RDU Neil

Good point on Luke and Jessica. While the viewer knew that, ostensibly the entire city was at risk (that never actually seemed the case, and everything ultimately is about... dragon bones? Whaaaaa?) there was no personal reason for Jessica and/or Luke to be involved, and they weren't together anymore, and Luke and Danny aren't friends, so... Basically, where the MCU movies took the time to EARN the big team up (I'd argue that they failed in execution, but that's me) the Defenders felt forced together for a reason that wasn't clear to them until, maybe the end, and even then...

these posts got me interested, so I've been watching he developments... the videos on Weather.com and places like that are just amazing... those overhead shots of the lava spill... further evidence of the impermanence of things.

This has been talked about for years. Really glad they are doing this, with the original writers and actors... I'm actually looking forward to this!

Sunnovabitch. I'd wondered if things had taken a turn for the worst, since we hadn't heard anything after his recent hospital stay. Hyper-man will be missed.

Now that's a motivation geek audiences could get behind.

Yes... exactly this. We house ruled that logic would apply based on the situation, since there was no game rule on this... and everyone was cool with "larger things not meant to be moved, will usually start falling apart unless you have AE to support the lift across most of the object in question." Seriously, it never really caused issues, as every player seemed to be fine with the losing the sillier interpretations of comic book physics, and being more logical about it.

I always joked that JLA Batman was "the GM's character" because he only worked from an RPG perspective if he had all the inside knowledge on what the GM planned to do, thus could always seem perfectly prepared for every situation.

Yes. As wacky as Lady Death obsession might be, at least "romantic obsession" is a motivation people can identify with. "In love with death" is a kind of loony that an audience can at least go with... having Thanos present his motivation as simply an extreme take on a logical problem is actually asking the audience to tyr and understand him, to think about what he says... and end up going, "Hey... wait a sec... whaaaa?"

Jessica Jones Season 2 I found compelling until the last couple episodes. The supporting cast, especially Hogarth, had great arcs (Trish was a mess and a terrible person, and that made her compelling). I thought Jessica's initial arc of getting more together and willing to put in the effort and connect with people was strong... but they completely lost me at the end with her sudden turn around with her mother and collapse into a very weak and almost helpless character. It seemed completely forced and out of character, especially because, in the end, they tried to show her being 'nice' again... which made no sense. It was like, again, the series was too long and they forced all this unnecessary drama mess at the end to fill time that would have been better cutting a couple episodes out and having Jessica put her mother down (one way or another) as a defining character moment, rather than falling into the passive, other people's actions push me around mode we found. It was really frustrating to me that they went in that direction, as a show that turns completely on the character development arc of the protagonist, to have it lose traction in that area so completely. I was just listing them in order of their release... my personal preference. First half of Luke Cage Season 1 Jessica Jones: Season 1 Daredevil Season 1 Daredevil Season 2 Punisher Season 1 Second half of Luke Cage Season 1 Jessica Jones Season 2 Defenders Season 1 Iron First Season 1 (horrible... simply horrible) I just read that the show runner for Iron Fist and The Inhumans was the same guy. Hello HR... we need to fire for cause! Oh... and according to Wikipedia, the second season of Luke Cage is only 8 episodes (not the usual 13, so like Defenders) which I think could be a really good thing. Keep the series and action tight. Don't try to do too much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Cage_(season_2)

Seriously... those same words came out of my mouth to my wife. I found myself closing my eyes during IW... not really engaged in the movie at all. And I have seen Winter Soldier about 20 times, easily, and would watch it 20 times again.

