MitD XII: This Space Intentionally Left Dark

[lio45]

Also, as far as size goes, it seems pretty obvious that the ideal criterion is this:
(where anything with an asterisk next to it would get determined by thread consensus; my opinion is irrelevant there and I won't even bother to form one.)

- MitD, himself, can't be larger than [Large/Huge]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD, himself, can't be smaller than [Medium/Large]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD's creature type can be any size as long as there's the possibility that a child (which MitD could very well be, with in comic evidence to support this) of the species would fit within the above size limits.


So, if for example the entry for any Colossal creature specifies that newborns are born Gargantuan, then that creature is unarguably out; it does not fit the FBS size criterion.

Basically, the point is, the size criterion should be applied to MitD himself, not his creature type, given how strong a case can be made for MitD being smaller than his dad / being a child.

[Joerg]

Wow, that thread has exploded while I was away

I'd like to add voting option I: Add "must not be an embodiment of Chaos" requirement.

Not because I want that requirement myself, but because I feel it would be needed if option D is added for symmetry.

BTW, as far as I understand it, the voting system works, but it is more complicated to vote in than other systems. You have to rank your choices and you must not forget a possible subset of your preferred set. E. g. if you want C, D, F and H independent of each other, you have to vote for 15 different sets of choices...

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Wow, that thread has exploded while I was away

You're telling me...

I'd like to add voting option I: Add "must not be an embodiment of Chaos" requirement.

Added

BTW, as far as I understand it, the voting system works, but it is more complicated to vote in than other systems. You have to rank your choices and you must not forget a possible subset of your preferred set. E. g. if you want C, D, F and H independent of each other, you have to vote for 15 different sets of choices...

That's fair, but I can interpret English language. If you want to vote for "Anything that contains C, D, F or H", go for it.

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

You're telling me...

I'm glad for the "vote by PM" bit that cuts down on massive amounts of posts during a vote.

[Kish]

I'd like to add voting option I: Add "must not be an embodiment of Chaos" requirement.

Not because I want that requirement myself, but because I feel it would be needed if option D is added for symmetry.

...why? Symmetry would be a "must not be an embodiment of Good" requirement, or possibly all five "must not be an embodiment of Good, Evil, Chaos, Law, or Neutrality" requirements.

[The Aboleth]

...why? Symmetry would be a "must not be an embodiment of Good" requirement, or possibly all five "must not be an embodiment of Good, Evil, Chaos, Law, or Neutrality" requirements.

Not to mention that a majority of MitD's actions to this point can reasonably be considered "Chaotic" (the taco scene from SoD immediately jumps to mind). If it was going to be an embodiment of anything, Chaotic seems better than most (to me, anyway).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Not to mention that a majority of MitD's actions to this point can reasonably be considered "Chaotic" (the taco scene from SoD immediately jumps to mind). If it was going to be an embodiment of anything, Chaotic seems better than most (to me, anyway).

Yes, but his almost-pathological desire to follow rules such as "stay in the shadows" are hard to imagine for an embodiment of Chaos.

Grey Wolf

[Crusher]

Also, as far as size goes, it seems pretty obvious that the ideal criterion is this:
(where anything with an asterisk next to it would get determined by thread consensus; my opinion is irrelevant there and I won't even bother to form one.)

- MitD, himself, can't be larger than [Large/Huge]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD, himself, can't be smaller than [Medium/Large]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD's creature type can be any size as long as there's the possibility that a child (which MitD could very well be, with in comic evidence to support this) of the species would fit within the above size limits.


So, if for example the entry for any Colossal creature specifies that newborns are born Gargantuan, then that creature is unarguably out; it does not fit the FBS size criterion.

Basically, the point is, the size criterion should be applied to MitD himself, not his creature type, given how strong a case can be made for MitD being smaller than his dad / being a child.

