Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5214
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by RocketScientist » Thu May 15, 2014 1:18 pm

Done. :)
Image Image Image

User avatar
Krulle
Transcribes Goblins
Posts: 6893
Location: banned
Contact:

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by Krulle » Thu May 15, 2014 1:54 pm

TY, RS!

BTW, I also favour B5 >> any ST
The abbr. of abbr. is abbr.

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by willpell » Thu May 15, 2014 7:37 pm

RocketScientist wrote:Some of you guys are going to hate me for this, but I thought B5 was extremely mediocre.
I don't hate you, you're just wrong.

I'm kidding. Opinions can't actually be wrong. If you didn't like it, there's something wrong with you that's perfectly fine. Different strokes and all that.

But I'm firmly in the B5 is Awesome camp, and am a little sad you left it out of the title of the split thread. (You could just call the thread "Geeky 90's Television" and cover all the bases we're talking about, plus have room for expansion. What the hell else was on back then?)
But anyway, B5 people and I are probably looking for different things in our sci-fi, because DS9 is my least favorite trek, and B5 people seem to like it.
They do have a lot in common: set on a space station rather than a ship (which very dramatically changes the dynamics of the story - you can't run away from your problems, and more transient elements are constantly passing through), with a generally grittier tone, and stories that are mostly arc-based (excluding the first season or two of DS9, and arguably the last season of B5 - in case you didn't know, that one was the result of them having scrambled to finish all their intended stories for it at the end of the previous season, because they thought they were canceled, so when they turned out to not be canceled they had nothing left which they really needed to do). If you like a lighter, more episodic tone, then TNG or even Voyager might be more your speed. Whereas if you really like deep characterization and convincing acting, well, sci-fi in general probably isn't your thing, at least not from that far back. Oh, except for Farscape, duh. You probably like that, or will if you don't know it yet. (Just a guess, of course, based on what you've said here.)
Otherwise they'd be having the experience of a commuter school, rather than building bonds from having gone away to school. If that makes sense.
Totally does. Being founded in touchy-feely New Agey kinds of principles, the Federation would completely be inclined toward making people work and study together just in the hopes of it being good for their emotional health, without worrying about whether they can be more efficient by exploiting their technology to the fullest. Though you do think they'd make exceptions for things like medical emergencies and stuff.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
Synch
Game Master
Posts: 4493
Location: New Zealand

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by Synch » Thu May 15, 2014 7:55 pm

willpell wrote: (You could just call the thread "Geeky 90's Television" and cover all the bases we're talking about, plus have room for expansion. What the hell else was on back then?)
Farscape, Dawson's Creek, Party of 5, Beverly Hills 90210, Stargate SG-1, Seinfeld!
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5214
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by RocketScientist » Thu May 15, 2014 8:56 pm

willpell wrote: If you like a lighter, more episodic tone, then TNG or even Voyager might be more your speed. Whereas if you really like deep characterization and convincing acting, well, sci-fi in general probably isn't your thing, at least not from that far back. Oh, except for Farscape, duh. You probably like that, or will if you don't know it yet. (Just a guess, of course, based on what you've said here.)
I have a cat named D'Argo.
I wrote:Otherwise they'd be having the experience of a commuter school, rather than building bonds from having gone away to school. If that makes sense.
willpell wrote:Totally does. Being founded in touchy-feely New Agey kinds of principles, the Federation would completely be inclined toward making people work and study together just in the hopes of it being good for their emotional health, without worrying about whether they can be more efficient by exploiting their technology to the fullest. Though you do think they'd make exceptions for things like medical emergencies and stuff.
Actually, I took it that it was a more military aspect of the school. You don't go home from military school. ("New Age" school would totally let you go home if you wanted. No one corrals hippies. It's like herding sheep.) Starfleet is the military, not hippies. (See: This Way to Eden, TOS. The space hippies hated Starfleet. Fair warning: That episode kind of... sucks.)
Image Image Image

