All posts by TarantulaJ1

Having BOTH Bradleys-- even just 09-- is rather overpowered, so they would win

To be honest, I really don't like webtoon formatting. It's convenient, but I hate having the entire narrative constricted to the small, narrow space of a screen (as someone who draws and writes occassionally). It's in color though, right? That might be worth seeing

@MeGA-Circuit Not everything needs to be on-screen to have an impact. Sometimes, its the other way around. Having the audience find out what happened to Nina the same time Edward makes the realization has much more shock value, and leaving the details of the transformation up to imagination makes you wonder about what really happened and how Nina felt, which is way worse in my opinion.

I hope I don't sound like a hypocrite by using other sources of media as examples-author/director choices are universal in a way morality in media isn't- but this is also how Jaws builds up suspense. The show doesn't actually show that much of the shark. Granted, that might just be a budget issue, but by having all the characters talk about the shark and not actually showing it, the show generates a lot of suspense as the audience is left to wonder about the creature. Macbeth does a similar thing, where certain important characters (won't say which, if spoilers are important) die offstage. It's not for suspense, but it leaves the audience to wonder.

Fair enough. FMA is definitely special in that regard, so a lot of characters can arguably be the MC. I haven't played the games myself, so I'll take your word for it!

Let's go, fumny number hehe

I've... never heard of anyone spelling her name that way, or pronouncing it that way lol

@MeGA-Circuit That's where you're wrong. Every show has it's own form of morality set by the standards of the world itself; you cannot group all shounen together, even if there are common themes due to its target demographic and tropes. Stop trying to compare it, because FMA is vastly different from Yu-Gi-Oh and you won't get anything of value from that. Fiction doesn't follow a universal code. The mechanics of each world is specific to that world, and determined by the author.

Edward and Alphonse are on Heroes Wiki because they're protagonists, and generally considered to be on the side of good (putting themselves in danger for the sake of humanity). This doesn't automatically make them "legendary" as you say. One of the central themes of the show is how in the end, no one is perfect but we can still try for good. Edward and Alphonse make mistakes and do irrational things sometimes, because they're human.

You're still very much focused on combat. It's definitely a large element of villains, but isn't at all necessary for one. I've repeated the same thing at least three times now- what part is difficult to understand?

@MeGA-Circuit What makes Edward a "legendary hero?" He says himself, in either the same episode or the next: he's only human. Edward isn't bound to any arbitrary rules that you're making up- he's made that clear repeatedly, often defying authority and constantly looking for a better solution to his problems. I would think the same thing applies here. Edward isn't the legendary hero you want him to be. He is not punching Tucker to administer "appropriate" justice. He's taking out his anger and lack of control over the situation out on Tucker.

You say Tucker has "lost the ability to hurt someone." What do you mean by that? He never lost his alchemical powers after the transmutation

What makes you think the perspective of characters from Yu-GI-Oh will reflect in Fullmetal Alchemist? Just because Edward is a shonen protagonist does not mean he will have the exact same outlook as every other shonen character. Furthermore, you're applying your own code of ethics to Edward. Accept that he does not think and behave the way you want him to, and is following his own code and emotions.

Hey, I remember this. It seems you've made quite a few more posts in the same vein since I last checked.

Why shouldn't Edward punch Shou Tucker? Being weak has very little impact on Edward's emotions. Edward was taking his anger out on Tucker- punching him was not meant to subdue him, and it was not meant to be a large scale, epic fight. Fullmetal Alchemist does not follow the superhero logic you want it to.

> why was Edward showing uncontrollable anger by ways like punching him multiple times?

People often use physical violence as an outlet for anger. He had befriended and briefly cared for Nina and Alexander, so seeing Tucker use their lives so flippantly for experimentation enraged him.

> And why did you all love this moment?

Most people can empathize with Edward's emotions in the current state, and are equally horrified by the creation of the Nina/Alexander chimera. Retribution is often satisfying to watch.

