Multifandom debate tournament
Nov. 28th, 2012 05:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
schneefinkI wonder who would win if characters from my various fandoms entered a debate tournament...
Eight teams for two semi-finals: Jennifer Keller and Radek Zelenka (SGA), Azula and Mai (A:tla), Sophie Devereaux and Nate Ford (Leverage), Luke Smith and Rani Chandra (SJA), Neal Caffrey and Elizabeth Burke (White Collar), Treize Kushrenada and Dorothy Catalonia (Gundam Wing), Natasha Romanoff and Bruce Banner (Avengers), Charlotte Lu and Mary Bennet (LBD)
SGA: All of the main characters except John and Carson would be interested in trying if it's sold well (Rodney only if Sam also competes.) Teyla, Ronon, and Elizabeth are decent, but it's difficult for them to deal with opinions that seem obviously morally wrong, especially if they have to defend them. Sam too, to a lesser degree. Rodney would quickly find the structure boring and too confining. Woolsey would probably find it very difficult to balance principles and mechanism. Jennifer is very good for a novice: she is first mentored by Elizabeth, but then becomes better than her. After her initial skepticism she becomes good at thinking in different directions and building the arguments, even though she always stays a bit hesitant. Radek is good at taking her ideas and leading them to their conclusions.
A:tla: None of the Gaang would be good at it. Sokka would have good ideas, but no structure, and none of the others would be happy with arguing for the "wrong" side.
Azula would be brilliant at it. Her POIs are especially feared. She's frustrated that she doesn't have a partner as good as her, so she likes Ironman tournaments (one person is one team.) If she does need a partner, Mai will do: good with mechanism and rebuttals, and she delivers Azula's POIs because nobody ever takes Azula.
Leverage: Forget Eliot, Parker, or Hardison: Sophie and Nate would make a great team. Sophie would be a spectacular prime minister, and Nate is especially good at summation speeches. They don't go to tournaments often because Sophie gets bored when the competition isn't good.
One Piece: Hm, many of them would either be too unstructured or dislike arguing against their opinion. Or wouldn't be interested, except maybe as a training exercise? Many teams would be fun, if not particularly good. Maybe Nami and Tashigi? ;)
Doctor Who/SJA: Not the Doctor, and many Companions would be too idealistic as well. After a few weeks of listening and understanding how it works and what is "allowed" Luke would probably really good at it, especially with Rani to help him. Rani would probably enjoy it very much and talk to poor Clyde about the debates at length. Clyde doesn't mind once he finds out she doesn't really expect him to listen. Sarah Jane is very proud of them and they regularly keep talking about the debate motions over dinner.
White Collar: Neal and Elizabeth, obviously. With a bit of practice they'd compliment each other very well. Neal has a way with words and finds it easy to explore different views, and Elizabeth has good ideas and brings them across well. Neither of them is great at summarizing and they flip coins who can do the extension when they're second half.
Gundam Wing: If it were a mission, Trowa and Heero might actually become good at it. Treize would be great at it, but I don't think Une would be very good (the Colonel doesn't like justifying her arguments and the Lady often doesn't hammer the point home.) He could partner with Dorothy, that might work well for a while until she gets tired of being mentored and wants her own partner, even though she knows she still needs a lot of practice. She tries to train Relena, but Relena doesn't take it seriously enough. I think Sally would be good at it! But I doubt Dorothy and her would work well together in the long term. Sally and Noin could compete together, but Noin's performance probably depends a lot on the motion and side so they're good, but not consistent.
Discworld: Lord Vetinari, obviously. Many others wouldn't see the point in it, like Granny or Susan or Vimes. Neither would Vetinari, to be honest, but if it's a good tournament and/or a politically important competition he might take part. Now someone who would compete with him... It would be hilarious if it were Ponder Stibbons *g* Sacharissa (the journalist from The Truth) maybe, though it's been a while since I read the book.
