Jump to content

Chase

Veterans
  • Posts

    2668
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Events

Reborn Development Blog

Rejuvenation Development Blog

Desolation Dev Blog

Everything posted by Chase

  1. I don't know how long this has exactly been in game - but the orphanage leaders are expected to conduct their battles in-house (during the orphanage raid, there is a room that is identified as an arena and ever since Ame replaced the Gym Guy with the monitor that she uses to help you herself - Ame herself will say that she will "talk with [Dr. Connal] later" about the situation through one such monitor outside of the orphanage arena's door.) To answer your questioning of the Orphanage leaders - the Orphanage is the site of their Gym - and the player technically busts them out of said Gym - which so happens to be mismanaged by Dr. Connal. (i.e. having you examined by his lackeys only to tell you the leaders aren't taking challenges during the first time you enter the Orphanage.) --- This means then - that the orphans don't have to be able to leave the orphanage at all in order to be worthy of their gym leader title. I -do- see what you're saying about potential overkill for the sake of story telling - but I don't think she is being shortsighted so much as she is prioritizing one over the other the same way Game Freak does in reverse. On the flip-slide, you don't see anything in the original series that suggests that Gym Leaders must hold their official league matches in their gyms other than the leaders - if encountered first outside of their gym - returning to their post before battling the player. If it's only a trend produced by the dialogue. In fact (due to circumstance) we actually -do- hold a gym battle outside of an official gym in that Blaine in Gen II is battling out of the Seafoam Islands (i think) due to Cinnabar Island's eruption. Perhaps, the badge is just a symbolic form of word-of-mouth that a player has indeed beaten so-and-so, rather than THE indicator that a player has beaten so-and-so. Only void in Reborn and the original games if A - the gym leader refuses to acknowledge the victory, or B - if the gym leader dies.
  2. I'm gonna have to firstly say this - I LOVE Y over X too - Simply because Yzard represents the sheer power a Mega Evolution would ideally have in my opinion. I don't think you -should- have to set something that mega evolves up if it's an offensive threat in most cases, and Yzard is the best representative of that. The biggest glaring weakness for this team is going to be priority. Your wallbreakers are fast, but that doesn't mean priority isn't going to cripple the concept of the team for you. I also think T-tar may be hyper-extended regarding previously mentioned Pokemon such as MegaGross, who not only can Hammer Arm a weakened Ttar into oblivion, but threatens Clefable and perhaps most importantly, Keldeo. Ttar + one of your two wallbreakers out early could spell trouble for the other if your opponent picks their poison with enough haste.
  3. Prologue There's a saying out there. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. I assume that this is implying that each experience we survive in life lends literal.... life experience. If a mighty warrior is able to survive a battle, the experience from said battle will aid him in the battles to come. If a husband loses his loved one, he knows from the time spent with that person how to treat the next woman he's willing to make those sacrifices for or at the very least know what it takes to help other men in their pursuits. The experience becomes the man's testimony, and figuratively, another arrow in his quiver. Perhaps it also plays into a form of "muscle memory" - or a habitual action in repeating instances of similar fashion. The warrior knows which movements he should make to effectively parry and slash with his blade in the next assault. The heartbroken man knows how to lace his words in order to woo, or the right touch to provide his partner with the feeling of security. The marksman is able to release his bowstring faster because he can place his fingers exactly where they need to be from prior doing so. Life is more than just a battle, but for me, it's always felt like one regardless of the task. The forces at work hollering orders down into the trenches at me as I rush to follow them. Over the top! Retreat! Find cover! Damn the mortars! Press onward! The results of my efforts look a little different than the imagery entwined with the orders. A dishwasher full of clean dishes. Another co-worker satisfied. Another friend comforted and another self fulfilled. Another workday marked off the calendar. Another fatigued body tucked safely under the comforter for yet another well deserved night of rest. Success. For Now. As I brandish my sword one last time before slipping it into it's sheath, I ponder the meaning of getting stronger, as well as my experiences. One thing is for certain, I'm still in the fight - so I better make improvement somewhere.