Why do you think that dirtying your hands with someone as pathetic as Tucker isn't a good thing? I can't see what connection you're making between the two.

It's all good! I'm not active very often, but I'm glad to help where I can

Idk, maybe just gratefulness for his actions and maybe hero worship?

@AdmiralZod1 fr

I am well aware that Tucker is evil, and I don't remember endorsing his viewpoint anywhere in my argument. I'm not sure why you chose to argue with that, if it's already established that we agree on that.

>I did not know about Fullmetal Alchemist fully.

What does this mean? You watched the show, right?

>But then there are things that confuse me, it is how you say Shou Tucker is “sick in the head” or broken.

>He is called “Pure Evil” for a reason. They scream of insanity and a broken psyche.

You seem to agree that he's fucked in the head. Why is that confusing?

>I mean, why do you say that he does not “refuse to admit he did something wrong”, but believe he did not do something wrong? Because there’s a reason why human alchemy and it’s transmutations are “forbidden” in the first place.

Obviously, for most sane people, human experimentation will be considered wrong, and rightfully so. However, there aren't really any hard facts to back this up, so it's perfectly viable that Tucker simply cannot wrap his head around this. You mentioned his sociopathic tendencies previously, so I dug around a bit, and a trait of one is lack of empathy for other people, and not feeling guilt about using others to get what they want. Assuming he is one, he can't care enough about others enough to see that he's wrong, and without genuine facts (humans need water to survive, a square has four equal sides, laws of gravity, etc) there's not really a way to explain it to him.

>Because he seems to lament and cling to his ideas that “sacrifices are a scientific advancement”. That may be true and all, but there are many lives that do not deserve to be sacrificed. What is so philosophical about human sacrifices anyway?

Which is true, and is why human experimentation is generally really bad. I suppose a philosophical argument can be made out of it though, like "trolley problem" type dilemmas.

>Human life is a very precious thing, and we humans live it fully doing things we love. So by sacrificing, it means those lives are gone. So you see and realize the problems with this ideology? I mean, why else do you think Edward angrily questioned that what he thinks human life- No, all life of every living being is.

Again, why are you so sure I agree with his ideology?

>But more importantly, how was his obsession over keeping his position as a State Alchemist made him broken to the point where went into a Moral Event Horizpn and is unable to understand and forget what human anger is exactly and believing he did something right?

He genuinely and wrongly believes that running that his certification and experiments is worth more than human life. What role does human anger play in this?

Not sure what you want me to do with a bunch of random quotes, but Google is free.

I mean this respectfully, but I can't really see what you're trying to prove or discuss, because virtually nothing is directed against my previous response, and very little to your original argument. If you can clarify more that'd be nice. And I have some questions of my own: What good would Edward making a speech have made? What did you expect from him, considering his role as "main hero" of the story?

Good day or night.

Both worked well for their respective shows, because they provide good backstory for the actions of the characters. Chose the 03 version just because I like Mustang more

Might skip some points because I have work to do, but anyways

To preface:

• I noticed that much of your confusion is because you simply do not care or understand that the show has themes and moral aspects unrelated to how powerful or intelligent a character is.

• I'll probably write like a bot. The reason for this is the sheer amount of essays, FRQs, and short answer responses I've had to write for school this past week.

• I will be assuming that this is all for the Brotherhood world and manga, not the 03 anime.

Question 1: Why do Hate How He Sacrificed Nina? Why was Nina so Dear to You All? And why use the statement “Hate Him Because He is Based Off Of Real Life”? And Why Call Him A “Child Abuser” in this Context?

What made her so precious that Edward angrily punched him in the face while angrily punching him in the face? And just what makes the idea of using his daughter as a test subject disgusting to you all?

- Nina is considered precious because she is an innocent. She's around, what- 5(?) years old, and embodies the purity that accompanies childhood, and there's really nothing that she did that can justify harming her.

And how is it child abuse?

