Is there a canon example of a Trump power disabling Tinkertech? Working on a Tinker, sure, but working on something they've made independent of them?
...im pretty sure there was? Its been a while since i read cannon i admit.
Is there a canon example of a Trump power disabling Tinkertech? Working on a Tinker, sure, but working on something they've made independent of them?
I don't recall anything of the sort. If nothing else Hatchetface's Trump ability to turn off the abilities of others would be almost instantly fatal for Mannequin. His life support systems are all Tinkertech....im pretty sure there was? Its been a while since i read cannon i admit.
Citrine. Her power allows her to create an effect within a relatively small area, up to and including nixing the power of a single parahuman. Of course that's assuming she's given enough time and her target doesn't leave the area of effect. So, yes, she could disable Tinkertech, but the process would be extremely selective and too slow to be viable.Is there a canon example of a Trump power disabling Tinkertech? Working on a Tinker, sure, but working on something they've made independent of them?
Okay, that can nix a single Tinker's ability to Tinker. Was it ever shown to stop already-existing Tinkertech from functioning? Or is that just supposition?Citrine. Her power allows her to create an effect within a relatively small area, up to and including nixing the power of a single parahuman. Of course that's assuming she's given enough time and her target doesn't leave the area of effect. So, yes, she could disable Tinkertech, but the process would be extremely selective and too slow to be viable.
Yes, it is just supposition, but one that is supported by canon. In her interlude in Ward, Citrine claims to be able to interact with ~60000 variables, by her count. So, really, the question isn't "can Citrine mess with X?" it's "is it viable for Citrine to mess with X when there's likely a simpler solution?"Okay, that can nix a single Tinker's ability to Tinker. Was it ever shown to stop already-existing Tinkertech from functioning? Or is that just supposition?
Right. I'm asking because I'm trying to point something out. Citrine's ability, Citrine's specific ability, can shut down Tinkertech in theory. That's a far cry from saying all Trump powers can affect all Tinkertech. Or even saying that some Trump powers can affect some Tinkertech.Yes, it is just supposition, but one that is supported by canon. In her interlude in Ward, Citrine claims to be able to interact with ~60000 variables, by her count. So, really, the question isn't "can Citrine mess with X?" it's "is it viable for Citrine to mess with X when there's likely a simpler solution?"
When I asked some of the guys at Cauldron, the response was that it depended on the nature of both the Tinker and the Trump in question.Right. I'm asking because I'm trying to point something out. Citrine's ability, Citrine's specific ability, can shut down Tinkertech in theory. That's a far cry from saying all Trump powers can affect all Tinkertech. Or even saying that some Trump powers can affect some Tinkertech.
If there were more examples we'd have a good reason to believe that Trumps could interfere with Tinkertech regularly.
The one thing that is unarguable is that Trump powers can interfere (or aid) Tinkers' ability to produce Tinkertech.
I wonder. Is Citrine's power actually limited to powers only? Because these comments make it feel like her power is "I can shutdown a certain mechanism/reaction/law of physics/whatever in a certain radius".Right. I'm asking because I'm trying to point something out. Citrine's ability, Citrine's specific ability, can shut down Tinkertech in theory. That's a far cry from saying all Trump powers can affect all Tinkertech. Or even saying that some Trump powers can affect some Tinkertech.
If there were more examples we'd have a good reason to believe that Trumps could interfere with Tinkertech regularly.
The one thing that is unarguable is that Trump powers can interfere (or aid) Tinkers' ability to produce Tinkertech.
The "shut down powers" thing is just a facet of her power, and one that really isn't viable if she's outnumbered. But, yeah, your thoughts are correct.I wonder. Is Citrine's power actually limited to powers only? Because these comments make it feel like her power is "I can shutdown a certain mechanism/reaction/law of physics/whatever in a certain radius".
That's pretty much exactly what her powers can do, and more.I wonder. Is Citrine's power actually limited to powers only? Because these comments make it feel like her power is "I can shutdown a certain mechanism/reaction/law of physics/whatever in a certain radius".
I've found in AO3 a story where Taylor is hired by the Dallons as house keeper. Vicky manages to have Taylor dressed as an anime Maid. I'm halfway the story, and things keep escalating towards lewds. I'm at a point where I'm not sure if the story is a TaylorXVicky ship, or a TaylorXVickyXAmy one. May be I'm just being tricked and nothing will happen.
IIRC posting AO3 links here is infractable, so I'm not doing it, but I'll give you the story name: Taylor's dress-up adventures.
So, how do you think they're going to either hide or explain Lisa being a robot? (Or at least there being someone new with metallic skin.) Case53? Experimented on by a tinker? Changer who becomes robot like? Member of the Adeptus Mechanicus, trying their best to be close to the blessed machine?
Do you know if there's any way to legally stream those movies in the US?Still much better than the anime though. On the other hand the anime(or well movie) had the Kongou Chomp and awesome fight scenes which totally made up for all its failings.
Really? That's a bit surprising. Is there any reason AO3 as a whole is infractable? (That does stand for Archive of Our Own, right?)IIRC posting AO3 links here is infractable, so I'm not doing it, but I'll give you the story name: Taylor's dress-up adventures.
It contains nsfw materials and as such it is illegal here to post direct links to it. Same with other similar sites. Also yes AO3 stands for archive of our ownReally? That's a bit surprising. Is there any reason AO3 as a whole is infractable? (That does stand for Archive of Our Own, right?)
It shouldn't be, as far as I'm aware. The only relevant part of the rule I could find is this:
To the best of my knowledge, AO3 doesn't have any advertising at all, so the only way you can link to NSFW content there is to link to a NSFW story directly. Linking to the home page, for example, isn't going to cause anyone any problems. Similarly, neither should linking to an author's profile which will provide a listing of their stories (though this might depend on exactly what their story descriptions are like?).Be aware of the links you are posting. If the site you are linking to has pornographic advertisements (such as some of the *boorus, for example), you may run afoul of this rule.
The anime is on Crunchyroll. You can watch it for free there, with ads, or pay for premium and watch it in hd with no ads. I got a 72h free premium pass if you want it. Poke me on pm and I'll send it when I get home.Do you know if there's any way to legally stream those movies in the US?
Which is the case particularly with "Taylor's dress up adventure". As I mentioned, it has "Rating: Explicit", and by "explicit" it means that sex is depicted in detail, not just hinted at or happening off-screen.To the best of my knowledge, AO3 doesn't have any advertising at all, so the only way you can link to NSFW content there is to link to a NSFW story directly.
Also, if the rule in SV is about advertising rather than explicit content, then linking to AO3 might be safe. But I'm not taking any chances
I was only responding to the question of all of AO3 being possibly intractable if linked (which is why I quoted the other person's question specifically, not anything you said), they weren't asking about that story in particular. There shouldn't be anything wrong with posting something like "There's a story on AO3 by the name of XYZ." since there's an amount of effort involved in finding it that's the same as saying "There's a story on AO3 by the name of XYZ." (in case this link doesn't work for some reason, it's just a google advanced search with 'site: archiveofourown.org' pre-placed in the search bar).Which is the case particularly with "Taylor's dress up adventure".
But... Isn't Victoria with Gallant? Or is that not in this timeline?
So i had a thought, and i'm not sure if someone has mentioned this already, but i wonder what Dean will think of Victoria's emotional development towards Relentless.