He isn't particularly devoted no but there's also absolutely nothing to indicate that he's disloyal or that he has any reason to betray us for the LeagueGoing by his coop blurb he's not really all that loyal to us. We want somebody who we can absolutely trust, will have no moral quandaries over the League actions whilst also having a high intrigue skill, which unfortunately we are in short supply of hero units meeting said requirements.
Why do we need it to be someone we can absolutely trust? Like... seriously?Going by his coop blurb he's not really all that loyal to us. We want somebody who we can absolutely trust, will have no moral quandaries over the League actions whilst also having a high intrigue skill, which unfortunately we are in short supply of hero units meeting said requirements.
Don't forget that Talia coming to us isn't the same as us sending Mercy to Ra's, for one Talia isn't actually his most trusted lieutenant, that would be Ubu, and for another Talia actively volunteered for the position in order to benefit herself rather than having been sent by her father as a sign of trust+ She's highly competent and our right-hand woman. This is a gesture of profound respect to Ra's. Mercy arguably means more to us than Talia does to him.
Not to mention that even if we do intend for this to be a long term alliance, which I personally do, we will almost certainly be working with Talia not Ra'sSo... if you really care about this alliance, and you want it to be the best alliance it can be, and you want to work really closely with him, and make our relationship with Ra's be, say, on the importance-level of our relationship with the US military, then yeah, probably send Mercy.
On the flip side, if you want someone who will make the system work, and keep Ra's reasonably happy, and make the connection functional but not amazing, then Wells will do the job just fine, and at far lower cost. We keep paying him, we offer generous additional pay on top for the foreign duty station, we maybe offer him the language-learning spell to help simplify settling in if he wants it.
For me? Ra's is a sideshow. I hope and expect to get some value out of him, but our desires are opposed, in ways that we're not particularly opposed to, say, Diana, the US military-industrial complex, or Queen Bee. As such, Wells as the "good enough" choice seems pretty much perfect. Mercy is overkill, and she's expensive overkill, and if she's only temporary overkill then... well, when we pull her back, who are we going to put instead? It's not like we're going to suddenly have anyone else better than Wells to send. Might as well go to him directly.
I would like to state that this is a vast over-simplification of things and a bit of a strawman argument. Hero units are prioritized to live when possible but you have succeeded in getting kills against them (Whisper A'Daire for example was killed on screen in quest). Hero units can die and will die if you use them stupidly.Side note: this is one of the things that I really don't like about "Hero characters basically never die ever" - it severely drops the risk of putting people we actually care about in legitimately dangerous situation. It lets us do things like lean into Roxxy's "when in risk of my life" trait without ever really having her in risk of her life... and so forth. It deforms the world. Well, that and the fact that it makes it functionally impossible to quietly arrange for the death of Lois Lane.
I personally do not consider the League of Shadows to be fundamentally sexist. There are sexist members and Ra's himself is ever so slightly sexist in that he won't ever consider a female heir/successor but nothing about the structure/organization of the League of Shadows makes it any more fundamentally sexist than a business or a military. Of the top of my head characters like Lady Shiva and Whip don't seem to face much discrimination for being women and have risen up the ranks whilst characters like David Cain don't seem to believe in any inherent superiority of men over women in combat/assassinations (for all that's messed up with Texas Dave, he doesn't consider Cassandra to be any less capable due to being born female). Ra's is sexist and it's never a great look when an organizations leader is something negative but Ra's sexism is relatively minor and insidious, only really affecting the people closest to him and his own opinions and beliefs don't necessarily transitively apply to the organization as a whole.She's heading into an organization that's... fundamentally sexist, and probably wont' recognize how awesome she is. She's likely going to get more disrespect than she deserves (not from Ra's, but possibly from others). Right now, Talia is trying to get as far away from her dad as she can. There's a reason for that.
I see what you're saying but to some extent it feels slightly disingenuous to say the League isn't sexist because it has some high ranking female members and it's high ranking make members aren't openly sexistI personally do not consider the League of Shadows to be fundamentally sexist. There are sexist members and Ra's himself is ever so slightly sexist in that he won't ever consider a female heir/successor but nothing about the structure/organization of the League of Shadows makes it any more fundamentally sexist than a business or a military. Of the top of my head characters like Lady Shiva and Whip don't seem to face much discrimination for being women and have risen up the ranks whilst characters like David Cain don't seem to believe in any inherent superiority of men over women in combat/assassinations (for all that's messed up with Texas Dave, he doesn't consider Cassandra to be any less capable due to being born female).
Fair enough, I can respect thatHaving reconsidered a bit, I think I'm declaring neutrality in the Mercy-Edward debate and retracting my vote.