I think you raise a valid point here, albeit one that I don't know the best way to convey. I think the size limit should be lifted on MitD's *race* but needs to remain in place for MitD *himself*. So, if he's a Huge-sized (probably at the small end of Huge) spawn of a race that's normally Gargantuan, that's possible. But I would not support the assertion that MitD himself can be Colossal.

[Vulkos]

I think you raise a valid point here, albeit one that I don't know the best way to convey. I think the size limit should be lifted on MitD's *race* but needs to remain in place for MitD *himself*. So, if he's a Huge-sized (probably at the small end of Huge) spawn of a race that's normally Gargantuan, that's possible. But I would not support the assertion that MitD himself can be Colossal.

Please note thet the voting option B, which I support, is exactly that.
None is talking about the size of MITD himself (which is obviously Medium-Large) but its species'.

Edit: wrongly wrote C instead of B

[lio45]

...why? Symmetry would be a "must not be an embodiment of Good" requirement, or possibly all five "must not be an embodiment of Good, Evil, Chaos, Law, or Neutrality" requirements.

Not to mention that a majority of MitD's actions to this point can reasonably be considered "Chaotic" (the taco scene from SoD immediately jumps to mind). If it was going to be an embodiment of anything, Chaotic seems better than most (to me, anyway).

Yes, but his almost-pathological desire to follow rules such as "stay in the shadows" are hard to imagine for an embodiment of Chaos.

Grey Wolf

I agree he's unlikely to be an embodiment of anything (wouldn't have been recruited by Team Evil if he were an embodiment of Good, wouldn't act so Lawfully on occasion if he were an embodiment of Chaos, etc.) but it seems pretty clear to me the only real, firm dealbreaker would be Evil (given how he's become friends with the paladin and started sabotaging of his own team).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Please note thet the voting option B, which I support, is exactly that.
None is talking about the size of MITD himself (which is obviously Medium-Large) but its species'.

Indeed. And, like with everything else, exceptions with solid reasoning behind it would still be accepted. But the onus is then on the person proposing it: if you can prove that a colossal creature has small enough children that can have the strength and spellcasting abilities of an adult, then I'll likely accept it, just as I'd accept an undead creature that needed to eat stew or moldy burgers and sleep. But in the absence of evidence, as per the current requirements, any base creature larger than Huge is not in consideration for FBS status.

Grey Wolf

[lio45]

Please note thet the voting option B, which I support, is exactly that.
None is talking about the size of MITD himself (which is obviously Medium-Large) but its species'.

I think you raise a valid point here, albeit one that I don't know the best way to convey. I think the size limit should be lifted on MitD's *race* but needs to remain in place for MitD *himself*. So, if he's a Huge-sized (probably at the small end of Huge) spawn of a race that's normally Gargantuan, that's possible. But I would not support the assertion that MitD himself can be Colossal.

Yeah, the problem is that it seems pretty difficult to get this exact memo to everyone at the same time.

Note that all three of the participants in this exact subdiscussion (Crusher, Vulkos, lio45) have "B as a standalone option" ranked before "A" in their votes, so we "aren't the problem", if I may say so.

I think that regardless of the results, it makes some sense to start behaving as if the size criterion applies only to MitD himself, i.e. any suggestion that plausibly allows a child of its species to meet the size criterion is deemed to meet it.

[NoHaxJustPi]

3Power, your statement calling me an alt has, i believe, been removed, but whose alt do you think I am and why?

[lio45]

BTW, as far as I understand it, the voting system works, but it is more complicated to vote in than other systems. You have to rank your choices and you must not forget a possible subset of your preferred set. E. g. if you want C, D, F and H independent of each other, you have to vote for 15 different sets of choices...

That, in a nutshell, is my problem with it.

And Aveline replies "no problem, we're under the assumption that everyone is mentally organized enough to make sure they'll cast an individual vote for every single of the possible 15 permutations of the things they'd want implemented; anyone who doesn't do that, it's their problem and their loss, the outcome may not always reflect their will", which I must say, is fair enough, and true.