I do enjoy me some Luke Cage. This use of Bushmaster, and the scenes of Misty with her cybernetic arm look good. We'll see if Marvel can maintain a full season of amazing this time. I rate the shows so far: Daredevil Season One: Well done crime thriller that used the full season to introduce a deep cast and complex plot, with proper time spent developing Marvel's second best villain in Kingpin. Jessica Jones Season One: Probably the best work by Marvel so far. An amazing performance by Ritter, best supporting cast and introduced Mike Colter who matched Ritter all along the way, truly gut wrenching personal character arc that drives the plot, and Marvel's single best villain on screen in Tennant's Killgrave. "What... Murdercorpse was taken?" hah! Daredevil Season Two: Almost as impressive as the first season, using the length of the series to flesh out two full stories... the Elektra/Hand war and the Punisher arc... introducing another powerful performance in Bernthal's Castle, giving Karen Page her own development, the proper Foggy/Murdock fallout, etc., and bringing the character of Elektra to life (and death) really effectively. Luke Cage Season One: The first half of this show was the strongest work by Marvel, period. The Cage/Cottonmouth dichotomy, the rich cinematography and commitment to Harlem as a place/emotive setting, the musicality of the story telling... absolutely amazing. Unfortunately, the second half, after killing off Cottonmouth (which could have worked, because Mariah is just as compelling a villain) fell into a mess of unnecessary plot elements (have to bring in Striker, have to bring in the scientist, have to bring in the dead ex-lover who might have betrayed him) that made it lose focus. There were some brilliant moments in the second half, but the final showdown with Striker was badly filmed and left the series on a down note, which is too bad, because this could have been the best thing ever. Iron Fist Season One: Less said, the better. A truly bad show that felt rushed to production, with a complete mis-cast of the title character and, for the first time, a lack of solid writing. The first of the Marvel series were slow paced with plenty of deep character moments, but the writers of Iron Fist just inserted "lots of pointless talking", a plot that made little sense and was clearly forced to setup the inevitable Defenders series, and ultimately failed in its one true mission, to bring a real flare for martial arts/wuxia style... lacking any real choreography, martial training, or commitment to fight scenes that Iron Fist demands. (Daredevil had way better fight scenes, and he is the crime series, Jones is the noir detective battling personal demons, Cage is the socially conscious everyman hero... Iron Fist needed to bring the Shaw bros./jet Li aspect/or go full tilt into the pulp legacy of Iron fist, but failed to do either.) Almost unwatchable by the end... which is too bad, as Iron Fist is one of my personal favorite characters since I was a kid. Defenders Season One: Good that it was kept to 8 short episodes, but still felt too long... the same flaws from Iron Fist dragged down this... the Hand as a shadowy organization were misused and ultimately failed to be compelling as villains (though Sigourney Weaver tried)... Elektra was done well, but the show lacked focus on her... they took the hand out of their ninja costumes, which actually worked well in DD Season Two, so why make them generic thugs now? It was just generally a let down all around. Punisher Season One: Both amazing and lacking at the same time. As a powerful action thriller with deep characterization and a straight forward plot fully enriched by a look at veterans, PTSD, and the price of violence, it was a great show. As a Marvel show... it wasn't anything. It completely lacked any reason to be tied to the Marvel universe, stripping out anything comic-like, and grounding the show much more in reality. It was "a version" of Frank Castle, but it didn't work as part of a larger Marvel Universe. Separate it from the rest of the shows and the MCU, it is great, but it otherwise is too human, too real to actually fit... which is head scratching. They clearly showed how to do Punisher with supers in DD Season 2, so not sure why they went this direction for the show.

That is totally cool! Except for the box, I have (or had) everyone of those pieces, all separately attained. The Adventurers Club I got as a single issue. DI itself I just bought the book. The hex map came with... something in 3rd Edition Champs, I think. That response card was in several products... heh. Real throw back in time, seeing all that, but I'd never seen in packaged in a DI box like that. A small RPG treasure there. Thanks for sharing.

Logic... not game rules. There were no game rules on this originally, so you had to make a call.

