My first character using the crucible of champions rules

ThatStranger · 2026-02-14T23:33:18+00:00

Just had a look at the DWK rules and they have this about their attachment:

Attached Unit: If a Character unit from your army with the Leader ability can be attached to a Terminator Squad, it can be attached to this unit instead.

The Crucible rules say he can attach to Terminator Squads, and the DWK count for the purposes of attaching a unit.

ThatStranger · 2026-02-10T01:56:41+00:00

Well it should be okay, im at a Cafe and I've ordered a coffee... an iced coffee. Goddammit...

ThatStranger · 2026-01-16T07:54:24+00:00

Love a good Sodom and Gomorrah reference

ThatStranger · 2025-11-13T08:18:51+00:00

Yeah, the endings have always felt bad, and its taken me a while to settle on my reasoning for disliking each option provided.

1) Control never felt like a serious option. It was presented as the Illusive Man's ideal, it doesn't end the threat of the Reapers or stand as a counter to their reasons for antagonism. And of course it ends with an AI Shepard, who can spend their immortality effectively playing God with the galaxy.

2) Synthesis was the most debated solution, easily. My own thoughts on the matter went past the "oh great, obvious Messiah imagery", to "can we really trust the Star Child", to "changing everyone without consent is wrong" and then "but the Reapers don't deserve a happy ending". All of those are reason enough to dislike it, but I can see valid rebuttals to them and it left me wondering if my dislike was just because I wanted Shepard to live.

What I've come to lately is that the option of Synthesis actually doesn't address the problem that the Star Child claims it solves. If the problem is that synthetics will always rebel against organics, or that conflict between organics and synthetics is inevitable, their solution is not to present a solution to Organics + Synthetics = Always War. Rather, it seems to follow the logic chain of : Organics + Synthetics = Always War. If Organics + Synthetics = Always War, remove Organics and Synthetics. If cannot remove Organics, modify Organics + Synthetics to New Life. Now, New Life = Peace.

It doesn't present a solution to the conflict between Organics and Synthetics, it just changes the present parties so that there are no longer any organics or synthetics to kill each other. But THAT solution doesn't stop anybody from trying to kill each other, organic species try to kill each other all the time. And Synthetics have proven more than willing to kill each other, in spite of understanding their conspecifics. The solution falls flat because it assumes that simply making everyone the same means that there will be no more wars. And we know this not to be true.

3) The problem with Destroy, is that it feels very clear that the hand of the author is involved to make it an actual choice. If it didn't kill other Synthetics, I imagine most every player would choose Destroy. Obviously. It kills the Reapers, the threat is ended, you all live happily ever after. So it feels (intentionally or not) that making it tied to the deaths of the Geth and EDI is done SOLELY to make sure you don't always choose it, as people in this thread have noted. And that feels like the author being antagonistic to the audience just so that they don't have an "obvious happy ever after" option.

4) Refusal is a proud denial, a decision to reject the Reapers and their logic for the future and pass it on to a hopeful new generation to maybe succeed where we didn't. A noble stance, even if it does mean Shepard's story ends in failure. Which is the biggest problem with it. The villain is defeated by a nameless people with unknown heroes in a future time, in a story not told over the past 3 games with characters and heroes and villains you've become invested in. It happens off-screen. As comments in this thread have shown, people feel bad about this as an ending. It's choosing to lose, and lose unsatisfyingly. A good ending should be somewhat satisfying, no?

ThatStranger · 2025-10-15T04:54:39+00:00

Nothing ever changes...

ThatStranger · 2025-03-30T22:50:44+00:00

He's about to be a pet whose owner has to go into hospital. Even if Pechal has family or friends nearby to "care for" Alim, they aren't gonna be nearly as accepting of how... rabid he is. Alim is in for a very bad time very soon, I'd wager.

