To begin with, (And ignoring the discourse style of writing for simplification) I did not imply you were unsuccessful, merely that you were biased. Do not shovel words into my mouth, also, don't resort to an appeal to emotion to try and discredit me. I proposed that your condition may affect your thinking, you are free to disagree. However your statements do not align with your claims.

You're still ignoring the point, demanding arbitrary weakness in equivalence (I don't think you know what this word actually means) Is a silly thing to do, in something like a superhero RP it is understandable. It neither improves the writing, nor the RP, it is an attempt to insert artificial depth, rather than strive for actual depth. Your interpretation of weakness and how to apply them is wrong. Also you repeatedly insist to the need for binary: If a character has a strength they must have an equal weakness. That is 1 and 0's. Apparently no character can exist that is more gifted than others they must all be perfectly balanced. Life doesn't work this way, and neither did RJ.

So if a disagreement is unable to be resolved, you'll just call it a 50/50? Instead of realistic analysis of the two differing sides of the argument? Thats bad GM'ing, and ignores your later statement to be aiming for realism. This is character interaction on a grand scale, before you try to disseminate the two

A nice statement regarding the co-operation, but you consistently demonstrate an unwillingness to co-operate. You repeatedly shut down conversations with the declaration that "I am the GM" even when you were blatantly wrong.

Now you are applying a sort of plot armor, despite previous claims to there being "No Plot Armor" Sadly realistically (which you claim to desire later on in your post) fights do not work this way. The canadian womens Olympic hockey team (The best in the world at the time) lost to a bunch of fourteen year olds who weren't even provincially (state) ranked. If you are at a disadvantage, you will lose, unless someone is incredibly stupid or you are incredibly lucky. I don't have a problem with this from a Literary sense, but you made the claim to realism. This is character interaction of a physical kind.

In regards to the Aes Sedai, you are obviously backpedaling on previous statements you made to save face. You declared an Aes-Sedai under the age of 100 to be a special snowflake, when it turns out they are incredibly common. Nynaeve was far from the exception to the rules on wilders as well. It is worth noting that the Amyrlin seat (Before the fracturing of the tower) was under the age of 100 during the time the WoT takes place. Also you keep making statements such as "usually/Normally" to justify an all encompassing statement that is clearly factually wrong. This is also known as anecdotal evidence.

Next you make another appeal to authority (which is not completely fallacious, considering the topic at hand) However if you are going to make such an appeal, you can't just say x y z is why I am right. Many other people have looked through sources and come to completely differing conclusions as you. If you wish to provide your sources for your claims, instead of implying that your knowledge is superior to others, which you have done repeatedly by making statements such as "No I'm not pulling this out of my ass" which would be utterly unnecessary, unless you felt the need to differentiate your information from others.


You dont have evidence (this once again implies that despite the lack of evidence, you do believe this is how it works) to this being how people work. Yet you still used this anecdotal and clearly misrepresented information to try and prove a point. This discredits everything else you have said.

The following bulletpoints are largely ridiculous, claims to realism (Really? Do I need to elaborate?), further appeals to authority, and general wishful thinking. Your attitudes regarding character creation do not line up with what you say here.

Pride is a sin, inability to accept help is a weakness, don't mix the two. Most characters who exemplify the sin of pride have the inability to accept help. Armstrong accepts help, because he chooses to often fight alone does not mean he refuses help his style of alchemy is highly destructive, he'd likely injure any allies not on the same level as he is. The same goes for Mustang. Armstrong is neither overly prideful (Yes he is proud of being himself, as I am sure you are proud of being yourself, as I am proud of being myself) nor is he unwilling to accept help.
Honestly I could go on but this isn't about FMA and focusing on it is just an attempt at distracting from the main points. Suffice to say you continue to contradict yourself. Yes, I am well aware of your love for strong muscled men.

You didn't add on to Tangletail because they argue far more rationally and logically than you. You end your argument with another appeal to emotion, then try and further discredit what I said by saying "No need to get angry here"

Yet how fucking dare I? Someone sounds angry to me. Perhaps you would prefer offended, the word you used.

Suffice to say you display consistent unwillingness to actually co-operate despite your claims, a large gap in your knowledge regarding WoT (this is why I got away with most of what I did with the Aiel, excluding going to Rhuidean, which actually is not forbidden in the way you tried to describe it. I digress though, we were apparently in large agreement regarding that, save for the Dothraki.)

Now you Admit to acting like an Ass, but refuse to apologize for it, this displays an almost quintessential Narcissism  (The psychological, not classical greek) I won't fully elaborate unless you wish to try and engage in character assassination further, instead of logical discussion.

Sorry if my thoughts are disjointed, the voices in my head are acting up (See I can do it too!)