  4. Tomas, I'd be willing to argue that in Reborn it works out rather nicely because of the rather dystopian setting. In other words, Reborn isn't SUPPOSED as controlled or ideal as other regions would be. If I remember things correctly chronologically (not realistically - as we all know the major non-Meteor people in Reborn are based off of people Ame knows.) In-game Ame didn't exactly have a sizeable workforce pool to work with having begun to assemble her Pokemon League AFTER Meteor began causing catastrophe across the region. Also, despite being imperfect characters, they are VERY MUCH well written into the story as protectors and defenders anyway. TL:DR - The characters don't have to be ideal if the setting isn't ideal and it makes sense with what we know about the story up to that point. The main focus should be - and in the original post of this thread IS - how are the characters that hold these league positions used throughout the story?
  5. The major disappointing thing about this though? Is that in Gen 6, they didn't allow for it to become a trend. Viola's only outside appearance is to inform the player about the Battle Chateau - which is not even a part of the story. The only other time the player encounters Viola is when they are explicitly challenging them. Grant also serves an assisting or explanatory role about an event that the player can't take part in, telling the player Grant won the previous bike race and giving the player Strength. The only other times the player encounters Grant is with the intent to challenge. Korrina is the LONE exception to story progression, encountering the player numerous times and serving as the Mega Evolution Successor. Ramos only takes challengers. Clemont only is seen lighting up his gym, and only takes challengers. Valerie only takes challengers Olympia only takes challengers ...and Wulfric actually makes a cameo taking care of Pokemon in a meadow - but is relatively insignificant to the story.
  6. I got one for you all. Generation 4 often gets slighted by me, and it's psuedo, which is actually a fantastic Pokemon in it's own right and loved by many - doesn't really quite do it for me in the same vein. Garchomp is considered the ace of Sinnoh's resident Champion, Cynthia, and is also a fierce looking beast of a 'mon. It -also- can be run offensively with boosting moves, or defensively with moves like Stealth Rock and Dragon Tail for support (Stealth Rock also fitting in some offensive non-sweeper varients.) It's actually a pretty big anomaly when it comes to how I don't hold it in high regard as others do - considering Hyper Offense is my preferred method of battle. It just is a reminder of a time when Pokemon wasn't a fandom I was proud to be a part of - and as such, it may never get the acknowledgement from me that it probably -does- deserve. Also, Garchomp is like, one of TWO Pokemon - and one that is by great significance, better than it is mega-evolution. Gross.
  7. Hey, Hukuna. I'm no where near as eloquent as you, and I don't like to sprinkle sugar all over folks, but I do have something to say. We don't really talk much - and when we do we don't always see eye to eye - but I do know that your road hasn't been the easiest and that you have walked it with a profound toughness and poise - not only surviving, but finding places like here at Reborn to thrive and leaving a mark on the people you interact with. It's been a pleasure working with you, and I hope your birthday was excellent. Cheers, man.
  8. Happy Birthday, Red Roll Good Tidings.
  9. Literal vs. Abstract interpretation is part of the mix too, Mde - I'm glad you mentioned that. The other stance many scholars have is the LITERARY EMBELLISHMENT stance - which claims that Genesis is explicitly meant to be poetic and points more toward the abstract theological concepts than it would something like the actual cosmos. Unfortunately, holding that position ALSO means you are mishandling (to an extent, as it is told in a story format) the text's meaning - as the wording plainly gives the impression of discourse on cosmology. So, I think that taking the text literally to AN EXTENT is -indeed- a good thing - but at the same time, you DO have to realize that it is an ancient account on creation and that it isn't going to be written like a non-fiction work would be today - specifically because ancient humans didn't exactly think the same way we do - as explained in the ontological difference above. --- Here are my findings a bit more plainly (as far as revelations go.) I still -do- hold that an intelligent designer is feasible. The Genesis Creation Story no longer plays into that holding. Genesis provides no evidence for God creating the universe at all, but that He provides things IN that universe with a purpose, which is effectively a creation of relevance. Now knowing that ancient near east humans saw things differently, the book of Genesis has a whole new look and feel when reading it. Because of my findings, I am now able to explore other stances, such as Evolutionary Creationism, or Theistic Evolution, or merely just holding Intelligent Design, or ...perhaps the most compelling to me now - Progressive Creationism - which is essentially more accepting of God using "evolution" as scientific process.
