Current Events > They make a big deal about batmans no kill rule but.....

(+) Yeah! (+)

cjsdowg posted...

But he didn't want to kill 18 when she was innocent. Killing assholes, killing innocent people.

Id say that was equal parts his boner. That entire arc was built on people making stupid decisions, all the way back to no one doing a thing about Dr Gero ahead of time.

Dark_Arbron posted...

Alas, the most powerful force in any comic universe - the status quo.

Batman with time to plan can beat that.

This makes me think of my own writings. I had a hero that doesn't kill. And He was going to have a debate with someone who wanted to kill a bad guy. And the other person points were so good , my MC lost the argument he was suppose to win.

Dark_Arbron posted...

Id say that was equal parts his boner.

As I was saying, one of the biggest reasons Goku doesn't kill people is his boner for fighting.

He doesn't want Picollo, Tien, Freiza, Vegeta etc to kill innocent people. But he really really wants to fight them. A lot.

The very first thing he did on first date with Chi-Chi was try to punch her in the face.

Killing is also something that most people shouldnt be comfortable doing. Its less about justification and more about whether or not the hero can live with it. Theres potential for character exploration there.

Guns_of_Verdun posted...

As I was saying, one of the biggest reasons Goku doesn't kill people is his boner for fighting.

He doesn't want Picollo, Tien, Freiza, Vegeta etc to kill innocent people. But he really really wants to fight them. A lot.

The very first thing he did on first date with Chi-Chi was try to punch her in the face.

Hopefully the Black Frieza arc can finally drive the point home that not only do some people need to stay dead but also that Gokus boner for fighting is literally an existential threat.

Friezas arc ended on Namek, with his last attempt to blast Goku in the back. Goku firing back at him was also a good character moment, as hed had enough and most likely went for the kill there. Frieza only survived retroactively.

(Id love to see Goku killing Frieza and King Cold in the original timeline. Was probably one of his most badass no-nonsense moments ever.)

Dark_Arbron posted...

Id say that was equal parts his boner. That entire arc was built on people making stupid decisions, all the way back to no one doing a thing about Dr Gero ahead of time.

Krillin deserves some sympathy, haha. He grew up in a male-only monastery, only got to train with a master because he brought him some naughty magazines, had to wear womens underwear, had to compete with a rival who just went to the moon while he just went to Texas, died twice, once after almost defeating the most powerful creature in the universe (back then), and then his first girlfriend dumped him. That man really needed a hug.

Also while its true Goku wants to fight his opponents again, even if he was willing to kill them he wouldnt want to do so in cold blood. In most cases he wasnt even given the opportunity to do so though. Frieza ended in a heated moment. Cell ended in surrender. Buu did end lethally because he had no choice.

Its like John McClane. He kills the terrorists but he always does so in combat. He has the first one dead to rights, but didnt want to just blow him away because heroic characters dont do that.

I only get annoyed by the no killing rule when it only applies to the boss. If theres a stack of dead henchmen to get to this point then I dont want to hear about your no killing rule.

bfslick50 posted...

I only get annoyed by the no killing rule when it only applies to the boss. If theres a stack of dead henchmen to get to this point then I dont want to hear about your no killing rule.

I am looking at you Abby About a AAA that came out 4 years ago.

Dark_Arbron posted...

Also while its true Goku wants to fight his opponents again, even if he was willing to kill them he wouldnt want to do so in cold blood. In most cases he wasnt even given the opportunity to do so though. Frieza ended in a heated moment. Cell ended in surrender. Buu did end lethally because he had no choice.

And Superman and Goku have power creeped to the point where strength, and even conflict itself, loses almost all meaning.

Dark_Arbron posted...

Killing is also something that most people shouldnt be comfortable doing. Its less about justification and more about whether or not the hero can live with it. Theres potential for character exploration there.

Plus again, if you find yourself wanting to keep a villain around, it can be better than say having a hero capable and willing to do the deed, but fails.

Heck it's one reason I maintain criticism for MoS. Before killing Zod we are given no set up for his stance and he blew a cleaner end early on by telling him how to adjust to Earth atmosphere when he could have dealt with him then.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-giving-a-villain-fate-worse-than-death-really-a-more-moral-option-than-killing-them-for-a-hero.646125/page-2

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/6bc137f6.jpg

PBusted posted...

https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-giving-a-villain-fate-worse-than-death-really-a-more-moral-option-than-killing-them-for-a-hero.646125/page-2

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/6bc137f6.jpg

Gobbie's bluff fucking called, damn.

PBusted posted...

https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-giving-a-villain-fate-worse-than-death-really-a-more-moral-option-than-killing-them-for-a-hero.646125/page-2

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/6bc137f6.jpg

"I don't care how many babies you kill with a shotgun," Spider-Man said to the villain, Baby-Murderer-With-Shotgun, "I will never kill you, which makes me the winner."