Author Topic: Lantz's Q and A thread  (Read 24636 times)

Cherry Lover

  • The Maintainer
  • SE.RA.PH
  • **********
  • Posts: 6375
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #45 on: November 01, 2013, 02:29:06 PM »
Saving innocents definitely isn't bad, no. But when the action that's attempting to save people a handful of people could cause thousands to die, no questions asked, then it's a bit different. We don't even have the justification of them being loved ones in this case. Taking risks to try to save even more innocents isn't bad, but a gamble on this grand of a scale is too risky and could cause far too many deaths as compared to lives saved.

"Could" is not the same as "will". Heroes don't take the easy option, they save the innocents no matter what.

And, it's not a "handful" of people, it can be hundreds of thousands. If the Grail had been summoned in Fuyuki then I think the entire town would have been destroyed.

Quote
Again, CGs only show up when some real bad shit is going down. The better solution is to always try and prevent the thing that would warrant CGs appearing to begin with, not stopping them once they've already shown up.

Well, yes, definitely, but I'm assuming there is a reason Toshi could not do that.

Alice

  • Administrator
  • Master
  • **********
  • Posts: 1703
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #46 on: November 01, 2013, 02:34:32 PM »
Quote from: lantzblades
If Alice and Arch want to think they are unbeatable or correct in what they do that is there business.

lantz, being smug about how wrong we must be really isn't the way to go right now. It's quite frankly kinda insulting.

And using a doujin as if it were canon and in any way valid is a really stupid move. It doesn't actually count.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 02:53:24 PM by Alice »

Besides running the forum, I can provide avatars for people as well~
This is my mod voice. ...Most of the time anyway.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #47 on: November 01, 2013, 02:38:04 PM »
Satoshi is rarely given a choice on his journey where to go or when.

And Archerko is a character in Swords and Sorcery so her canon is relevant guys so er, sorry Arch but active continuity Trumps your argument in this case.

I'm not being smug I'm stating a fact. You are allowed to believe your interpretation of the facts but they aren't clear enough to confirm anything. And as I said above Archerko is a character in the story Alice, it would be stupid to ignore her canon.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #48 on: November 01, 2013, 05:11:31 PM »
Well names regarding the index I believe I have everything brought over, apart from Shinji's route (which I'm having beta'd) it's all there.

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #49 on: November 01, 2013, 05:22:16 PM »
Sword Dancers isn't canon Lantz. At all. In the slightest. And you're still wrong and violating canon in god knows how many fucking ways with your interpretation of CG's. BECAUSE ARCHERKO DOES NOT EXIST IN CANON. SHE'S A FUCKING DOUJIN CHARACTER.

As for the saving people argument, here's a hypothetical scenario - There's a train about to hit five people on the tracks. You're standing next to someone you don't know. You don't know the people on the tracks. If you shove the person standing next to you onto the tracks, he will die but the train will not hit those five people. Shoving this guy on the track will save innocent people. So by your logic mike, shoving this dude on the tracks in cold blood to save those five people isn't a villainous action, despite it obviously being murder.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #50 on: November 01, 2013, 05:32:35 PM »
Don't like it Arch then don't read it. The fic involves multiverse travel and Archerko is a character in the story. Swords dancers is acceptable fanon until the word of god says otherwise.

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #51 on: November 01, 2013, 05:37:50 PM »
Don't like it Arch then don't read it. The fic involves multiverse travel and Archerko is a character in the story. Swords dancers is acceptable fanon until the word of god says otherwise.
...Lantz. Jesus christ. That statement contains EVERYTHING WRONG WITH YOU AS AN AUTHOR. Don't like don't read kills criticism, kills discussion, creates hugboxes of like minded sycophants that will praise anything you put out without questioning the quality contained within.

To elaborate on Mike's post of "Well, they didn't go after Sakura in HF" well, here's why: She hadn't done shit yet to interfere with Alaya or destroy the world. Sure she was GOING to, but not yet. Satoshi on the other hand deliberately interferes with CG's. That's an action, and a threat to the world's safety. So Alaya simply won't stop until he's wiped out.

Cherry Lover

  • The Maintainer
  • SE.RA.PH
  • **********
  • Posts: 6375
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #52 on: November 01, 2013, 05:42:09 PM »
Sword Dancers isn't canon Lantz. At all. In the slightest. And you're still wrong and violating canon in god knows how many fucking ways with your interpretation of CG's. BECAUSE ARCHERKO DOES NOT EXIST IN CANON. SHE'S A FUCKING DOUJIN CHARACTER.

Sword Dancers isn't canon for the Nasuverse, but it is also unlikely that it explicitly violates canon. And, if he is violating canon, please explain how he is doing so, because I'm not seeing it.

Also, Lantz did say that he didn't want to continue this further, and I see his point, so it might be a good idea if we drop it....

Quote
As for the saving people argument, here's a hypothetical scenario - There's a train about to hit five people on the tracks. You're standing next to someone you don't know. You don't know the people on the tracks. If you shove the person standing next to you onto the tracks, he will die but the train will not hit those five people. Shoving this guy on the track will save innocent people. So by your logic mike, shoving this dude on the tracks in cold blood to save those five people isn't a villainous action, despite it obviously being murder.

Erm, what?

That's nothing like what I'm arguing. In fact, what you are arguing is that, if someone is about to shove said person onto the tracks, it would be a villianous act to prevent them doing so. I don't see how preventing a villainous act can possibly be a villainous act....