  10. Alright, so quick warning. This discourse will be about the interpretations currently living people make and the intended interpretation of the writer of the book of Genesis, which is the first book of the Jewish Torah, or Christian "Old Testament." and thus first book of the "Bible." - if that doesn't interest you - don't waste your time reading any further. If seeing Hunter possibly admit being wrong about something he is extremely passionate about to the point where debate/heated argument ensued in previous discourses is your thing - PLEASE DO READ. It will be fun for all of us... maybe. --- What if I told you - that today's biblical scholars - skeptic to fundamentalist believer - read Genesis 1:1 onward with the INCORRECT thought process? One of the burning questions of the universe is simply the question of it's existence to begin with. "Who or what caused this to happen" is the question everyone seems to try and answer using ancient texts and scientific discovery, be it exclusively to the point where both sides are up in arms over what is gospel and what is irrelevant and mythical - or inclusively - using the supernatural to explain what the natural doesn't, or rationalizing the divine's capabilities in working in natural or apparent processes. In other words - we have the question that perhaps is the most prominent when it comes to Existentialism. In the book of Genesis, we are given what appears to be a creation story - or what on the surface, appears to be such an attempt to answer the "Who or what" question posed above. This passage is the source of many popular debates and is the bastion evidence for the "Creationist" - or those who claim we were put here by the divine - argument.... However, while we could definitely point to the wording of this text to compose our arguments for God - what if we are doing so without paying respect to the intention of the Genesis author? Did the author have the same material ontology we did? Is he talking about the cosmos at all, or is it possibly a literary embellishment? And what does this mean about Hunter's faith-based, science supported stance on the issue of Creationism vs. Evolution? Was I (and possibly many of you) wrong in interpreting the creation account? --- Before I get there, let me lay the groundwork by addressing a few popular stances. YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM - The belief that God created the universe - quite literally - in seven days. Days being 24 hour increments. The PRO in having this stance is that YE Creationists have a bit of a better glance on the ancient text here than those of other stances. The CON in this stance is that it doesn't mesh well with recent scientific discoveries. OLD EARTH CREATIONISM - The belief that God created the universe - somewhat literally - in "seven days". Days being in seven time increments that are "not necessarily" 24 hour time frames. The PRO in having this stance is that you can remain quite solid in textual interpretation while being able to avoid being shot down by scientific evidence. DAY AGE CREATIONISM - The belief that God created the universe - literally - in seven "days" - a time period that is more akin to years. This stance is the perfect middle ground on the time-scientific evidence scale, but as I've regretfully had to come to terms with, isn't as serviceable to the text as I had hoped. My mentor and I previously called ourselves "Day Age Creationists." Day Agers do not have to be accepting of evolution in any capacity - but are the most liberal non-evolutionists out there. EVOLUTION - The belief in the evolutionary theory that organisms "evolve" from previous lifeforms - or the process quite simply being how organisms change over time. --- With those stances out of the way, let me explain what my previous stance was. I was a Day Age creationist largely due to two reasons: Evolution is a very well substantiated theory from the mind of Charles Darwin - that is now being backed up with genetics and new "missing links" being found regularly. Because of it being a theory though, I wasn't really ready to say "It's law - evolution is the way of the world" - despite being seemingly so in many respects. The other reason though is my personal field of study - Theology. I'm one who is personally much more interested in the idea of God and the texts that support His existence than I am the scientific details. This means I spend more of my time pouring over the Bible than I do watching the Discovery Channel or taking life science courses. Truth be told, it's actually the texts that lead me away from Young Earth creationism - particularly because the proof isn't found in your go-to English translation. The word "Day" in Hebrew is quite loaded with various meanings, with some literally meaning "a while." - which, when you look outside the bible for fossil data that out-dates the age of the Earth from the Y.A.C's interpretation - means you don't have to ascribe to a pole. So there you have it. I was looking for the stance