I mean that's fair but I suppose that I ought to elaborate on my original position. I feel that the League is not fundamentally sexist. In practice it might be actually sexist but nothing about the organization's structures, goals or methodologies inherently necessitate that the organization act in a manner that is sexist.I see what you're saying but to some extent it feels slightly disingenuous to say the League isn't sexist because it has some high ranking female members and it's high ranking make members aren't openly sexist
In an organisation that was founded centuries ago by a, mildly, sexist man who still runs it whose goal it is to maintain old values and indoctrinates a lot of its members I find it kind of hard to buy that the rank and file isn't at least somewhat sexist even if they'd never express it to their superiors, especially because if you're a woman who raised in rank then you've bloody earned it
Fair enough, it isn't intentionally sexist nor is that a part of its core valuesI mean that's fair but I suppose that I ought to elaborate on my original position. I feel that the League is not fundamentally sexist. In practice it might be actually sexist but nothing about the organization's structures, goals or methodologies inherently necessitate that the organization act in a manner that is sexist.
That makes senseThe League's goal isn't to maintain old values per se (they're a lot closer to being ecoterrorists than they are fundamentalists) and they're fairly egalitarian in who they take in.
I would say they're at least a little bit more sexist between being led by a supreme ruler who is unintentionally sexist and the military at least theoretically being effected by public opinionThere might be sexism amongst the organization but at the same time if you put the same people in an official government recognized military then it would be about as sexist.
Okay, then I could use some correction, because the position I was taking is based on my gut-level understanding of how it works, which, more or less, comes out of my memories of my understanding of how you've responded previously when the topic has come up.I would like to state that this is a vast over-simplification of things and a bit of a strawman argument. Hero units are prioritized to live when possible but you have succeeded in getting kills against them (Whisper A'Daire for example was killed on screen in quest). Hero units can die and will die if you use them stupidly.
Yes it does warp the world a little bit that they're prioritized to survive over generic units but it's a comic book setting, I shouldn't be attempting to stick one to one to realism and I think it's a necessary addition considering how permanent death is in quest (if a character dies on screen chances are they're never coming back ever again). I think the current situation is the best solution to giving you fair difficulty and letting things have proper impact (you can try to metagame it but the system is fair and most importantly it enables fun since it gives you a bit of a safety net if you want to play more crazy and aggressive).
TLDR: I feel a bit like the position you're critiquing is a strawman and not the actual state of things. My solution is not perfect but I consider the alternatives to potentially be worse.
So you are right in the broad strokes but a lot of the nuance is missing from the interpretation listed above. It's less that I would "take literally everything else before killing off a character" and more so that I'd pick anything that could feasibly serve as an alternative prior to that point. Furthermore if it doesn't kill off a character but it does have negative consequences then it does make it easier to attempt again later. This is true for both Lois and Mercy.Okay, then I could use some correction, because the position I was taking is based on my gut-level understanding of how it works, which, more or less, comes out of my memories of my understanding of how you've responded previously when the topic has come up.
At the time, I was looking at Lois Lane specifically, and looking at "What would it take for this woman to straight-up no fooling no take-backs die, if we wanted to assassinate her?" The response that we got back (as best I understood it) was that you would take literally everything else on the plausible reward table before you picked "Lois Lane just straight-up dies". As far as I could tell, that meant that in order to make it happen, we'd have to roll better than your creativity at coming up with potentially interesting bennies that might come out of an assassination attempt. That felt like an unrealistically high bar to achieve, and was one of the reasons I gave up on even trying.
I'd assumed that someone like Mercy would be... more or less the same. Further, I was pretty sure that if Ra's was rolling for "attack Mercy Graves" he'd actually prefer that she be captured rather than killed (for various reasons). As such, my interpretation was that it would be unrealistically improbable for the situation "We send Mercy to Ra's. Ra's decides to betray us and sends lethal-capable assets after Mercy." to result in "Mercy has died." just going off the "picks off the reward table". For example, something like "Mercy is captured, but manages to get some sort of word out to Lex before they lock her down" could quite plausibly slot in as being worth the same point score from Ra's point of view, and therefore would occur instead.
If I'm wrong in any of this understanding, then please do correct me.
That, and use overkill.So essentially take actions that will limit plot armor until everything possible is now impossible.
Have I mentioned how much I dislike this kind of... commentary?Looks like we're just going to give up one of our most useful hero units for the foreseeable future then
I guess we'll just have to go into next turn two useful heroes down
Oh, it does, and I'll admit that that's useful to know for the case of, for example, Lois Lane. Now I'm half-wishing we had sent someone after her while she was in the hospital.
