|
|
Post by Leviathan on May 12, 2016 10:36:58 GMT -6
Protected finishers? As in no two wrestlers can have the same finisher in their move repertoire. A couple of us were in Tinychat yesterday and we thought it was a pretty sweet idea.
|
|
ＤＩＡＶＯＬＯ
Jobber
My blade game? Yoshimitsu.
Posts: 128 
|
Post by ＤＩＡＶＯＬＯ on May 12, 2016 10:37:49 GMT -6
ZA WAAAARUUUUUUUUUUDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by John Gable on May 12, 2016 10:39:16 GMT -6
I would be up for this. Though it would require us to make a list...We are just gonna have to draw straws I guess. Good idea, fam!
|
|
|
|
Post by Leviathan on May 12, 2016 11:18:12 GMT -6
I wouldn't mind compiling a list if everyone posted what they want their protected finisher to be!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jay Omega on May 12, 2016 11:18:33 GMT -6
What about common moves that are frequently used as finishers? The superkick comes to mind; lot of people use it, but only HBK calls it a finisher. Ditto with the Shining Wizard; popular move, not exactly a "finisher".
|
|
|
|
Post by Lyndon "Big" Diehl on May 12, 2016 11:19:17 GMT -6
Does anyone share finishers now?
|
|
|
|
An idea
May 12, 2016 11:22:17 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Leviathan on May 12, 2016 11:22:17 GMT -6
I'm not sure if anyone's sharing right now. I know a lot of people use the superkick and those would be the type of situations we could avoid.
Like if you're "end all, be all" finisher is this devestating superkick, it would take credibility away from it if a two week rookie was passing them out like high fives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Leviathan on May 12, 2016 11:23:27 GMT -6
And the idea of a protected finisher could lead to some fun match pairings if the people involved were fighting over the right to use that move!  |
|
|
|
Post by DeMarcus Jordan on May 12, 2016 11:25:41 GMT -6
Jeff does the Super Kick as a finisher...the Spoke.
I could add this to my picbase/entrance theme?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jay Omega on May 12, 2016 11:30:50 GMT -6
And the idea of a protected finisher could lead to some fun match pairings if the people involved were fighting over the right to use that move! Crow McMorris v. Jeff Purse: Coma Kick v. the Spoke! Book it, guys! |
|
|
|
An idea
May 12, 2016 11:31:53 GMT -6
Post by Spencer Adams on May 12, 2016 11:31:53 GMT -6
The superkick is possibly the one exception to uniqueness as it's almost just a wrestling thing at this point. Good enough for a finisher? Yes, but it has that sort of feel where it's like the great meme move of wrestling. I dunno.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jay Omega on May 12, 2016 11:42:40 GMT -6
I think it would be acceptable for two people to use a superkick, provided there was a clear difference. As an example, if Purse uses the Spoke as an "out of nowhere" superkick, while Crow uses the Coma Kick as sort of a "called" finisher, like HBK striking up the band. The end result might be the same, but the differences should be enough.
Or like the difference between the Liontamer and the Walls of Jericho, or the Sharpshooter and that terrible submission move the Rock does. I like the idea of protected finishers - gives it an air of a registered trademark - but I also don't want us to stifle people. Perhaps if a finisher is taken, and a new signee has used it for years also, would it not be all right to have the newb use a variant, rather than a whole new finisher? Can't use just a superkick? How about a vertical press into a superkick? Or a running superkick? Triple springboard 360 degree superkick?
And now I've used that word so many times it has lost all meaning. Just like the move itself did in the previous fed.
|
|
6ix Goddess
Developmental
We Surrounded By the Fukken Wolves
Posts: 89
|
Post by 6ix Goddess on May 12, 2016 11:50:30 GMT -6
I've always considered "named finishers" to be a specific variation on the move. For instance, Howard Black used "the Kimura Lock" as a finisher; it was a bland, bread-and-butter Kimura. Dag Riddik used "the Trump Card", which was a Kimura, but I always assumed to be a very specific sort of Kimura in how it was applied.
I do, however, believe that if you claim a finisher with no name, like how CD had the Burning Hammer, that no one else should be able to take the finisher with that name. If, for instance, someone grabbed "Spear" as a finisher, no one else could take "Spear" but would have to find a new name and call it a spear variation.
|
|
|
|
An idea
May 12, 2016 11:54:43 GMT -6
Post by Crow McMorris on May 12, 2016 11:54:43 GMT -6
I think it would be acceptable for two people to use a superkick, provided there was a clear difference. As an example, if Purse uses the Spoke as an "out of nowhere" superkick, while Crow uses the Coma Kick as sort of a "called" finisher, like HBK striking up the band. The end result might be the same, but the differences should be enough. Or like the difference between the Liontamer and the Walls of Jericho, or the Sharpshooter and that terrible submission move the Rock does. I like the idea of protected finishers - gives it an air of a registered trademark - but I also don't want us to stifle people. Perhaps if a finisher is taken, and a new signee has used it for years also, would it not be all right to have the newb use a variant, rather than a whole new finisher? Can't use just a superkick? How about a vertical press into a superkick? Or a running superkick? Triple springboard 360 degree superkick? And now I've used that word so many times it has lost all meaning. Just like the move itself did in the previous fed. I think Jay makes a lot of great points here, I changed the Coma Kick into a "Trouble in Paradise" finisher when I joined because I knew the Superkick would eventually be taken. I think that's fine to do, Murder of Crows is the character's primary anyway. He does a curb stomp to, but there's a reason for that since it's a move shared by father and son. The point is, there can be exceptions as long as the reason is good enough. And variations should be excepted as separate moves as Jay suggested. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Cameron on May 12, 2016 11:56:37 GMT -6
SUPERKICK
SUPERKICK
SUPERKICK
SU
PER
KICK
|
|
