I get it, she’s in the game, and part of ep 8. I understand that we should be required to get her to 7*. But please, for the love of God, don’t make us gear her.
It’s not that I don’t like her kit. I’m sure I read it once, but I don’t even remember what her kit does. I, and I think most of the community, just flat don’t like her character.
If you are planning an event requiring resistance for ep 9, and Rose is to be a part of it, I make the following suggestion:
She does a stage with Finn.
She is required to be 7*
The AI always and exclusively targets Finn, no AOE.
Set up some parameters so that Finn must survive X amount of turns, even have the enemy grant a debuff capping speed so the stage turns into a complete gear check for Finn if you want.
When Rose finally gets a turn and Finn is still alive we use an event only ability called “Love Saves the Day lolz **** *shrug*” And you pass the stage.
Again, if you have any feelings for the community at all. The thought of gearing Rose almost makes me feel like I’m in the movie “Saw”.
The community says to quit speaking for us. Just say you don't like her, at least it sounds genuine. Once you (speak) for everyone, we know it's just you and your hangups. Thanks and good day.
I see what you mean. You saying you are speaking for the community doesn’t sound genuine at all!
Haha no I’m at that point by G8 I think!
Suddenly everyone has to Relic 4 a worthless character that literally nobody has up except those who A: really liked the character or B: powered her up on a whim, probably for the memes
I thought Rose made sense and I liked her. She has heard all the stories and considers the main characters to be heroes (she's basically us, the audience). She then finds out her heroes aren't exactly what she believes (similar to Rey with Luke, the theme is echoed by DJ on Canto Bight). Then at the end she realizes heroes can be heroic and also have flaws (similar to Rey with Luke again). She's basically our chance to put ourselves in the story.
I agree the Rey character development is lazy. They wanted to make sure everyone agrees that Rey > Luke, but they have yet to tell us why.
(Spoilers to follow) I don’t like the Rose character because she goes from “Sometimes die for what you believe in” to “live for love no matter what you believe in” (which was also really selfish on her part because she had no way to know if Finn felt the same way or not, yet she took his choice to sacrifice himself for the good of the cause from him).
I also hate that she thinks their mission was “worth it” because they freed some rabbit horses that will ultimately and easily be rounded up again. These people have mastered intergalactic space travel, they can round up some rabbit horses that got out of the pen. Han Solo rode his ton ton (spelling?) until it froze to death, then used it as a shelter to save just himself and his friend. Rose and Finn should have lead a stampede of rabbit horses who turned on their masters and were slaughtered all in the name of getting the codebreaker or something. Freeing the rabbit horses doesn’t make failing at your one chance to possibly save your cause and your friends lives. You may have got a consolation, you probably wasted a helpful resource and you should have focused on what was most important rather than getting distracted by the poor rabbit horses.
Maybe we need a trilogy that happens at the same time as episode 8, but breaks down all the off camera character developments so that we can “understand” episode 8 and it’s lunacy.
I thought that’s why we have heroes in movies. We can live vicariously through them. We can put ourselves in their shoes as they succeed or fail.
I don’t need a passive observer in a film to represent me. Watching someone watch things happen isn’t interesting unless we’re talking Mystery Science Theatre 3000. The character had all the personal development and purpose in the story of a doorknob.
How, exactly, was she a passive observer? Didn't she save Finn's life in the end? Was that while she was being passive?
I was responding to someone who said they liked having someone in the movie who watched actually important characters do things. And for they most part that poster is right. She’s meaningless to the plot.
However, you are also right that she takes bold action in the end to nearly get everyone killed trying to save a boy she met a couple of hours ago and kind of likes. And she would have succeeded in saving him long enough that the First Order could slaughter them all together if not for Luke stepping in to distract Kylo by committing suicide via meditating too hard.
It was Finn that said it was “worth it.” I watched that stupid movie twice to see if it would start growing on me. It was far worse the second time. But I agree with everything else you said here.
I think a better way to end episode 8 is after the rescue of rabbit horses and Finn telling Rose it was worth it to fail the resistance, the camera rotates up to space and we get to see the resistance fleet run out of fuel and then be blown up by the FO. Yea...totally worth running some rabbit horses through a few walls.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
I forgot that the gold standard for hating all women is not liking a single character portrayal in a single movie.
I also hate George Clooney’s portrayal of Batman. I guess that means I hate all men too.
Well, full disclosure, I 7* her long ago as I thought she might have been needed for a new FO legendary like hux or smoke. So now that I’ve wasted my energy and credits, i selfishly want everyone else to waste their energy and credits as well
hold on now, did Clooney play batman?!
Unfortunately yes. Quite a few years ago. I think the title was Batman Forever. It was such a steaming pile that it nearly killed the movie franchise.
here i am, still thinking ben affleck was a horrible fit. Needless to say i haven't seen the one with clooney.
I thought Affleck was a bad choice going in. Having seen it I would say HE was actually decent. It was everything else about the movie that was an abomination.
And as much as I hated Batman vs Superman (which I can assure you is a TON), it was Oscar-worthy compared to the Clooney Batman movie.
Edit: Correction. The one with Clooney isn’t Batman Forever. That was the one with Val Kilmer that was also pretty horrible. Clooney was in Batman and Robin in 1997. It currently has an 11% on Rotten Tomatoes. That seems high to me.
I'm not going to argue about your critique of her choices, that's not the point though to me. I don't like only characters who always do the "right" or "most logical" thing, meaning I don't have to agree with all character's choices to find him or her interesting. I think that as long as it fits the character (development) , controversial decisions are good for a complex and multilayered story. Plus, I love the older Star Wars books with all their little side stories about characters that never appeared in the main story arc, but had their own stories taking place somewhere in the galaxy. That's what makes the Star Wars universe so vivid imho.
"Batman & Robin" from 1997 (edit: just realized you already corrected it yourself) - one of those movies that were so bad that it made them already good again! Uma Thruman as Poison Ivy alone is worth watching it, always loved her in such crazy roles.