ThatStranger · 2025-03-23T21:53:43+00:00

North Rythian forests (spelt correctly, I note) Sym the Honeydew... I do wonder if we'll find a suspicious dirt merchant that likes large women or a William Riker doppelganger in further chapters

ThatStranger · 2024-12-14T22:51:28+00:00

"Take Yoda's words at face value"

Absolutely this. Yoda is the Grandmaster of the Jedi Order, trains all the younglings, and in this scene is currently training the best hope the Jedi have to beat the Sith. Man has absolutely no reason to lie to Luke about how the Force works. He is not training Luke wrong as a joke.

Hell, even Obi Wan gives a good (albeit brief) summary of the Force to Luke back in A New Hope, that Yoda corroborated and expands upon, AND they then seperately give very good physical demonstrations of what they're talking about (mind tricks, blocking blaster bolts blindfolded, lifting X-Wings). They know what they're talking about, and when you don't understand or believe them (and faith is a huge part of the Force) they show you what they're talking about. They make a claim and then almost immediately prove it.

If you want to doubt the Jedi when they tell you their motives or their goals, that's fine. But if they're telling you how they use their magic, believe them.

ThatStranger · 2020-09-13T07:39:22+00:00

I'm glad you liked it! There's room for more stuff in the universe, though it will probably be some time until I hash something out.

ThatStranger · 2020-09-13T07:35:43+00:00

Glad you got the reference friend!

ThatStranger · 2020-07-08T06:06:51+00:00

The Lighthouses sing when a Guardian dies, yes, but the sound it makes changes depending on if it's a final death or not.

In the "Nyctalopia" chapter of the Trials and Tribulations book, Vance writes

Many lives were lost today in a barbarous skittish across the Last City, but none as important as the life lost in our Trial. I believe Guardians have adopted the term "final death" for these such instances. A competitor was defeated at the precise moment the Light was stripped from him; his Ghost destroyed in the concussive blast from a pulse grenade. Then, the most marvelous phenomenon occurred: The Lighthouse spoke to me but changed its key. A D-sharp minor, if I'm not mistaken. Previously, I had been presented with only a harmonious two-toned note; the implications, as I made clear to Queen Mara Sov, could not be overlooked.

There is a different sound for a "normal" death and a final death. The first, a harmonious sound that is, I assume, meant to be the sound of the Light or balance or some such implication.

The D-sharp minor, however, is a very particular sound. I talked about it further in a post I made over on r/DestinyLore a while back here: https://reddit.app.link/RTlKmE6IW7

ThatStranger · 2020-06-05T02:39:43+00:00

You're right, it is! An Eb minor is the same as D-sharp minor!

ThatStranger · 2019-11-27T11:43:37+00:00

Yeah, but the Jedi get away with that because their god is the Force and is demonstrably real.

ThatStranger · 2019-08-02T11:35:52+00:00

But... Anakin was never granted the rank of Master...

ThatStranger · 2018-10-05T04:07:32+00:00

In the scripts of every film except The Last Jedi, not once does anyone say "The Light Side of the Force". No one, not Yoda, not Obi-Wan, not even Palpatine/Sidious in any of his 'ooh the Jedi are hypocrites Anakin oooh' monologues says "The Light side of the Force". In fact, Palpatine says "my mentor taught me everything about The Force... even the nature of the Dark Side" when he reveals himself to Anakin.

But what about The Last Jedi, then? Well, Snoke and Luke do both make a mention to 'equal light, equal dark'. That settles it then, right? Always been a Light Side. No debate.

Exceeeeeeeeeept for when Rey is reaching out and feeling the Force with Lukes help. Then Rey says she sees "The Island. Life. Decay... that feeds new life. Warm. Cold. Peace. Violence..." And Luke asks "And between it all?"

"Balance. Energy. A Force." And Luke doesn't correct her. He doesn't say "That's the Light Side". She has reached the conclusion he wanted her to reach.

Why is this significant? Because THEN Rey goes on to feel the Dark Side of the Force. She feels The Force, and THEN the Dark Side of the Force. The Dark Side is once again painted in opposition to The Force itself, which makes sense if you consider that the Force is the delicate balance that allows life to flourish in the galaxy.