Don't like it Arch then don't read it. The fic involves multiverse travel and Archerko is a character in the story. Swords dancers is acceptable fanon until the word of god says otherwise.
...Lantz. Jesus christ. That statement contains EVERYTHING WRONG WITH YOU AS AN AUTHOR. Don't like don't read kills criticism, kills discussion, creates hugboxes of like minded sycophants that will praise anything you put out without questioning the quality contained within.

It's also entirely sensible advice. There are always going to be fics that people don't like, and it is ludicrous to complain about aspects of them that are explicit author decisions rather than mistakes (especially when it involves deciding to add aspects of doujins and the like into your fic). Unless the author is being a complete dick (e.g. bashing), anyway, and even then there is no point in going on and on at them every chance you get.

And, yes, I am well aware I am not great at taking this advice either....

Quote
To elaborate on Mike's post of "Well, they didn't go after Sakura in HF" well, here's why: She hadn't done shit yet to interfere with Alaya or destroy the world. Sure she was GOING to, but not yet. Satoshi on the other hand deliberately interferes with CG's. That's an action, and a threat to the world's safety. So Alaya simply won't stop until he's wiped out.

I think you're assigning far much intelligence and foresight to Alaya there. It might try to kill Satoshi, but once he stops being an immediate danger I doubt it will put any extra effort into doing so.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 05:45:42 PM by Cherry Lover »

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #53 on: November 01, 2013, 05:51:02 PM »
Sword Dancers isn't canon Lantz. At all. In the slightest. And you're still wrong and violating canon in god knows how many fucking ways with your interpretation of CG's. BECAUSE ARCHERKO DOES NOT EXIST IN CANON. SHE'S A FUCKING DOUJIN CHARACTER.

Sword Dancers isn't canon for the Nasuverse, but it is also unlikely that it explicitly violates canon. And, if he is violating canon, please explain how he is doing so, because I'm not seeing it.

Also, Lantz did say that he didn't want to continue this further, and I see his point, so it might be a good idea if we drop it....

Quote
As for the saving people argument, here's a hypothetical scenario - There's a train about to hit five people on the tracks. You're standing next to someone you don't know. You don't know the people on the tracks. If you shove the person standing next to you onto the tracks, he will die but the train will not hit those five people. Shoving this guy on the track will save innocent people. So by your logic mike, shoving this dude on the tracks in cold blood to save those five people isn't a villainous action, despite it obviously being murder.

Erm, what?

That's nothing like what I'm arguing. In fact, what you are arguing is that, if someone is about to shove said person onto the tracks, it would be a villianous act to prevent them doing so. I don't see how preventing a villainous act can possibly be a villainous act....
>Archerko
>Surviving Ilya
>Something Zoukenyish
Yeah, it's pretty obviously not canon.


So you're saying it's heroic to let 5 people die to save one person?

The question is as much about ethics as it is heroics. Ethically speaking, pushing someone onto the tracks and killing them even to save five people, is murder. No way around that. However, Heroically speaking. Congrats. You just saved five people by throwing one under the bus.

Ethically, you're letting someone die either way. So why not save the maximum amount of people? Interfering with the counter guardians is like letting those five die to save one. In the long run, it'll ruin you. That's what satoshi is doing every time he STOPS a CG from doing it's job. He's letting five people die by train so he doesn't have to shove one in front of it.

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #54 on: November 01, 2013, 05:53:18 PM »
I think you're assigning far much intelligence and foresight to Alaya there. It might try to kill Satoshi, but once he stops being an immediate danger I doubt it will put any extra effort into doing so.
AHAHAHA. His actions proved he's an immediate danger to the world. Think of Alaya like a simple AI. It's got a logic path, and there's no way of reversing its decision. Once it decides to destroy something, it won't stop until it's gone.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #55 on: November 01, 2013, 05:54:13 PM »
Nasu didn't define what the counter force and guardians are in detail. As such I've use available information, theories and since Archerko is an active character in the story established those details as part of the cg frame work. It's a fiction about the mulriverse so frankly there's going to be a lot of non canon stuff popping up, nothing to do about it really.

Seriously nasu established anything as possible so I'm taking advantage of that. Don't like it arch then don't read it.

and seriously now, let's move on to other questions please.

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #56 on: November 01, 2013, 05:58:05 PM »
There's still the problem of how suish Satoshi is and how he's literally dooming the world through interfering.

Congrats lantz, you just made the character most likely to be responsible for an apocolypse in the Nasuverse.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #57 on: November 01, 2013, 06:34:02 PM »
That is your opinion Arch. Take it and leave if you have no more questions  relevant to the thread or stay if you want to ask others unrelated to the counter guardian thing. As of now I'll be clear, we have reached an impasse of opinion on this topic so changing topics  is prudent.

in short ask other questions please.

Arch-Magos Winter

  • The Machine Prophet
  • Servant
  • ******
  • Posts: 2349
  • Techpriest of Beasts Lair
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #58 on: November 01, 2013, 06:37:31 PM »
That is your opinion Arch. Take it and leave if you have no more questions  relevant to the thread or stay if you want to ask others unrelated to the counter guardian thing. As of now I'll be clear, we have reached an impasse of opinion on this topic so changing topics  is prudent.

in short ask other questions please.
Why the fuck does Satoshi have three swords, one of which is fucking Mordreds.

lantzblades

  • Black King of the round table
  • Alter Ego
  • *******
  • Posts: 3676
  • GM
    • View Profile
Re: Lantz's Q and A thread
« Reply #59 on: November 01, 2013, 06:39:22 PM »
Made two of them, took mordreds sword when he won a fight.