- There are others forms of abuse besides extreme physical abuse, like in the example you brought up, and I think in the FMA world, this too would quality as physical abuse.

• Firstly, the experiment is done to her unknowingly, that is to say without her consent, akin to force feeding (like physically shoving food down a kids throat) or CSA, both forms of abuse.

• Secondly, turning Nina into a chimaera can be considered mutilation. Mutilation can be defined as:

> An act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal.

• Obviously there isn't really an example in the real world to compare this to, but basically the transmutation damaged her body and mind, as she is trapped in a dog-like body, and appears to have mental impairment too (can only repeat a couple words and phrases, probably has greater trouble with forming thoughts than previously).

• We can argue semantics and whether the above is true all day, but creating chimaeras is said to cause immense pain to the creature because mixing animals together was unnatural and incompatible.

Question 2: Why Do You Act Like Edward Who Was Angry? Besides, Tucker Was Too Pathetic to Deserve Punches in The Face.

What did Ed mean exactly when he said Tucker was “no alchemist” when he is one, albeit an unethical and bad one. What was an alchemist according to Ed?

- Rewatching the FMAB episode rn, it looks like he only says that real alchemists shouldn't mess with peoples lives intentionally (implying human transmutation, but with a lot more yelling). Was it in the 03 anime?

Why do you people love seeing Tucker suffer by being punched in the face?

- We've established that Tucker is pretty sick in the head, so most viewers find satisfaction in karma (he hurt Nina, in return he gets hurt).

He is too pathetic and useless to hurt anyone? Can’t you all let him go? And I coined that from Psychonauts.

- He provides a pretty good source of moral debate that some people enjoy, mostly about how far human experimentation should be pushed, if morals are more important than science or vice versa.

- Wdym by "let him go"? Is there a reason he shouldn't be discussed?

(Being pedantic, but coining a term is when you make something up, and if you pulled it from another media source it wouldn't be coining. Yeah I'm an asshat, I'm know.)

Question 3: His Ineptitude and Inability to Accept Reality

I heard that State Alchemists should try to create something to support the country with the funds they had earned. But instead of making medicine or anything else, he thought it was a good idea to make a chimera with his family.

- Alchemists get research grants to pursue whatever interest field they desire, though it probably has to be within the law. They get a lot of free reign as long as they fight in the Amestrian military during wartime. At least, that's my understanding of it.

- Plus, the government probably saw some use in them, as they can be used in the military (which.. does actually happen later)

And this is one thing I am lost at, why is Tucker so inept and so detached from reality that he fails to understand why his superiors and Edward denied his Ninalexander Chimera and denied him.

- Tucker values scientific achievement over being morally correct, and cannot understand why anyone would hold a different set of values. Not confusing, but I do actually agree with you here.

There is a reason why he refuses to admit he did something wrong, he wants to prove to the world that he had made scientific progress, but it was a wrong kind of progress and because of his short-sightedness, missed the point of what alchemy should be about, philosophy and wisdom.

- Not exactly sure how philosophy would come into play besides affecting each characters outlook on life, which was shown with Tucker. Interesting point though, would be interested in hearing more.

So I want to know more about his psychology of his sociopathy from you guys:

• (A) Why did he give in to the insanity and become a sociopath and sacrifice his wife and Nina like that so easily?

-I'm not familiar enough on traits of either to providing an actual medical diagnosis, but his values revolve around scientific achievement no matter the cost, even if he has to sacrifice his family. He was presented the option twice, and both times, he chose what more closely matched his outlook.

-And probably cared about his state certification too much.

• (B) And why does he refuse to understand or admit why what he did was wrong due to wanting people to accept him? Because people like Senku from Dr. Stone would know otherwise.

- I don't think it's something he can just refuse; Tucker just doesn't think it's wrong. Again, he prioritizes what he sees as scientific progress over all other morals, and is completely blind to anything contradictory.