User avatar
Synch
Game Master
Posts: 4493
Location: New Zealand

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by Synch » Thu May 15, 2014 11:01 pm

BSG is my fave, closely followed by Firefly. Not a big Trekkie or B5 fan.
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by willpell » Fri May 16, 2014 10:26 am

Synch wrote:
willpell wrote: (You could just call the thread "Geeky 90's Television" and cover all the bases we're talking about, plus have room for expansion. What the hell else was on back then?)
Farscape, Dawson's Creek, Party of 5, Beverly Hills 90210, Stargate SG-1, Seinfeld!
My bad on forgetting SG1. But with the possible exception of Seinfeild, how are any of the others "geeky"?
RocketScientist wrote:I have a cat named D'Argo.
Should I assume you're not a French-speaking Greek-Mythology buff?
Actually, I took it that it was a more military aspect of the school. You don't go home from military school. ("New Age" school would totally let you go home if you wanted. No one corrals hippies. It's like herding sheep.) Starfleet is the military, not hippies. (See: This Way to Eden, TOS. The space hippies hated Starfleet. Fair warning: That episode kind of... sucks.)
I didn't mean hippies....more like soccer moms who do yoga and drink organic smoothies. Not the original counterculture, but people who cherry-picked stuff from those movements which they thought were cool, and discarded the rest. While Starfleet is ostensibly a military organization, they aren't especially warlike, and their take on military discipline is pretty relaxed, they don't seem to have drill sergeants or reveille or any of those other brutal toughening-up aspects; I think they're more analogous to the Coast Guard than to the Navy, using a very loose framework of military discipline just to enforce procedure and keep people sort of alert, without actually trying to turn them into killing machines who unhesitantly jump when told how high. (I realize that I'm contrasting them with stereotypes more than actualities, but I think the point still stands.)
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5214
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by RocketScientist » Fri May 16, 2014 2:31 pm

willpell wrote:
RocketScientist wrote:I have a cat named D'Argo.
Should I assume you're not a French-speaking Greek-Mythology buff?
D'Argo:
Image
[thumbnail]http://wackomedia.com/uploads/2009/11/f ... e70df5.jpg[/thumbnail]

Although I did try to tell someone once that I'd named him that because Argonauts. They didn't get that any more than they got Farscape. They are not of my people. *great sadness and shaking of head*
Image Image Image

Your.Master
Mutters to Themself
Posts: 26

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by Your.Master » Fri May 16, 2014 10:53 pm

Oooh! Do I get to whine about nerd TV? Let me whine!

Whedonverse
-----------------


Buffy

Quite entertaining; I only saw it for the first time a year or so ago and marathon'd through it. It takes on a different character I think a couple seasons in, because it has enough material to make a lot of callbacks to itself, so in that sense I'm not sure season 3 really was the best place to stop (this is unlike, say, Smallville, which was another supernaturally-themed show that started in high school and went past graduation in a similar arc, but stopping at 3 was the right call because it really just started with its best episode and got worse).

Angel

I have to say, I did not find this entertaining at all. I struggled through it. I only found season 5 watchable, and it seemed pretty clearly taking on a Buffy aspect at the time (even without Spike). I just found it boring. I really can't rank the seasons. Pylea was kind of fun I guess, but Angel people seem to not like that. I had tried to watch season 1 when it was airing and gave up; I only got through Angel on inertia after Buffy unexpectedly impressed me.

Firefly

Tied for best show mentioned in this thread. Too short. Though I can name bad episodes in its short run. I do wonder if it gets all the credit for the great premise squeezed into a few episodes.

The movie was only tolerable, not good.

TrekVerse
---------------


TOS

Unwatchable for me. I gave a couple episodes a try, the movies a try -- no. Can't do it.

TNG

Lots of great memories. First seasons were awful. Have not watched in sequence in some time, but it has my fondest memories.

Voyager

Always strikes me as under-rated. I never thought it was as good as TNG but it gets so much hate, yet it seemed just...fine to me. The doctor was great.