I'm not implying that at all and I find it kind of offensive that you're assuming the worst of me hereHave I mentioned how much I dislike this kind of... commentary?
Whineposts are very offputting. If you have an argument to advance, advance it in a form that respects other people's intelligence rather than just implying that they're too stupid to see the obvious reason they're wrong.
Because I'd declared neutrality in this vote. But so help me, every time I see this kind of thing...
Mildred Graves:Lucy Lane: General, Roman Senator, Medusa/Gorgon
(So I brainstormed a few ideas and I ultimately settled on the most horror related one. I do blame Castlevania a bit for me coming to this conclusion.)
...It is later revealed that Meena didn't actually dress up for Halloween. Mr. Mxyzptlk didn't actually do anything to her; it's all placebo effect and all MAD SCIENCE she did was purely under her own power and initiative.Meena Dhawan: Mad Scientist, Princess Aura, Marie Curie
(I'm very tempted to go for Princess Aura but I don't think the Flash Gordon reference is interesting enough to work on its own. Mad Scientist is just a fun role for Meena as it basically gets to show her acting completely unhinged and making her another threat to the heroes that's distinct from the others)
Tempting, assuming the character exists yet?Caitlin Snow: Aayla Secura, Yeti, Vampire, Surfer Chick, Jester
(I'm not super happy with any of the costume options but having Caitlin be able to be heroic and not have to deal with the nastier sides of her personality seems like a fun time)
Mildred Graves, meditatively:Rene Carpenter: Teacher, Flamenco dancer, Cyclops
(I'm leaning this way due to it lining up with Lucy's greek monster theme and it would be fun to see the transformation take place)
Mr. Mxyzptlk:Ace: Normal Schoolgirl, Princess, Fairy
(I knew that with Ace I wanted to take her powers away. However I also wanted to give her a form she could be happy with and not just be in danger the whole time. As such making her a fairy let me do that, it seemed like an appropriate costume for a young girl to want to wear for Halloween and it let me call back to her fondness for butterflies)
Mr. Mxyzptlk:Leslie Willis: Rock Star, Fallen Angel, Pirate Radio
(This just seemed like a costume she'd wear...)
Leslie Willis:and was the least potentially disruptive to events in the city at large)
Nitpick: Jimmy Olson's been working for the Daily Planet since at least the time Blindspot tried to assassinate Lois Lane, and that was around Turn 12-16 or so of the quest as I recall. It's been about four years. Surely he's at least comfortably into his twenties, even if he's an intern slow-walking a journalism degree through community college or something?Jimmy Olson: Superman
(It's Superman's best pal becoming Superman. It also means Clark's got to navigate working with a teen with all of his powers and less of his weaknesses who thinks he's Superman but actually isn't. It's a fun dichotomy and a problem to work around)
Jimmy Olson:Perry White: Mob Boss, Luchador
(This just seems funny to me. I don't have any deep reason for this, the image of Perry White about to elbow drop someone just makes me laugh)
@King crimson , I think you missed a beautiful opportunity.Alfred Pennyworth: Priest, Aging Knight, Charon
(This just seemed the best to me especially since the priest option, while good, works best with synergy with the rest of the batfamily that just isn't there with the rest of how I'm leaning right now)
She doesn't exist but if it's non-canon then that's not an issue. On top of that if I absolutely wanted to make it canon Caitlin could just be some random Twi'Lek Jedi as Twi'Lek's first appeared in the 80's I believe. I'm still not the fondest of breaking the media crossover rule but I could do it.
Yeah made a mistake and he's probably out of high school at this point I mean depending on how we cut things Jimmy's not necessarily in college yet (he could be in his last year of high school) but it is fair to say that he's not really a "teenager" any more as he's definitely older than Barbara who's about sixteen. He's somewhere between 19 and 21 if I had to ballpark his age off the top of my head. Still not someone I'd trust with the powers of Superman and the overall point remains I believe (just replace teen with "very young adult" in my original statement and you've still got an interesting set-up).Nitpick: Jimmy Olson's been working for the Daily Planet since at least the time Blindspot tried to assassinate Lois Lane, and that was around Turn 12-16 or so of the quest as I recall. It's been about four years. Surely he's at least comfortably into his twenties, even if he's an intern slow-walking a journalism degree through community college or something?
I actually considered Don Quixote as a costume for Alfred. The thing that ultimately caused me to dismiss it is that Don Quixote has a mustache and beard, which is a minor thing but it just felt weird for me to have Alfred put on a fake beard. I didn't consider having it be Bruce Wayne who's dressed as Don Quixote though.@King crimson , I think you missed a beautiful opportunity.
Bruce Wayne as Don Quixote, and Alfred as Sancho Panza.