Good Omens: Crowley would find it hilarious, and he would absolutely cheat to win. He would try to get Aziraphale to play with him, but Aziraphale doesn't really understand the game. Crowley would simply make everyone think that he is actually two players and find it hilarious to mess with everyone by "proving" outrageous claims.
The Avengers: Fury wouldn't like letting others see how he approaches a problem. Maria claims to find it pointless, but secretly she would like the challenge but doesn't want to lose publicly. Coulson sees no need for it. Natasha competes because she finds out who else is at that tournament. Her approach to a problem sometimes seems strange to people, but she has Bruce to help her with the moral side of it and she helps him with structure. I'm not sure about Pepper, I think she would find the game too frustrating when the other side is weak. She could be good, but I don't think she and Natasha would be a good team because their style is probably similar.
Homestuck: too many characters! Or not. Rose might do it for fun, but not for long, and she could probably get Kanaya to try it, but being alien and having a completely different moral framework makes it difficult. Maybe Dirk? Idk, I don't know the new kids that well. Not sure how well they would work together, some of their ideas would probably come across as strange. I don't think they would be good for a long time, but for some rounds, sure, why not.
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries: Charlotte: structured, speaks clearly, has ideas. Lizzie might become okay, if she has training, but if she does depends on how their debate club is. Jane is too nice, Lydia too chaotic, Bing is too polite... Darcy might become okay, with some training, but I can't really see him do it. Caroline thinks she's good, but she's average at best, rarely enough analysis. How about Mary? At first she finds it difficult to speak in front of a crowd, but Lydia encourages her because she somehow gets the idea that it would be really good for her cousin. Lydia brings Mary and Charlotte together, and Charlotte, who is looking for a good partner, agrees to mentor Mary in the meantime. Mary turns out to be good at poking holes into arguments and gets good at structure. Their team is probably among the weakest I listed here, but they do okay.
Who wins? Not sure, but I would bet on Sophie and Nate.
Eight teams for two semi-finals: Jennifer Keller and Radek Zelenka (SGA), Azula and Mai (A:tla), Sophie Devereaux and Nate Ford (Leverage), Luke Smith and Rani Chandra (SJA), Neal Caffrey and Elizabeth Burke (White Collar), Treize Kushrenada and Dorothy Catalonia (Gundam Wing), Natasha Romanoff and Bruce Banner (Avengers), Charlotte Lu and Mary Bennet (LBD)
SGA: All of the main characters except John and Carson would be interested in trying if it's sold well (Rodney only if Sam also competes.) Teyla, Ronon, and Elizabeth are decent, but it's difficult for them to deal with opinions that seem obviously morally wrong, especially if they have to defend them. Sam too, to a lesser degree. Rodney would quickly find the structure boring and too confining. Woolsey would probably find it very difficult to balance principles and mechanism. Jennifer is very good for a novice: she is first mentored by Elizabeth, but then becomes better than her. After her initial skepticism she becomes good at thinking in different directions and building the arguments, even though she always stays a bit hesitant. Radek is good at taking her ideas and leading them to their conclusions.
A:tla: None of the Gaang would be good at it. Sokka would have good ideas, but no structure, and none of the others would be happy with arguing for the "wrong" side.
Azula would be brilliant at it. Her POIs are especially feared. She's frustrated that she doesn't have a partner as good as her, so she likes Ironman tournaments (one person is one team.) If she does need a partner, Mai will do: good with mechanism and rebuttals, and she delivers Azula's POIs because nobody ever takes Azula.
Leverage: Forget Eliot, Parker, or Hardison: Sophie and Nate would make a great team. Sophie would be a spectacular prime minister, and Nate is especially good at summation speeches. They don't go to tournaments often because Sophie gets bored when the competition isn't good.