DS9

I couldn't sit through it at the time and I just recently (as in, within the past few months) forced myself to sit through it, in order. It's bad. And the vaunted metaplot seems to happen almost exclusively in season finales (contrast B5 where it seemed to run through Seasons 2 through 4 more evenly). Honestly, much as B5 is really Londo's story despite being told from a human perspective, I think DS9 gets a lot more interesting if you think of it as being Quark's story: his struggle in the backdrop of a struggle between several strange foreign cultures, his leader going senile, his mother a political revolutionary, his nephew embracing a very different way of life he was exposed to, and watching helplessly in horror as his distant homeland undergoes the greatest cultural shift in their recorded history to become an unrecognizable state. And I don't *like* Quark or the Ferengi episodes. I just think he and they are the best parts of DS9.

I don't think there's a single character in DS9 that I liked. Garak might have come closest, but he didn't live up to his promise. Then...I guess...Jake?

The only episode that was not a Ferengi episode and that was not a season finale that seemed any good was the "it's a faaaaaake" episode. And maybe the one with the Cardassian guy who is suicidal because he was basically Nazi who started to feel guilty, which I only remembered by looking up top-ten lists of DS9 episodes on the Internet in order to be fair. I'm almost gagging on some of the other episodes listed in those top tens, like any with the insufferable holographic lounge singer. I have to address the one that keep showing up, about the struggles of black people (and to a lesser extent, women) in the 50s. It wouldn't have been a bad TV show in and of itself, but it was a terrible DS9 episode. It was tied into Star Trek pathetically with a "butterfly dreaming I'm a man" excuse. I think they did a much better job of pointing it out when Sisko refused to join in the stupid holographic lounge singer thing on the basis of the treatment of black people at the time, and that's how they could have tied it in. Yes, I'd rather the entire episode have been a holodeck accident episode. And it would have made it funnier when Quark started in about politics.

Also Sisko's acting reminds me of how people parody Shatner's acting, moreso than Shatner ever did (though of course I have seen a lot more DS9 than TOS, since, as I said, I find TOS unwatchable).

Enterprise

Very very very bad start. It actually did seem to be picking up near the end. Then they knew it was the last season, and seemed resigned to suck again for the last few bunch of episodes.

Movies

The J J Abrams movies are far and away the best Star Trek that exists.

There. I said it.

I've heard some people call them dumbed-down action movies. To which I have to respond: have you ever seen Trek? They are kind of dumb action shows. Occasionally they'll pull a ham-fisted morality play, on a rare occasion they'll even adapt a neat idea (like Jean Luc Picard living his life in that alien culture where he learned to play the alien flute). But frequently the sign of "intelligence" is when they use Big Sciencey Words in utterly meaningless or self-contradictory ways, which strikes me as much dumber than being consistent. The Universal Translator is a cop-out which fails rarely but randomly (mostly when Klingons are talking) -- Farscape made the mistake of copying that with translator microbes in the second episode, then they backed away from it until they hit Earth and learned English for real.

The only sci fi I'm aware of that seems squishier and dumber than Trek to me is Doctor Who. Sometimes I see Star Wars' original trilogy listed as squishier than Trek, but I don't get that. Both Trek and Wars had actual magic -- the Force on one side, "Psychics" on the other. Both handwaved around FTL travel, weapons, and shields. Star Wars showed an interstellar community of fundamentally dissimilar life-forms. They communicated through a combination of translator droids and just learning multiple "standard" languages including how to understand languages whose sounds you yourself can't perform, leading to Han speaking English at Jabba speaking...Hutt-ese? The technology was sometimes flaky but never in a miraculously disastrous fashion. Yes, C3P0's poor range of motion was kind of stupid, but I'll put that up against asking the computer to make a holodeck character that could outwit data and coming up with an AI supervillain to take over the Enterprise any day (by the way, that's also an example of magic). Or watching Harry Kim say "Computer, apply a recursive algorithm" and it just friggin' fixes a broken holodeck character, even though it's like saying "computer, build a thing" and expecting it to decide to build a 1/4 scale replica of a grand piano.

