tape, it's OK if one person does not share your view. There's no need to repeat yourself time after time, especially when the person is not listening.
tape, it's OK if one person does not share your view. There's no need to repeat yourself time after time, especially when the person is not listening.
忽见柳荫下两个小孩子在哀哀痛哭,瞧模样正是武敦儒、武修文兄弟。郭芙大声叫道:「喂,你们在干甚麽?」武 修文回头见是郭芙,哭道:「我们在哭,你不见麽?」
PJ, I'm not asking him to repeat himself. I'm asking him for the same standards that he applies to everybody else in Wuxia to be applied to Dugu Qiubai.
I'm not asking him to do anything that I haven't done myself that he, in the past, expected me to do.
Last edited by Dirt; 04-06-10 at 12:09 PM.
I have applied the same standards; the sword of common ruin has not met those standards as it has shown to be nowhere as effective as it should be.
I dislike the idea of invincible fighters.
In fact, I prefer it when the strongest fighter in a novel is NOT the main character. Smiling Proud Wanderer was perfect in that regard. The antagonist DFBB was the strongest by far, yet even he succumbed to the combined might of Ren Woxing, Xiang Wentian, Linghu Chong and the classic hostage strategy.
The idea of the Sweeper Monk sending a gust of wind to knock Jiumozhi far outside the building with a mere flick of his sleeve is too much.
This is the same Jiumozhi who could wield one sword of 6MJS, knew YJJ, dozens of Shaolin Supreme Skills, XiaoWu ShenGong, and who single-handedly fought the 6 Dali monks' 6MJS formation to a draw, and felt confident he could defeat them in round 2.
I like a story with a good balance of power between protagonists and antagonists. Having invincible characters disrupts this balance, destroys all the "what ifs" scenarios our imagination can concoct, ect
It adds an element of excitement when no character is invincible, especially if they are the protagonist.
If you know they might loose, even die then this add real jeopardy to dangerous situations.