• (C) What was his goal by using chimeras? It was too advanced and he had zero intelligence to pull it off as he made failed prototypes? How would those improve the country exactly?

- 1. Once again, scientific advancement, probably just for the sake of it. As you said, he is sociopathic and lack of care for others emotions is a trait of that.

- 2. That's not really a question. But bio life alchemy is said to have few advancements in its history, and producing any mixed creature requires knowledge and skill, so his intelligence is debatable.

- 3. Chimaeras as guard animals and as military weapons, both demonstrated in the series. Even if it's no good for regular civilians, this is funded by the government/military system, who evidently deem it a useful advancement. Remember how they made their own?

Question 4: If You Want Other Good Examples of Evil Villains Who Are Like Him, I Got Good Ones

And what do you mean by “Hate-Sink”? Is he a “Love-to-Hate” Villain? But what is there to love?

- A "Hate-Sink" is basically when a character is made easy to hate intentionally. Got that from about 30 seconds of googling. I'm not sure what context this was used in, so you'll have to go back to reddit and ask the person who used it.

- So, not exactly a "Love-to-Hate" villain.

So why go far for this hatred?

- I can think of very few things less vile than harming innocents, such as children like Nina. Other villains in the story have grander characteristics (speed, strength, powers, cunning, etc etc) but seeing this specific example of cruelty with the justification he made probably hurt viewers much more than seeing a bunch of random extras get killed.

- Reminds me of that saying, "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic," from somewhere. Not exactly applicable, but still thought I'd drop it here.

Why hate things from real life exactly?

- Should we be supporting him instead?

And Edward, you should have made a heroic speech to outcry his alchemy and that is why he is not an alchemist.

- But why? He was pretty clearly angry in the moment. He is portrayed (especially in the beginning) to be volatile and prone to conflict, and this true to his character. Just because he is the protagonist doesn't mean he will act like a stereotypical superhero the way you expect him to. What makes you expect him to act otherwise?

-What would a grandiose speech accomplish? I cannot see any reasons why it would be better for the plot.

Even Ben 10 and his Grandpa Max would give him a piece of his mind!

- However, Ed is neither Ben 10 nor Grandpa Max. There's no point comparing two different shows built with different characters, themes, and plot.

Sorry, but what is the context of this!? I only know flashy battle and action, so how does the “real-life” ideas and “personal” feelings of hatred towards Shou Tucker matter in the dark and mature world of Fullmetal Alchemist!

- Why should "real life" ideas and "personal" feelings of hatred not be compatible with the show? Just because it can be dark sometimes doesn't mean human emotion will cancel out.

- Fullmetal Alchemist is actually a pretty positive show. Yeah there's a lot of violence and covers darker themes, the main message of the story is still uplifting (stuff like people are resilient, there's always a way forward, teamwork, unconditional love, etc etc).

Final thoughts:

- What I don't understand is your preoccupation with fitting all the characters into neat "superhero" and "supervillain" boxes. Obviously, there is a good and evil in the story, but all characters are portrayed as inherently human, with human flaws and desires, not as cookie cutter hero/villain archetypes you want them to be.

- Tucker isn't really set up to be a major threat to the protagonist, or really a threat at all. He still has his own purpose, though; Tucker helps introduce some of the shows concepts. He shows that the world isn't all sunshine and rainbows early on. He gives Ed the lesson that while he's only human and incapable of saving everyone, he can still move forward and try his best to prevent evil. His actions inspire Ed and Al to help people after the battle against Father.

-Tucker is indeed pathetic, and commits atrocities on a smaller scale, but he is still plenty evil, and unlike the other villain characters, lacks redeeming qualities. This makes him much more hateable than other characters.

Well, if this post is ragebait, I've fallen for it pretty hard. Hopefully you read my response, or at least skim through some sections.

Its pretty cool he attempts to follow his morals even when it works against him, which I guess could be a value itself. Otherwise hes really frickin weird

They're both good in different ways

Yeah envy was kewl