So... yes, "it works". :)

[TheSchleus]

Also, as far as size goes, it seems pretty obvious that the ideal criterion is this:
(where anything with an asterisk next to it would get determined by thread consensus; my opinion is irrelevant there and I won't even bother to form one.)

- MitD, himself, can't be larger than [Large/Huge]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD, himself, can't be smaller than [Medium/Large]* because that's obviously what he visually is in the comic;

- MitD's creature type can be any size as long as there's the possibility that a child (which MitD could very well be, with in comic evidence to support this) of the species would fit within the above size limits.


So, if for example the entry for any Colossal creature specifies that newborns are born Gargantuan, then that creature is unarguably out; it does not fit the FBS size criterion.

Basically, the point is, the size criterion should be applied to MitD himself, not his creature type, given how strong a case can be made for MitD being smaller than his dad / being a child.

As I understand it, the FBS size criterion was composed on the basis that it was the cap of plausible size that MitD's species could have because if his species were larger, he would be too small, even as a child. So it is based on the MitD's maximum possible size, then extrapolated to his species. And while the size criterion could be turned onto the MitD himself directly, we don't have specified size for juveniles of almost any species. Because of that, I think it's more useful to base it on the adult size, as it's what will actually be available. From what I know, almost nothing says what size its children are, although I could be wrong on that.

*edit* I see this may be completely unnecessary at this point. Clearly I type too slowly.

[Crusher]

Yeah, the problem is that it seems pretty difficult to get this exact memo to everyone at the same time.

Note that all three of the participants in this exact subdiscussion (Crusher, Vulkos, lio45) have "B as a standalone option" ranked before "A" in their votes, so we "aren't the problem", if I may say so.

I think that regardless of the results, it makes some sense to start behaving as if the size criterion applies only to MitD himself, i.e. any suggestion that plausibly allows a child of its species to meet the size criterion is deemed to meet it.

I'll be the problem if I want to be! You can't stop me!

*edit* I see this may be completely unnecessary at this point. Clearly I type too slowly.

Yeah, this thread has been like that, lately. Historically, you could spend hours or even days working on a post and it didn't really matter. Lately, you need to be a speed-typist to get points in while they're still relevant.

[Vendanna]

That, in a nutshell, is my problem with it.

And Aveline replies "no problem, we're under the assumption that everyone is mentally organized enough to make sure they'll cast an individual vote for every single of the possible 15 permutations of the things they'd want implemented; anyone who doesn't do that, it's their problem and their loss, the outcome may not always reflect their will", which I must say, is fair enough, and true.

So... yes, "it works". :)

you are making a mountain out of a small grain of sand. I didn't had to break my mind with all that in order to vote, heck I just told in the pm what I wanted to vote and why to Greywolf and he did an explendid work out of it. kudos to him! now I'm only waiting to see how it resolves and if a new comic strip happens. ^^

[Peelee]

3Power, your statement calling me an alt has, i believe, been removed, but whose alt do you think I am and why?

The comment in question has been scrubbed, so I would advise you to not ask for 3P to go into more detail on it.

[NoHaxJustPi]

wanting to know everything is a blessing and a curse
mostly just a curse

[Crusher]

wanting to know everything is a blessing and a curse
mostly just a curse

Thanos and Tony Start would agree.

[Peelee]

Thanos and Tony Start would agree.

I think he's now called Tony Options or Tony Menu.

[Joerg]

That's fair, but I can interpret English language. If you want to vote for "Anything that contains C, D, F or H", go for it.

Unless you don't want them in combination with B or E. But I admit, it's probably academic because apparently most people don't vote for many options anyway.

...why? Symmetry would be a "must not be an embodiment of Good" requirement, or possibly all five "must not be an embodiment of Good, Evil, Chaos, Law, or Neutrality" requirements.

The latter, yes. But we don't have an embodiment of Good or Law or Neutrality in the FBS category anyway.

