion in a PM); his observations of your general conduct in this thread was not. I'm sorry, Doug, but that's how I honestly see it. You were patently in the wrong here.

I strongly suggest we abandon this thread before it gets any worse. Nothing further will be accomplished here.

I'm not surprised by anything you would say Treb. I'll reread it once again.

[Chuckg]

I strongly suggest we abandon this thread before it gets any worse. Nothing further will be accomplished here.

I respect you, I respect your opinions, and so I will respect this advice.

Thank you.