Star Trek is a dumb adventure show, mostly composed of one-offs or the occasional two-parter, with hits and misses in there.

That said, First Contact was entertaining though. The other Trek movies were not.

Stargate
------------------


Stargate: SG1

Tolerable, especially in the later seasons.

Stargate: Atlantis

Actually somewhat entertaining. McKay carried that show for me.

Stargate: The other live-action one

Unwatchably bad

Miscellaneous
------------------


Babylon 5

I liked this, but I recognize that the acting was awful and most actual episodes were pretty bad. It just had a fascinating metaplot, and the cheeseball sci fi was the relatively inoffensive vector for delivering that metaplot. Quality was low in season 1 because the metaplot wasn't built up, and season 5 dropped off a lot because they had rushed to tie up the plot for season 4 (which may possibly have improved season 4).

FarScape

Along with Firefly, tied for the best show of those mentioned in this thread. Though you had to be in it for different things.

Unsolicited opinions on things not previously mentioned
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Doctor Who

I don't understand why this is popular. I find it patronizing and insulting to my intelligence. I just don't get the appeal. Anyone who says they like this, I discount their opinions on other television, not because they are bad people or anything but because they so clearly and fundamentally have different tastes than me that any opinions we share must be coincidence. That's, unfortunately, a lot of people on the Internet these days. I. Just. Don't. Get. It.

Note: I saw sample episodes from many eras, and I was really giving it a chance in the Eccleston year and shortly into the next guy, figuring there must be something hidden there. My opinion stands on all of them.

Sliders

Would love to see what Torme would have done with this without network interference.

BattleStar Galactica

Similar feelings to Doctor Who, except at least I didn't feel like my intelligence was being insulted, just my patience.

User avatar
Synch
Game Master
Posts: 4493
Location: New Zealand

Re: Twitter tweets (now: New Blog Post)

Post by Synch » Fri May 16, 2014 11:33 pm

willpell wrote:
Synch wrote:
willpell wrote: (You could just call the thread "Geeky 90's Television" and cover all the bases we're talking about, plus have room for expansion. What the hell else was on back then?)
Farscape, Dawson's Creek, Party of 5, Beverly Hills 90210, Stargate SG-1, Seinfeld!
Oops, just rattling off 90s TV. But we also forgot Space: Above and Beyond, and Sliders.

I started watching The 100, its ok but its too much like Teen Soap meets Lord of the Flies. Under the Dome was ok.

What are people's thoughts on Defiance, or Space: Above and Beyond?
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5214
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by RocketScientist » Sat May 17, 2014 12:08 am

Yeah, we like different things. You'll need to discount my opinion. I fricking love Doctor Who. :lol:

Fake Abrams Trek: Hate it. I like Star Trek. That's not it. As I said in another thread, it's a Tom Cruise sci-fi-of-the-month flick without Tom Cruise or an interesting premise. At which point, I have to ask, why bother to call it Star Trek, when it's not anything like Star Trek? All I can come up with is greed and laziness, both of which are just sad.

Technical details: Do not care. Do not even want to hear about them unless there is going to be a test afterward, where I have to build the FTL drive.

Battlestar Galactica: Boring. Granted, I came in on some kind of boring election thing, and it was all "blah, blah, election, some woman running against some evil dude." I think. Dunno. Bored me. The original 1970s Galactica was about as interesting as Buck Rogers or Space 1999. Which is not at all interesting, I can't sit through this. So yeah.

Squishyness: If Trek/Wars = squishy, then I guess you missed the 1970s. :lol: Because speaking of Space 1999, if you don't know that an explosion on the far side of the moon wouldn't shoot the moon off into space, then possibly you should ask someone before making an entire show about it. I don't know how they could have fixed that with tech or hand waving, though. They were driving. the moon. around space. At least I'm pretty sure that was what they were doing, given the episode I saw where they were going to try again for another pass at getting to earth. WTF is that even?

