That’s not even about the masks. Its undoubtfully about the Hagah but it’s not about their masks or their significance after being canonized.
Also do I have to repeat the novella argument how people don’t actually read my posts and still argue with me over things I didn’t argue. I hope not because I’m not actually in the mode to write an electric boogaloo of that.
This was not an argument for the masks being pointless either. It was to provide an example of how Greg cannonizes these models. If he had canonized the shapes in any form my example would have fallen flat.
Rider wants to give the toy a robot arm with a built in canon weapon that we have no basis for. I mean by the presented logic I’ll give my Tuyet a barbed axe.
No, because ths bird can be ignored it. The Rhotuka is an item with an established significance to canon. The bird hammer does not.
Edit: The bird hammer will just become a hammer. The robotic arm with a rhotuka would still be a robotic arm with a rhotuka because a rhotuka exist in universe. Wholesomegadunka’s bird did not exist prior to the making of the weapon
This is a good point that I hadn’t even considered until now, though it connects to my point about the Launcher being part of her body, rather than a separate tool. Regardless of functionality, there’s no reason Lariska’s left arm can’t have the appearance of a Rhotuka Launcher.
It’s just a question of if the functionality would be canonized, and possibly whether or not the art would be allowed to show it (if the entry in question even wins, that is).
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We still don’t know if Lariska has a Rhotuka at all, or if her model will even be allowed to look like she does.
I see what you’re saying. I personally feel like that difference doesn’t really matter. There doesn’t seem to be much a delineation between “I think Artakha’s canon hammer transforms” and “I think Lariska’s arm might look like a Rhotuka launcher”, especially if neither would be canonized if they did win. At any rate, the model doesn’t even get canonized in the first place. The art does.
This. But, to answer your question, should a rhotuka-wielding Lariska win, and if that is canonized and added to the art, her power likely would not be canonized on top of that.
To be more succinct, I don’t see a meaningful difference between “Artakha’s hammer looks like a bird” and “Lariska’s arm looks like a Rhotuka launcher” if neither of them are canonized anyways.
You mentioned the masks. You said you hadn’t for a month. I posted evidence to the contrary.
I did read what you wrote, and I responded to it. Read what you posted again.
Nobody claimed it was, only that you let Gaaki live in your head rent-free to the tune of a low-quality rendition of Super Hey Ya! (Presumably, she’s also dancing, though one cannot say what dance she performs.)
he literally did
The rhotuka can be ignored, just don’t put it on the toy or use the play function. These are EXACTLY the same situation. There is no rational basis on which to treat them differently. Robot birds exist in canon, just like Rhotuka.
I will eventually follow the decision of the contest organizer. just I thought the combination of Hordika Arm and Rhotuka left arm was a pretty good concept, because since she appeared in 2005…Even if i can’t make a model using only ~2005 parts, I thought using 2005 toy playware could be a good design element for 2005 character.
I don’t think so. In many contests, additional backdoor functions were often excluded except for appearance.
Of course they shouldn’t. That’s a logical extreme, and logical extremes aren’t always practical.
A small detail like an arm design that resembles a canon weapon, a design that wouldn’t even be canonized, is significantly less … significant … than a secondary weapon.
The way I see it, these situations are different than the one being discussed here because they would involves completely separate weapons, while the Rhotuka Launcher in question is built into the character’s arm. The use of a build detail that resembles a previously-used function isn’t really comparable to a completely separate tool.
Now, actually canonizing the functionality of the Rhotuka spinner might be comparable to the inclusion of a second Toa Tool, but that’s not the primary discussion here: the question is whether or not @RiderBD 's Lariska may use Rhotuka Launcher parts, to which the answer should be “sure, but that doesn’t necessarily mean she actually has a Launcher”.
EDIT: I see now that this is more or less what you’re already saying:
I think, given the discussion here, there will probably be an explicit ruling on the topic by the time Lariska comes around. We’d best just wait and see.
Please correct me if I’m wrong @RiderBD your intent with adding the rhotuka was for Lariska to have a Rhotuka and not just there to facilitate the arm construction?
I think you’re missing the point. He can use it and have the intent of it being a rhotuka.
But if it wins Greg can still say “no she doesn’t have a rhotuka” and then suddenly its not a rhotuka and just part of the arm design.