that didn't force me to eat the evolutionary pie due to it being potentially -not- the way it works -and- worked with the text. --- Functional Ontology - or the intended purpose for existence - is different from material ontology - or the make-up of existence. Today, we tend to have a materialistic ontology - asking "what is it made of?" proudly - which plays into the popular arguments of making something out of nothing I've spouted on in other threads. However, ANCIENT peoples don't hold material ontology at all. Ancient in this case meaning, the writer of Genesis. --- Here's an exercise. If I were to point at a seat, you would probably call it a "Chair." - but if I were to point at a seat, an ancient human being wouldn't know what to call it until you SAT on it. This applies to the things in Genesis - the question that the ancients asked wasn't "What is this made of"....but "Why?" or "What's the point?". --- Breaking some of it down. Day and Night: Genesis quite clearly demonstrates God providing light ("And the Lord said, "Let there be light.") - but it goes on to determine that God also establishes the separation of DAY and NIGHT using the light or it's absence. Meaning, the writer weren't looking for the damn magic lightbulb that was called the Sun - they were establishing that the light's purpose was to establish what time it was. This means two things. God doesn't necessarily have to physically create light here. God explicitly provides the given light with a PURPOSE - to establish Day and Night. This is where those crazy Young Earthers actually do a very good job of providing good exegesis. (And it was evening, and it was morning - the first day.) Water: Fun Fact: Did you know that the wording of Genesis might hint that water was materialistically speaking ALREADY in existence? In fact, water is clearest example of functional ontology. ("God hovered over the waters." > "God moved them so that they separated the sea from the land." The text actually only focuses on giving water a PURPOSE in that it now separates land and sea. Humanity: The most elaborated part of man's creation is that man was created for TWO purposes. Dominion and abundance. --- Here's the pattern. We're not dealing with "what is it made of" in Genesis. This means that if you look at Genesis as evidence for your existential questions beyond purpose - you're not doing the text appropriate justice at all. I was wrong in doing so - and some of the revelations have led me to start re-thinking my stance. I -was- wrong in making Genesis evidence for God's existence in that I did it without reading the text with the author's original intent in mind. What about you guys? What do you think of all of this?
  11. I got some quality loot - and will probably make some more out of it. Three figure amount of cash. Three figure amount in gift cards (Olive Garden, Macy's, Whataburger, iTunes, Starbucks) an office chair two new dress shirts shaving equipment items that make people smell and look presentable pajamas, socks, etc. a multi-tool a water bottle and a photo-book that documents my grandfather's history from his new fiancee. Potential purchases Quality headphones - with a microphone a New 3DS -or- Sm4sh (DS) Jeans/Cargo/Khaki shorts. Shoes Shirts Ties A backpack Several of these items are purchasable at Macy's - so I can use that gift card as opposed to my cash.
  12. AYY. Chesnaught essentially has two options in OU - Standard physical wall, and Salac Belly Drum. However - If you like experimenting - as the spirit of this team suggests - you could hand Ches an Assault Vest and try to uitlize a moveset that looks kinda like this. - Drain Punch - Seed Bomb - Rock Tomb - Power-Up Punch ...the goal of the set is to kinda combine it's two OU sets. The vest gives Chesnaught help on the special side (which is probably not enough for OU - like I said, it's in the spirit of experimentation.) in conjunction with the secondary ability of Drain Punch to provide Ches with staying power. Offensively though, Rock Tomb essentially makes up for it's poor speed like the Salac would the BD set and Power-Up Punch causes a gradual increase in power. It's a little hard to get going - but in UU - I've found it to the most enjoyable set to use. --- I'll use your team and put relevant feedback here.
  13. TIL I WAS WRONG. Those of you that know me, know that I've been wrong about a metric LOT....of things. But this kind of wrong is the kind of theological-existential wrong that will probably need to be addressed in it's own thread for those that enjoy that kind of thing. I owe several of you my revelations at the least. On the one hand, it's kinda cool and mind blowing. On the other...I'm just extremely pissed off.