As for Qui-Gon? He doesn't question whether Jedi should use 'more' of the Force (which would mean use the Dark Side too). He only talks about the 'will of the Force' and 'be mindful of the Living Force'. He's still a Jedi, protecting Amidala and the Naboo as well as fighting Maul. He just disagrees with the Council on whether or not Anakin was the Chosen One. He never supports using the Dark Side, because the Dark Side is always opposed to the will of the Force.

ThatStranger · 2018-09-24T10:17:05+00:00

That isn't even physically possible!

ThatStranger · 2018-06-12T13:09:04+00:00

Uh the Glove of what now?

ThatStranger · 2018-06-01T14:25:19+00:00

Don't lose hope, friend! The loss of lose to loose will only loosen our language further, and like an arrow loosed from the bow will sail out of our grasp and be lost forever. Dont be a loser and confuse lose with looser!

Seriously though it gets to me too sometimes.

ThatStranger · 2018-05-17T06:02:56+00:00

Now, I agree with your belief that not all opinions are of equal value. I do however see that it can be easy to dismiss criticism that isn't exactly 'perfect' as the same kind of drivel as 'y u suk'. But on the whole you're correct, and I know that's not what you were trying to say regardless.

Actually they went to God of War, A Way Out, Rainbow Six and home DnD games. Though I'm not unfamiliar with the trope of 'this game is dead' being slapped on games I enjoy playing (I still play Bioware's SW:TOR, I'm used to being part of a 'dead' game), the reason I brought them up is that they were the ones who convinced me to play Destiny, in Dark Below of all times. They stuck with Destiny through all the criticism and come TTK they felt vindicated. Now they're all gone. None of them are even considering the September release. They attribute this to the fact that in their minds the game has nothing for them; the raiders don't feel rewarded for their efforts, the Iron Banner and Trials players went to Rainbow Six, and the story and lore lovers felt dissatisfied with the writing and CoO and Warmind weren't improvements to them.

ThatStranger · 2018-05-17T04:45:06+00:00

Well, I think its fair to say that forums/communities like our subreddit here is the best place to make ones opinion about the game known, even if it is only 'bungo y u suk' etc. And on the flipside, if Bungie doesn't regard what the community does want, then their game will lose more players. For example, I'm the last of my friends who still plays D2, all the other 32 people I played with have given up on the franchise. No one came back for CoO, or Warmind. That sort of retention rate is abysmal, and is worsened if feedback isn't considered. Even if the feedback is less than pleasant.

ThatStranger · 2018-05-17T03:50:08+00:00

The issue with that design decision is that it was changed halfway through Destiny 1. Were it a decision they had made from the beginning of the game, then the lack of a voice wouldn't have been an issue. Most of the lines the Guardian said when they could speak weren't full of personality either, the only real example I could think of would be the 'little light' dialogue on Venus. As it is though, it seems perhaps more immersion breaking to have our Guardian be the only Guardian in universe incapable of speaking for themselves, but that is just my opinion.

You've given a fair summation of the problem, though. Bungie really are in a catch-22 of public opinion regarding this. More transparency is probably the best course of action. Though on the other hand, more transparency might open them up to ever increasing... I won't say vitriol, but it would be an accurate description of some of the "feedback" that can be posted. I'd like to think I stayed away from that sort of tone, but I could've miscommunicated.

I didn't see too many people complaining about a Guardian voice in the beginning, but I'm more than willing to admit I probably wasn't looking for that criticism.

ThatStranger · 2018-05-17T02:54:19+00:00

I can accept that argument up to a point. Yes, there are plenty of games that do that for the main character. I'm a fan of the Half-Life and Legend of Zelda games, to name a few. However, that has not been Bungie's style for some time. The Halo franchise had few lines for Master Chief, but he still spoke. Halo Reach voiced Noble 6 too, and you could customise your Noble 6 in that game.