One Piece: Hm, many of them would either be too unstructured or dislike arguing against their opinion. Or wouldn't be interested, except maybe as a training exercise? Many teams would be fun, if not particularly good. Maybe Nami and Tashigi? ;)
Doctor Who/SJA: Not the Doctor, and many Companions would be too idealistic as well. After a few weeks of listening and understanding how it works and what is "allowed" Luke would probably really good at it, especially with Rani to help him. Rani would probably enjoy it very much and talk to poor Clyde about the debates at length. Clyde doesn't mind once he finds out she doesn't really expect him to listen. Sarah Jane is very proud of them and they regularly keep talking about the debate motions over dinner.
White Collar: Neal and Elizabeth, obviously. With a bit of practice they'd compliment each other very well. Neal has a way with words and finds it easy to explore different views, and Elizabeth has good ideas and brings them across well. Neither of them is great at summarizing and they flip coins who can do the extension when they're second half.
Gundam Wing: If it were a mission, Trowa and Heero might actually become good at it. Treize would be great at it, but I don't think Une would be very good (the Colonel doesn't like justifying her arguments and the Lady often doesn't hammer the point home.) He could partner with Dorothy, that might work well for a while until she gets tired of being mentored and wants her own partner, even though she knows she still needs a lot of practice. She tries to train Relena, but Relena doesn't take it seriously enough. I think Sally would be good at it! But I doubt Dorothy and her would work well together in the long term. Sally and Noin could compete together, but Noin's performance probably depends a lot on the motion and side so they're good, but not consistent.
Discworld: Lord Vetinari, obviously. Many others wouldn't see the point in it, like Granny or Susan or Vimes. Neither would Vetinari, to be honest, but if it's a good tournament and/or a politically important competition he might take part. Now someone who would compete with him... It would be hilarious if it were Ponder Stibbons *g* Sacharissa (the journalist from The Truth) maybe, though it's been a while since I read the book.
Good Omens: Crowley would find it hilarious, and he would absolutely cheat to win. He would try to get Aziraphale to play with him, but Aziraphale doesn't really understand the game. Crowley would simply make everyone think that he is actually two players and find it hilarious to mess with everyone by "proving" outrageous claims.
The Avengers: Fury wouldn't like letting others see how he approaches a problem. Maria claims to find it pointless, but secretly she would like the challenge but doesn't want to lose publicly. Coulson sees no need for it. Natasha competes because she finds out who else is at that tournament. Her approach to a problem sometimes seems strange to people, but she has Bruce to help her with the moral side of it and she helps him with structure. I'm not sure about Pepper, I think she would find the game too frustrating when the other side is weak. She could be good, but I don't think she and Natasha would be a good team because their style is probably similar.
Homestuck: too many characters! Or not. Rose might do it for fun, but not for long, and she could probably get Kanaya to try it, but being alien and having a completely different moral framework makes it difficult. Maybe Dirk? Idk, I don't know the new kids that well. Not sure how well they would work together, some of their ideas would probably come across as strange. I don't think they would be good for a long time, but for some rounds, sure, why not.
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries: Charlotte: structured, speaks clearly, has ideas. Lizzie might become okay, if she has training, but if she does depends on how their debate club is. Jane is too nice, Lydia too chaotic, Bing is too polite... Darcy might become okay, with some training, but I can't really see him do it. Caroline thinks she's good, but she's average at best, rarely enough analysis. How about Mary? At first she finds it difficult to speak in front of a crowd, but Lydia encourages her because she somehow gets the idea that it would be really good for her cousin. Lydia brings Mary and Charlotte together, and Charlotte, who is looking for a good partner, agrees to mentor Mary in the meantime. Mary turns out to be good at poking holes into arguments and gets good at structure. Their team is probably among the weakest I listed here, but they do okay.
Who wins? Not sure, but I would bet on Sophie and Nate.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-11-28 06:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-28 11:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-29 04:38 pm (UTC)You know, it wouldn't be the first time either team had infiltrated a school because of plot reasons, so I can totally see that face off.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-29 05:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-28 11:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-28 11:26 pm (UTC)