Sliders: Loved it. Probably more than it merited, but it struck a chord with me at the time.

Equally awesome, and maybe even more so: Quantum Leap. 8)

Also Dollhouse. Nobody loves Dollhouse, but that second season, especially the back half of it, was brilliant.

My new favorite: Orphan Black. It is INSANELY good. Like even the first episode is really good, and it gets better from there.

Question for people who watch Agents of SHIELD: did the finale make you wonder if we're going to finally get a Nick Fury movie? I would watch the shit out of a Nick Fury movie.

Combination Trek/Marvel point: I am almost positive that Patrick Stewart is the best actor I have ever seen. Seriously. Watch him in Hamlet with David Tennant and the Royal Shakespeare company. Patrick blows them ALL out of the water. They're acting around him, and Patrick just IS Claudius. He's the opposite of the bad actor who throws you out of the movie. He's a genius actor who absorbs you, and then you only come out of it when someone else speaks. I have never seen anything like that. :shock:

Never Saw Definiance or Space Above and Beyond. Is Defiance that thing on SciFi (or whatever it is)? I'm pissed off at SciFi because they never let a show go more than 4 - 5 seasons. Most recently because of Eureka, Being Human and Warehouse 13 (none of which are favorites, per se, but all of which I like), but also because of Sliders, Atlantis, SG-1 (notice how many seasons of SC-1 predate SciFi) and of course Farscape. (Yes, the cat watches it. No, I'm not kidding. It says his name, and he's captivated by it. Less so now that my daughter has watched the entire series 3 times in the last couple of years with him, though.)
Image Image Image

DrinksTooMuchCoffee
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 809

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by DrinksTooMuchCoffee » Sat May 17, 2014 9:06 am

Off in fantasy there was Highlander, Hercules, and Xena. Last two actually were popular, so may not count. ;) Loved Methos on Highlander. Ultimate pragmatist against Duncan's Lawful Goodness.
Byron: Do you want a tombstone that says, "He Lived For Centuries" or do you want one that says, "For Centuries He Was Alive"?
Methos: You're not listening to me. I don't want a tombstone.
Although he may just have been playing the long con on Duncan.

Card-carrying B5 Fanclub member here, and yeah, a lot of the story is the greater context of the rest of the galaxy not on screen, not so much what you actually see in the episode. When you have a fandom dissecting every episode and speculating it's easy to think about all that. For the first season there was a lot of "What happened to Sinclair during the Battle of the Line and WHY did the Minbari surrender"? Then there was also the whole mystery of those black ships that just show up and blow everything up and disappear again. As far as on-screen scenes, funnily they were the best when it was just two characters in a room talking. B5 did crush the Hugos for a few years, so other people must have liked it too. ;)

ETA: And thinking of the Raimis, there was also Cleopatra 2525, which was a tad odd. :) Since it had Bruce Campbell in it and was comedic as well, I'm surprised Brisco County Jr. wasn't a Raimi show. As I liked that and it was on Fox, it was also canceled. (The F in Fox is for "F Fox!").

User avatar
Lurks_In_Shadows
Cures Light Wounds
Posts: 4688
Location: In the Pharoh's mud pits, making bricks without straw.

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by Lurks_In_Shadows » Sat May 17, 2014 1:50 pm

Gads, I'm glad that I'm not the only one who remembers "Space 1999"! :lol:
To answer Your_Master: The deal with Whooligans and Trekie fans of TOS is not so much that they think that the shows were good. It is more of a cult-type thing. Kinda like the people who really get into The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by willpell » Sat May 17, 2014 2:41 pm

For the record, I thought Abrams Trek 1.0 was kinda dumb and mostly just an amusing spectacle, too ridiculous in several places to really get into. But Star Trek Into Darkness was phenomenal - still a bit dumb on a few plot points, but I didn't care because it was 90% pure awesomeness, and the bad parts weren't bad enough to ruin the rest. Between the two, I consider the neo-Trek franchise to be a success.

