>Do you really not see how making Ash in a summon battle harder to kill than Kyousuke on the grounds of being way easier to kill in reality is blatant favouritism?
No because it's not favoritism. Defeat Ash by taking away his means of fighting. The pokemon who are actually being compared to the opponent.
>Summoners often being glass canons is their fault and I'm against giving them invincible rule shields to act like Ash survives the planet being nuked into oblivion.
Planet nuking is a false equivalance DontTalk. Because the opponent wouldnt be specifically targetting ash. If the environment gets nuked mid battle, Ash would most certainly be able to be targetted by it, and for obvious reasons. Ash would just happen to die, not because the opponent intended to do that.
What im saying im against is the opponent specifically targetting JUST ash/Yugi/Gingka/Tamer and avoidning the summons all together in order to win.
>A weak character fighting a glass canon can be a fair fight. Lu-Niang Lan is a very accomplished fighter in a verse swarming with summoners that summon beings far above her paygrade. Her fighting a summoner is a viable fight.
This isn't the issue im targetting here DontTalk. If the summoners themselves are fighting each other, thats completely fair. Like if Ash and Tai from Digimon went head to head without their summons. Thats fine.
Again, im talking about if an opponent completely ignores the summons and goes specifically JUST for the summoner in order to win.
>We have hundreds of glass canons on this page and this is no different. Heck, summoners are in a much better situation then most glass canons, since summoners can at least use their summons as shields.
It is different because in the case of those glass canons, they still have stats/abilities that are still considered that tier. For example, someone whos 2-A in AP but has Low 2-C durability. The AP still makes it fair for them to compare to another 2-A, so the match is fair.
In this case, we're talking about a summoner whos beyond a glass canon. They dont have any relevant stat in any way outside of what their summons have. Nothing they have, as individuals, compares to the opponent. So why make them involved as targets?
>Wrong. Remember what a shadow pokemon is? Literally designed to attack humans and does in fact also do so mid-battle.
Shadow Pokemon im not too heavily experienced with, which is why I wouldnt have remembered that. My overall point still stands tho. It's not a universal thing that happens in Pokemon in general.
>Expecting characters from other verses to use worse strategies than they usually do, just so that some summoners don't have to step out of their comfort zone is favouritism.
Again, we can apply this argument to characters purposely choosing to not use an ability that would save them all because of in-character morals. And it would be treated like crap if we did.
It's not favourtism, it's for the sake of a battle. And if they have to target the weak link at all, they were never good enough to face their summons in the first place.
>And we don't put morals higher than fighting for survival, we put realism higher than fighting for survival. We make characters act the way they realistically do in their own verse. So, for example Ash will not start attacking humans. Not because he has morals, but because he usually doesn't attack humans.
Which is, again, the characters morals of what they do from their respective universes. Hence why in-character is always automatically assumed first unless someone specifically makes a match bloodlusted. Ash for instance not attacking a human is a moral for him because its not in character for him to do that. So if realism as you say has higher priority, why wouldnt Ash do that if it means saving his life?
Same thing if, for instance, Katara deciding not to use Bloodbending to save her from dying in a match?
>That is giving them an invincible shield. Or how else do you plan the summoners not dying by the shockwave of the fights any much higher tiered fighter produces?
See my 2nd paragraph for this.