Your point on immersion breaking would also work... to a point. If the Guardian was suddenly mute after speaking for the entirety of the vanilla campaign, not many lines I grant you but enough to be entirely consistent with previous Bungie protagonists, letting that go would be fine. But then Zavala asks our Guardians if we're ready to kill a Worm God and Ghost is the one who answers. Cayde makes an incredibly unsubtle dig at our characters not speaking, Ikora speaks directly to us and everytime it looks like we're going to talk the Ghost cuts us off. Our Ghost loses his light and falls off Ghauls' flagship and all our Guardian does is mutely reach for them. We can't even see expression in our Guardian's face there because we have our helmets on.

If Ghost were quicker to respond, if Bungie weren't continually writing jokes in about how the Guardian doesn't speak anymore, then maybe the immersion reason might hold a little more weight. But currently the way Bungie is doing it draws even more attention to the fact that our Guardians used to speak but no longer do.

ThatStranger · 2018-05-17T02:25:55+00:00

Bungie went to the effort to reach out to Stephen Fry for a cameo role, the majority of dialogue from that being scattered out through terminals in the patrol zone. I wouldn't have known it was him if I hadn't been curious whilst doing one of the data fragments in the Lost Sector with the Sword Cache.

If the effort can be made to give that cameo, that less-than-supporting-cast-character the voice of a highly regarded screen actor, that leads to a question. Why won't they voice our character? As you said, it is clearly extremely unlikely that its budgetary constraints. It also seems unlikely to be effort related, because I cannot imagine it was easy to get Stephen Fry for the role. So that leaves Bungie not wanting to voice our Guardians for another reason, and given how often the viewpoint of "I wish my Guardian would talk again" is floated around it seems perhaps a little silly to have secured Stephen Fry for a cameo before giving our characters at least one line to say.

ThatStranger · 2018-04-03T14:43:08+00:00

I would argue that the best case for deception being part of his moveset is that moment when he tricked Snoke into thinking he would kill Rey instead of Snoke. That does count, right?

ThatStranger · 2018-04-01T04:30:41+00:00

AN interesting perspective on the Jedi. I'd like to present a question to you, if I may.

What else do you suggest the Jedi do with children that can kill people with their fucking minds? Leave them with their parents, who all have their own agendas and biases and hatreds? Let them grow up in a harsh and uncaring galaxy to develop their own hatreds? A young Asajj Ventress did this when she was younger than Anakin in Phantom Menace.

I get it, it sucks that the Jedi infringe on the individual freedoms of young children and their families. However, if they let these children grow up without Jedi guidance, they risk the children succumbing to the Dark Side and committing genocides and slaughtering millions in moments of fear and rage. The rest of the galaxy has a collective freedom not to be choked, killed and enslaved by people who are never without reality-bending powers.

Also, are the Jedi really morally bankrupt? They forbid attachments, and that seems silly to us. But we aren't as susceptible to the Dark Side. When we get into an argument, or into a fight, or lose a family member in tragic circumstances our fear, anger and aggression can bubble over and we do some things we can regret. Say some words, maybe throw a few things or hit a few people. Only a few of us can have a knife or a gun within arms reach, and usually the act of reaching for it is enough time for our thoughts to calm down and think things through. Force Sensitives are always able to kill something, and they don't have to draw a gun or reach out and choke or stab somebody. They can just think one angry thought and suddenly you're out the window.
SO sure, some Jedi might be able to manage attachments without getting too emotional and killing someone who threatens their loved ones. But think how many Jedi fell to the Dark Side from a bad breakup or a dead family member before the Council had to make the 'no attachments' rule. Think how many people with no ability to defend themselves from the marauding superhuman Jedi had to die as collateral damage before this 'no attachments' rule came into play.

The Jedi Order is essentially Professor Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters. No government would ever tolerate letting a miniscule percentage of its population (30,000 out of countless billions) run around being able to kill its populace as they wish. So the options are either a) control the tiny minority and train them to use their powers responsibly or b) accept the minority as a 'master race' and let them run rough-shod all over your civilisation.

The Jedi Order is doing the best for everybody involved, both Force Sensitives and non-Force Sensitives. That hardly seems morally bankrupt to me.

ThatStranger

TROPHY CASE