I don't need to argue with your extremely-contrary-to-mine tastes for the most part, YM, but I am calling BS on this claim:
Your.Master wrote:the computer to make a holodeck character that could outwit data and coming up with an AI supervillain to take over the Enterprise any day (by the way, that's also an example of magic).
No. Just no. A computer glitch is not "magic". Real computers glitch all the time; if anything, what's magic about Trek is that their technology only occasionally malfunctions catastrophically. I always think that Bones (and Pulaski) had the right idea to distrust the transporter; we see about three or five episodes across Trek in which a transport screws up somehow, and it's not like Starfleet members have a news media to tell them how statistically you're more likely to be hit by a shuttlecraft than to be vaporized in a transporter accident. So yeah, technology going haywire once in a while, even to the point of accidentally creating artificial intelligence, is entirely consistent with the sci-fi milieu.
Doctor Who

I don't understand why this is popular.
I consider it a bit overrated; to me, this is the one that's a "dumb adventure show" with "magic", and even though the Doctor is twelve characters and counting, I still don't feel like the show has a wide enough ensemble cast to really interest me. The best shows tend to be the ones with a lot of interesting personality dynamics (I say this as a person who happily watches movies I know to be terribly written, just for the lasers and giant robots and pretty matte paintings in the background), and so a show that's all about one guy, and a fairly vaguely concepted guy at that, has a hard time working for me.

That said, a number of brilliant writers have used Dr. Who's popularity as a vehicle to create individual stories of incredible awesomeness, and if it takes a lot of barely-tolerable dreck to generate those diamonds in the rough, I consider that an acceptible tradeoff.
Sliders

Would love to see what Torme would have done with this without network interference.
For once we agree completely. That show started with incredible promise and just went straight to shit, for the most depressing of reasons and in the most ridiculous of fashions.
Synch wrote:I started watching The 100, its ok but its too much like Teen Soap meets Lord of the Flies.
I know of a show that's exactly 44 times better. :mrgreen:
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
RocketScientist
Global Moderator
Posts: 5214
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by RocketScientist » Sat May 17, 2014 9:13 pm

DrinksTooMuchCoffee wrote:Off in fantasy there was Highlander, Hercules, and Xena. Last two actually were popular, so may not count. ;) Loved Methos on Highlander. Ultimate pragmatist against Duncan's Lawful Goodness.
Byron: Do you want a tombstone that says, "He Lived For Centuries" or do you want one that says, "For Centuries He Was Alive"?
Methos: You're not listening to me. I don't want a tombstone.
Although he may just have been playing the long con on Duncan.
That is one of my two favorite Methos moments. The other being when he pawed though Duncan's CD collection and was all "What, no Queen?" :lol:
Lurks_In_Shadows wrote:Gads, I'm glad that I'm not the only one who remembers "Space 1999"! :lol:
To answer Your_Master: The deal with Whooligans and Trekie fans of TOS is not so much that they think that the shows were good. It is more of a cult-type thing. Kinda like the people who really get into The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
I think you're on to something there, because I was big into Rocky when I was like 17.
Image Image Image

DrinksTooMuchCoffee
Indulges in Conversation
Posts: 809

Re: Whedonverse and Star Trek Verse

Post by DrinksTooMuchCoffee » Sun May 18, 2014 12:17 pm

RocketScientist wrote:That is one of my two favorite Methos moments. The other being when he pawed though Duncan's CD collection and was all "What, no Queen?" :lol:
His utter dismissal of Chivalry while still managing to be likable and friends with Duncan was great. Not that he was opposed to it. It was just a trendy code made up by drunken bards one night and useless; one that Duncan lived his life by. :lol: Greatly paraphrased: "D: But I can't fight her. She's a woman!" "M: Fine. I'll do it. *sigh* Pick up your sword, bitch!" (Hey, he still held to the Game rules when Duncan was looking. ;) )

Post Reply