  14. ....I guess I have to come now....thanks Sini you're a reeeeeal champ. Jack Frost: Sheep - This brotha from down unda deserves a friggen nom so he can stop complaining about it. (I know, you're not really complaining.) Snow Queen: Lost Lore - She -also- hasn't been nommed by anyone else...(unless it's in a spoiler I'm too lazy to click on right now.) and SHE LOVES THE HOLIDAYS. (If I have to go to this party so do you.) Polar Monarch: This is a small group and I don't now many who are best suited for this position, but I would say Kurotsune is the best fit here. This person and I may seem standoffish...a lot....but xe is a fantastic person. --- Rookie of the Year: I'm not the best at keeping up with the new neighbors, but I would like to say David (NasDav) -....or bandwagon with Chubb if NasDav isn't as much of a newbie as I think he is. t3rrawr: If you win this award you should feel awful - but Jelly's shitpost game is the most consistent, so there's....that. MVP: Bob the Etesian. For those of you that don't know who Bob is, he's the guy with all the breeding advice and in-game team expertise. ...He may have been nommed before though. FGOTY: .....let's go with Se7en. I intend to play it when more episodes are out, but based on the hype alone in it's development and the sheer amount of this community that pitched in, it sounds like a hit. WOO Bandwagon.
  15. I think it's been said already, but Pancham is a decent Pokemon if you like variety. It will get the job done against Cradily in the immediate future and it will find it's uses - but Makuhita is just too much of a steal in the early game, with various uses even after Florinia. That being said, I'll suggest Pancham for novelty. Pangoro is a very bulky Pokemon and while it's moveset is mediocre it will eventually be able to handle the role a Scrafty would just as well, without taking recoil from missed Hi Jump Kicks. The way I see it, Pangoro is a better comparable Pokemon to Scrafty than it is to Hariyama. As silly as it would sound, Hariyama is a solid teammate throughout the entirety of the game.
  16. About time... Congratulations Rose - and keep up the good work, Cochise.
  17. This is kinda cool because of the limits you will have regarding Pokeballs. You won't have a a whole lot of PokeBalls to use throughout your adventure - so it kinda matters which pokemon you think are worth saving them for. Good luck!
  18. Sometimes the greatest company one can have is himself. Even if his standing with himself is questionably that of a predictably scripted sado-masochistic relationship. Perhaps that statement is contentious, and I could understand my take on it being disagreed with. It's not like it's fact or anything. I'm not writing this to be agreed with. The air of vindication replaces the storms of rupture when you can look yourself in the mirror and pocket your reflection's acceptance and assurance. Everything you have done can be justified if you're the judge. This doesn't make all of your decisions the right ones, and it doesn't help mean anyone should deny the right to an attorney and proceed to make a fool out of themselves on the stand trying to defend themselves - but it does lay the groundwork for said defense in a way. Your motives are still yours, regardless of if anyone else cares for them or not. If the why you did something is beneficial or worth the repercussions, then you can take the result to the bank. Validation can begin to dawn on you at that point. Your motives were yours. Your actions were yours. They are weaved into the fabric of your being. For me, I can quickly list off the more garish threads because the desire to change or improve or do the complete opposite of validate is strong with me. Liar. One who covets. One who has stolen. One who hurts. However, it everything you intend to do and everything that you indeed do make up the quilt of your existence, then there are also linens that are considerably beautiful by most. Comedian, Humble. Sacrificial. Competitive. Determined. Adaptable. ....and then you have the centerpiece patchworks. The patterns humanity wants and more or less needs on it's quilt all the same. One who is loved. One who is respected. One who is popular. One who wields courage. One who is strong. One who is influential in a positive manner (positive being determined by the individual and not by society, of course!) and so on and so forth. The thing about the fabric of life though, is that you can't just cut out the pieces that are garish. You can't replace them with the fabrics of other quilts. If those pieces are on your quilt, they truly belong to you. If they aren't - then your course of option is to make the quilt bigger. The pieces become a story. For example. Someone who develops a brave nature over time still has cowardly pieces on his quilt. Take for example, myself. You begin to see the "I once was X but then I became Y" pattern as your run your fingers over the stitching. The other thing you can't do with the quilt is wash it. Remember the times you pricked your finger with the needle and bled. That blood becomes a piece on it's own. "This is the time I was hurting." You can't ever finish the quilt by denying anything that's supposed to be on it. The only one that can get you to appreciate your hard work for it is... ...you all guessed it. You. Hunter. Enjoy this piece of your quilt. "This is the time you appreciated you."
  19. humble, humble, don't you stumble, as you soar so high you should not tumble...