Again... if this had been stated in the movie, or alluded to, or addressed in some way. My issue isn't that fans can come up with all kinds of explanations that might make sense, but that the movie itself fails to address clear implications of what was stated in the movie. Especially when it comes to the central tenant of the film. They've clearly stated that this was like an episode of TV, where you are expected to have watched all the other movies, so we don't have to build in motivation and character development to the characters you've already seen... they just "show up" and you go with it because... you saw all the other movies. That means these characters are just set pieces, because Story is about character and development... so that means Thanos is the only real character in this movie. Everyone and everything moves around him, his motivations, actions, dramatic arc, etc. So now, all critical attention needs to fall on that dramatic arc... so you better damn well make it compelling, believable and engaging. You can't leave major holes to assumptions. Any drama comes not from what Thanos is doing, but why... and how does it dramatically change throughout the arc. That is Story... because otherwise you simply have a string of scenes. In this case, they really failed in two major areas. First, his stated motivation is highly flawed, and it was never called out... by either a "That makes no sense! You must just be insane!" or "I have become death, savior of the universe... and will take the role of Life Culler!" or whatever. Second, his supposed emotional arc with Gamora, where they completely failed to convince that he had any true emotion or love for her... so that he pays a dramatic price. We only have his word that he cared, and a few tears, in the face of decades of emotional torture and galactic slaughter was supposed to make us empathize and connect with him? Worst of all, the universe as defined, agreed that his horrific behavior constituted "love", otherwise it wouldn't have coughed up the soul gem for him. If the MCU is the kind of place where the cosmic fundamentals believe the most misogynistic form of male control and manipulation of women, up to the point of sacrificing the woman for the man's gain, is "love"... well then I'm pretty sure I hope the entire universe gets wiped out, not just half of it... because that isn't a place that I care to have exist... even in fiction. I'm really surprised that there aren't more negative reactions among the fandom that the main takeaway from Infinity War is that the MCU, at a fundamental, structural, cosmically conscious level is abhorrently and violently sexist. Yay Marvel!

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that 1st Ed had a specific rule, just that I hadn't, in 30 plus years of playing, ever played in a game allowing unrealistic lifting. With or without rules defining such. This gets back to my point above... what constitutes as "single object" ? For purposes of lift and damage, both? I'll check the rules later, but aside from lifting, I'm now concerned about the implications for damage? So... if I have a flat 50STR TK, no AE... I can apply my 50STR to the entire structure of the Yacht uniformly, to crush it? So the damage is spread around the entire craft? How big can one object be? Is the Earth a single object with a single Body stat? Granted it might have a defense large enough, but can I envelope the entire planet and squeeze with just a base 50 STR TK? I recognize that size/scale has never been effectively applied/ruled in Hero (because size and scale should not be separate from, say, damage, because a larger EB should do more damage, or at least damage a larger area, etc.) and would love to see some kind of easily applied universal, but I don't think that is possible. It seems to me though, that any time you are moving beyond affecting just what is in one hex, you are getting into AE by default... or you get some really, really weird interpretations.

Really? I've always played, since 1st Ed, that if you try to lift a large object (more than a hex, and of course, detail specific) w/o AE, it will begin to break around the lifting point, depending on the object, lift angle, whether the object is supposed to move as a single object (a vehicle as opposed to a house), etc. So an strong enough character can take ahold of the front door handle of a house and just walk off with the whole building over his head?

I don't think I ever did this. This thread wasn't here when the boards first began... what was that... 2003 or so? How did you come up with your 'handle' (forum name)? RDU refers to my long running Champs campaign... begun in '87 and technically still has a game once or twice a year... ran pretty much weekly for 25 years. Neil refers to me. (Have used this handle online since '87 as well.) What was the first tabletop RPG you played? AD&D... played the intro adventure from and early Dungeon Magazine (have to look in my collection, as I have the first 50 issues or so.) That original group moved to 1st Edition Champions (after trying Top Secret, Aftermath, Traveller...) and never looked back. What was the first tabletop RPG you GMed? Again, AD&D after having played a while, wanted to make my own dungeon... a magical pyramid in the middle of the desert with a Lich ruling over all the traps and terrors and a rainbow bridge from the top where you had to battle the Kobold god to escape. Whatever... I was 14... What are you currently playing/GMing? Currently running a bi-weekly campaign I call Secret Worlds using Hero. Think a combination of the Bourne movies with the X-Files... lots of martial arts, shoot-outs, conspiracies, Russian mobsters, Yakuza, weird science, ancient cabals, etc. Looking forward to a yearly get-together in July of some of my long term friends who have spread out over the land, and have a blow-out weekend of gaming back in my original supers campaign, mentioned above. (Well... blow-out weekend, is usually pretty tame for those of us now at a certain age where staying awake past 11pm is a hardship, but you know...)

