This was not what I said at all, and I thought we would simply agree to disagree on the topic instead of making it a "I'm right" fight and looking for confirmation from our flists. Or that's what I had decided to do because I wasn't planning on angering you. I figured there was something in what you were saying I didn't understand, and that there was something in what I was saying you didn't understand because we were on such difference paces, and I had planned to just... move on.
I'm disappointed I was the only one thinking this. I don't want to explain myself again, since I don't know how to do it differently than I did it already, and we still wouldn't understand each other, but I am sad that this was brought up in public.
You're the one that said you wanted to agree to disagree, I never said I would; especially since to do so I would first have to understand your point and I really don't. I told you that.
If you want to think this is about who is "right" go ahead. You'd be wrong, but knock yourself out.
I was trying to understand. You said you wouldn't explain and went to bed. So I vented on my LJ. It's how I get things off my chest.
Perhaps you look for validation, I don't. I was wondering if someone saw something I missed. Not that I really expect someone to be able to explain YOUR reasoning, since they aren't you. But other points of view are often a good thing when I'm try to puzzle something out.
If you want to explain your ideas (yes the above is what I saw you as saying, and the reason for my feelings. If you think that my understanding is wrong it's up to you to tell me what you DID mean) to me, go ahead. That's all I ever wanted. Otherwise, if you want to just "move on" I'm not stopping you.
I'm sorry, our conversation was at seven in the morning my time, so I wasn't as clear trying to explain this as I could have been.
What I meant to say is that my character is being taken from a certain point and developing away from his canon future. From what I understood -- and I could very well be wrong -- you were going to take a character and ignore information that is revealed about his past because it is revealed in the future canon. The information mentioned in a ten-years-in-the-future canon about "ten years ago" has to be taken into consideration. If one decides to play a character disregarding that information because it's in a future canon and the pull-point chosen is before, then, I think this makes the character an AU. A similar example might be if someone were to take Roy from just before Snowbirds, and decide that, since he was taken before his addiction was revealed, that he has never touched heroin in his life.
As I told you before, it's not HIS past. I was using a jump off point well before he fired Dick. So yes I was going to ignore the "revelations" of DKSA since none of that had happen or would BE happening given that the character would be in the game verse and not the canon setting.
Your Roy example fails because you're still missing the fact that my pull point was to have been before the EVENTS themselves occurred, not the reveal. I pointed this out to you several times. Making the pull point before the EVENTS means there is no issue.
I fail to see how this means I would NOT be playing a Miller Verse Batman.
And as I pointed out, this future information also reveals why he took Dick in, amongst other things, which is in his past, and you answered you wanted to disregard this, too. I said the information from the rest of the canon, mainly DKR and DKSA, told us a lot about his behaviour in the past, and you answered that personality was fluid and that you didn't have to consider this, either.
I can try and go with another example, from a completely different fandom -- if someone plays Peter Pettigrew from his days as a teenager, he hasn't done anything wrong, yet, and he hasn't turned over to the dark side. It is very possible to take that pull point and make him grow from there without having him ever join Voldemort. However, everything we know about his future indicates that he is easy to manipulate, that his willpower isn't the best, and that he is the kind of character who, under some circumstances, will betray friends. This part of his personality can't be disregarded because the events showing them haven't occurred, yet
( ... )
The future information is in the FUTURE, looking back on things from one particular and obviously biased vantage point.
You seem to be operating from the idea that characters and their personalities are static. I don't think they are. At all.
Sure, he took Dick in as an experiment. Great, dandy. And? That's not his only reasoning. He DOES have feelings beyond that of a scientist with an experiment and I was going to explore that. But apparently this means, according to you, that I wouldn't be playing Miller Verse Batman. Why? Seriously. Why? ALL the characters int eh Game would be AU by definition.
So what makes your Dick a Miller Verse character, but not the Bruce I was thinking of playing?
I don't mind exploring parts of a character, I mind that you deliberately want to ignore half the canon source when setting what Bruce's personality is like and don't see how that might be problematic :/
This was not what I said at all, and I thought we would simply agree to disagree on the topic instead of making it a "I'm right" fight and looking for confirmation from our flists. Or that's what I had decided to do because I wasn't planning on angering you. I figured there was something in what you were saying I didn't understand, and that there was something in what I was saying you didn't understand because we were on such difference paces, and I had planned to just... move on.
I'm disappointed I was the only one thinking this. I don't want to explain myself again, since I don't know how to do it differently than I did it already, and we still wouldn't understand each other, but I am sad that this was brought up in public.
Reply
If you want to think this is about who is "right" go ahead. You'd be wrong, but knock yourself out.
I was trying to understand. You said you wouldn't explain and went to bed. So I vented on my LJ. It's how I get things off my chest.
Perhaps you look for validation, I don't. I was wondering if someone saw something I missed. Not that I really expect someone to be able to explain YOUR reasoning, since they aren't you. But other points of view are often a good thing when I'm try to puzzle something out.
If you want to explain your ideas (yes the above is what I saw you as saying, and the reason for my feelings. If you think that my understanding is wrong it's up to you to tell me what you DID mean) to me, go ahead. That's all I ever wanted. Otherwise, if you want to just "move on" I'm not stopping you.
Reply
What I meant to say is that my character is being taken from a certain point and developing away from his canon future. From what I understood -- and I could very well be wrong -- you were going to take a character and ignore information that is revealed about his past because it is revealed in the future canon. The information mentioned in a ten-years-in-the-future canon about "ten years ago" has to be taken into consideration. If one decides to play a character disregarding that information because it's in a future canon and the pull-point chosen is before, then, I think this makes the character an AU. A similar example might be if someone were to take Roy from just before Snowbirds, and decide that, since he was taken before his addiction was revealed, that he has never touched heroin in his life.
Reply
Your Roy example fails because you're still missing the fact that my pull point was to have been before the EVENTS themselves occurred, not the reveal. I pointed this out to you several times. Making the pull point before the EVENTS means there is no issue.
I fail to see how this means I would NOT be playing a Miller Verse Batman.
Reply
I can try and go with another example, from a completely different fandom -- if someone plays Peter Pettigrew from his days as a teenager, he hasn't done anything wrong, yet, and he hasn't turned over to the dark side. It is very possible to take that pull point and make him grow from there without having him ever join Voldemort. However, everything we know about his future indicates that he is easy to manipulate, that his willpower isn't the best, and that he is the kind of character who, under some circumstances, will betray friends. This part of his personality can't be disregarded because the events showing them haven't occurred, yet ( ... )
Reply
The future information is in the FUTURE, looking back on things from one particular and obviously biased vantage point.
You seem to be operating from the idea that characters and their personalities are static. I don't think they are. At all.
Sure, he took Dick in as an experiment. Great, dandy. And? That's not his only reasoning. He DOES have feelings beyond that of a scientist with an experiment and I was going to explore that. But apparently this means, according to you, that I wouldn't be playing Miller Verse Batman. Why? Seriously. Why? ALL the characters int eh Game would be AU by definition.
So what makes your Dick a Miller Verse character, but not the Bruce I was thinking of playing?
Reply
Reply
As for setting up personalities, then by that reasoning your Dick isn't Miller Verse either, since you said he won't be going crazy.
Reply
Leave a comment