  20. Have a song I can't get out of my head lately. Why haven't I ever heard of these Starset guys before two weeks ago?
  21. Somehow....some way....It's as if being me is all of a sudden something to boast about. I -will- do it right this time. For me. For everyone.

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. Rosesong

      Rosesong

      Damn straight you will, or I'll beat you into the next century

    3. Tomas Elliot

      Tomas Elliot

      When I decided to pick up the identity of Se7en's female rival, in order to advertise our game, I almost made a status with a joke about "taking a page from Hunter's book". I eventually decided against it because I thought it could sound in bad taste :/

    4. Flux

      Flux

      @Dobby

      I'm pretty sure this is still the account that was Hilda. The name is just changed and the rep is reset.

      Anyway. it's good that you can feel good about being yourself. Being able to be happy while expressing who you truly are is really the best any of us can hope for. I hope things can turn out right this time.

  22. Thanks for the comments guys. I'll look into reworking my tag - but I went with creative writing because I didn't plan on stopping there. I appreciate you all reading my work. Five in the mornin', frost in the grass, hat over brow, some water in the glass, new day's here, and another one's comin', got another shot, so ya gotta get stunnin' Boom, Pow, pull on the reigns, Gun a little faster, gotta break the chains, No pair is better than the fire and the rain, gotta know yourself better, cause you're still the same! heartbreak, and a ton a-shame..., clock runnin' and ya soul too tame, hop back on the saddle, but don't flee town, 'cause the folks know better than to keep you down... No smoke, no longer called Madge, once Sheriff, but gotta taken badge, village ain't all with ya and some want a scrap, but a face ain't what put ya on the damn map! Boom, Pow, pull on the reigns, Gun a little faster, gotta break the chains, No pair is better than the fire and the rain, gotta know yourself better, cause you're still the same!
  23. You ever notice? True sacrifice is looking at the map of souls in front of you, each one a red blip, and saying "I would gladly die for them all." Every. Last. One. True sacrifice is weighing your faults against the ones of those you despise and being able to say "I am no better." No better even when your heart feels it knows better. But do you ever notice? True sacrifice, is looking those you care about in their eyes and yet doing the same to those you don't. It's easy to provide for the people you want in your life. It's hard to do so for those you could care less. And yet, that's the unseen clause of being selfless - of being able to make a sacrifice. In order to sacrifice, you have to get past the barrier that is yourself. The things you want. The things you don't want. There is no filter for the real thing. Sacrifice is not picky. Do you notice though? We tend to value each red blip differently. This one is a lover. This one is a close friend. This one taught me how to read. This one was with me when I was in pain. This one caused me pain. In all but the later - I would gladly lend a hand. Do you notice that I would have to swallow my pride to help that last red blip? However, depending on who you are, there is one red blip that either goes unaccounted for, or is the most valuable blip on the map. The one that you can call your own. True sacrifice is finding a way to establish worth to that blip, without making it worth the most. Do you notice that's the singular hardest thing about sacrifice?
  24. Hello, from the other side...

    1. Juniper

      Juniper

      Hello from this side, Adele.

    2. Hexagoen

      Hexagoen

      i hope you do feel better after this ;-;

    3. Felicity

      Felicity

      Goodbye, from below

  25. I've put up with way too many instances of stress to be one to have faked kindness. You don't even need MY word with regards to the real way I treat others. The fact that people are coming to my defense (somehow) in this thread should be telling that my care for this community isn't fake. I will try to be a good person from here on out. I happen to think that good person will act a lot like Hilda did, and I happen to think that I will fail at times, inevitably - and I can only hope that my failures aren't distinguished into me "playing Hilda" as they are one in the same. Regardless of what happens, I'm going to have bad days at the office, but it won't look much different from Hilda's bad days at the office. Nor will the routine ones. For those of you clamoring for my "impeachment" - I mean "office" in being a part of this community in general and not to smear you all in something that quite honestly isn't there.
×
×
  • Create New...