Oh man... Danger International is my single favorite Hero System product, and I've been playing since 80-81... whenever first Edition came out. But I didn't know there was a box-set? Really? I just went to RPG Geek to see if there was a listing for it. Do you have a picture you could post of this box set? I'd be fascinated to see it. Welcome to Hero!

Short answer, "yes, AE is needed" Long answer, your way of defining the power around "one object" is not something the rules recognize. "One object" is arbitrary. Was the man one object, or was his shirt the one object, or just his skin, but not the bones underneath was the target? Was the main cabin of the yacht the one object, or the whole yacht? That kind of arbitrary "what constitutes an object?" isn't supported by the game... but area affected is. If you want a power that can essentially effect large and small objects, you'll need AE to cover the largest possible object you want to be able to cover. Then put Selective on it... so TK, Area Effect, Selective... now, while you could get everything in a particular area, you can selectively choose only the man, and not his dog. If you and your GM consider an added limitation "Only can select on object in the area affected" that might work as well... but from your description, I have a hard time figuring out how that would work. If you target one object, and that object is a yacht... what about the people and objects ON the yacht? At what point is one object part of another object? That kind of arbitrariness is probably more a SFX, general in-game, at the time ruling. What you want is the logical game effect... which is TK, Area Effect, Selective. At least that is my take on it.

Huh... that was awful. And I mean... from an action POV... that was terrible. Zero tactics... zero stealth... just a brawler in a Batsuit... and terrible choreography... moves slowly and awkwardly... Weird... I've never seen BvS or JL... and I thought maybe at least the action in them was good, even if the stories weren't... but that was just awful. Iron Man tended to be more stealthy and tactical.

I live in Michigan... believe me, I know what utter $h!te my state legislators are. Just another example...

Thanos killed me. At least he put me out of my misery.

I really am hoping to see the nearly four hour director's cut that Coogler supposedly filmed. If Marvel doesn't release that, they are missing a huge opportunity.

Exactly. It completely lost me once it became clear there was nothing deeper to his plan... and the fact that it simply wouldn't work. As I posted before, they missed a perfect moment to have someone, anyone... someone quick witted and doesn't know when to keep their mouth shut (Spider-Man, Iron Man, Shuri, whoever) to just say just that. "Are yo crazy? Even if you do what you want, the population will rebound in fifty years. Maybe less? What does this gain you?" Give Thanos a chance to confront whether he is REALLY trying to save the universe, or has just become obsessed with killing trillions in the name of balance. Let us see his cuckoo on full display. That and that they so ham-fistedly tried to make Thanos some kind of sympathetic villain, and we were supposed to believe he actually loved Gamora (just so they could fridge another female character so a male character gets a dramatic story arc, which is traditionally a more DC move than Marvel) just pissed me off to no end. Actualy, no... just disappointed me. What pisses me off is the masses of people actively calling this movie good, which requires a level of willful ignorance that I find appalling. Especially the critics. This is a movie that actually does fall back on all the tropes in such a way as to create a spectacle with no substance (as they tend to want to say about all comic book movies) yet they fail to actually call this one out.

To Hugh's point, you certainly could say, "No" to that kind of Batman... but based on a campaign where that level of Batman wouldn't fit. Not because of "right" source material vs. "wrong" source material. For example, if I was running a 30's Pulp style, costumed crime fighter type campaign, I'd probably request a toned down version of Doc Batshadow! to play closer to human, because that was the expected feel of the game... whereas a modern superteam on the level of Bronze Age Avengers who has NightBatHawk, then sure, the Batfleck could be a fine model. It is the criteria for what is acceptable that we have to be clear about... and to me it is about "campaign expectations" rather than arguing over the correct source material interpretation. Usually the latter gets people talking past each other, rather than the former, which gets people agreeing one what they want the ultimate game play to be.