[lio45]

I think you raise a valid point here, albeit one that I don't know the best way to convey. I think the size limit should be lifted on MitD's *race* but needs to remain in place for MitD *himself*. So, if he's a Huge-sized (probably at the small end of Huge) spawn of a race that's normally Gargantuan, that's possible. But I would not support the assertion that MitD himself can be Colossal.

Indeed. And, like with everything else, exceptions with solid reasoning behind it would still be accepted. But the onus is then on the person proposing it: if you can prove that a colossal creature has small enough children that can have the strength and spellcasting abilities of an adult, then I'll likely accept it, just as I'd accept an undead creature that needed to eat stew or moldy burgers and sleep. But in the absence of evidence, as per the current requirements, any base creature larger than Huge is not in consideration for FBS status.

Grey Wolf

*edit* I see this may be completely unnecessary at this point. Clearly I type too slowly.

So it seems that everybody is on the same page in the end............

I guess, for everyone to be satisfied, maybe consider slightly modifying the text of the OP to better match what you just said here, GW? i.e. MitD himself is clearly no greater than Huge (I'd say Large, but I can live with Huge if that's the thread consensus; doesn't change much since the base creature - MitD's dad - is likely larger anyway), but the size restriction on the base creature is looser and on a kinda case-by-case basis.

[Jasdoif]

I suppose it's too early on the West Coast right now but I'm wishing for people with at least reliable basic math and common sense (Kish, Jasdoif) to come back in here so I can get some backup.

Grey_Wolf_c's posts have really clarified things for me: The vote targets the operational level of making the updates to the initial posts, rather than the tactical level of what updates should be made (as I had assumed).

That's why sets of options are distinct from their subsets (to ensure there's a majority in favor of actually doing the combination), why a single option is chosen (no opportunity for conflicting-as-in-wasted effort from different initiatives), why there's a "no change" option (a special case representing "making changes is a waste of everyone's time"); and IRV even has a completely natural way to handle if no one's willing to put in the effort for the option voted for (discard the option and take the next, just as if a candidate bowed out). And iterating over the remaining options after one change has been done is still a possibility.

It's not how I do things...but introducing a new subcategory to the Index of the Giant's Comments would only require me adding an element to my layout file representing the new subcategory, and updating some entry elements to be in the new subcategory; my Python script handles all the spoiler/table/BBCode/page-breaks/table-of-contents, then I just copy/paste into my posts. It's minimal overhead and I can trivially do it all myself; It's not really comparable to digging through monster manuals to check sizes and strength scores for all the proposed entries to see which need to go where (especially since it's not fair to assume universal access to the relevant information).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Grey_Wolf_c's posts have really clarified things for me: The vote targets the operational level of making the updates to the initial posts, rather than the tactical level of what updates should be made (as I had assumed).
<snip>

...

...

Great, now I'm not sure I know what I'm doing. Glad it makes sense to you when you put it that way, though.

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

Great, now I'm not sure I know what I'm doing.

I've never found that to be an impediment myself, though.

[lio45]

Did you know you're pretty quotable, Peelee? (And I meant that as a compliment.)

[Peelee]

Did you know you're pretty quotable, Peelee? (And I meant that as a compliment.)

The trick is to go for the low-hanging fruit. That's why I always aim at myself. (I appreciate that, btw!)

[Squire Doodad]

I'd just like to say "bloody hell."

*going through the last five pages that popped up overnight*
"It is done.
Farewell."

[Squire Doodad]

Wow, that thread has exploded while I was away

I'd like to add voting option I: Add "must not be an embodiment of Chaos" requirement.

Not because I want that requirement myself, but because I feel it would be needed if option D is added for symmetry.

I get why you are saying it for symmetry purposes, but MitD has shown plenty of chaotic aspects (assuming he perceives Xykon and RC as being some sort of authority). If you are suggesting this because RC would prefer a Lawful party member, then keep in mind that he prefers being Evil (or at least non-good) over that by a sizable margin.
I'm not going against your desire to have that in place, I am saying that the suggestion itself is not as well founded as the "must not be an embodiment of Evil" is.