PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying Infinity gauntlet question in DnD terms [spoilers]



Pinjata
2019-04-30, 07:00 PM
-If equipped to a mortal, even when harnessed in a gauntlet, Infinity stones fry him instantly
-Hulk, a goddamn epic level Barbarian is taking massive damage and long-lasting debuffs just from attaching it
-Somehow, our lvl 10 human Tinkerer is able to EQUIP it, without being turned to ash instantly

Explain this to me, please.

tyckspoon
2019-04-30, 07:07 PM
Iron Man's armor pretty consistently takes damage on his behalf, and it has to be almost completely destroyed before it starts carrying through to Tony inside. So the armor suffered most of the damage until Tony actually activated the gems, at which point the surge just blew through the armor and killed him (but with enough time left over for heartfelt dramatic goodbyes, because the Stones have a sense of story.)

Pinjata
2019-04-30, 07:13 PM
Why didn't they dress up Hulk in one of those big armors, then, when he was using the gauntlet? I think (don't know) that armor should have pretty much zero effect on gamma radiation in this case.

Pleh
2019-04-30, 09:41 PM
If a mortal touches the stones directly, they get fried. The gauntlet provides limited protection from direct exposure.

If Hulk's arm was destroyed by *wearing* the gauntlet, he wouldn't have been able to snap his fingers. His arm was destroyed by the snap he performed, which released the active power of the stones, rather than just their ambient energy.

Tony was probably getting radiation poisoning just from wearing the gauntlet, but he was shielded enough to not instantly explode.

Also, I'm pretty sure Tony is more than just level 10.

Hulk also has Damage Resistance to Radiant Damage, which is the gauntlet's damage type. Tony got the full dose, so it killed him.

Lalliman
2019-05-01, 12:29 AM
Also, Tony used the gauntlet to erase Thanos and his army. Hulk used it to resurrect half the universe. It's like a 10th level spell vs an 18th level spell.

kinglinus1
2019-05-01, 08:39 AM
-If equipped to a mortal, even when harnessed in a gauntlet, Infinity stones fry him instantly
-Hulk, a goddamn epic level Barbarian is taking massive damage and long-lasting debuffs just from attaching it
-Somehow, our lvl 10 human Tinkerer is able to EQUIP it, without being turned to ash instantly

Explain this to me, please.

Iron man Snapped, and half of Iron_Man disappeared.

Kaptin Keen
2019-05-01, 10:06 AM
I think a better question is: How did the stones just magically socket into the Iron Man suit's gauntlet? Did Tony Stark design it with sockets, just because ... who knows, maybe one day they'll come in handy?! oO

Pinjata
2019-05-01, 11:18 AM
Hulk was taking massive damage just from wearing the gauntlet. That is my problem. It should kill mere mortal instantly. Armor debuffing the damage is an interesting theory, I must admit. Also it's true Stark was not in direct contact with infinity stone.

VelociRapture12
2019-05-01, 11:51 AM
I think a better question is: How did the stones just magically socket into the Iron Man suit's gauntlet? Did Tony Stark design it with sockets, just because ... who knows, maybe one day they'll come in handy?! oO

I seem to remember it saying somewhere, that the Iron Man suit he was using was super adaptable, to the point that if he has seen the designs for it or made the object before that he can recreate it with his suit. Its the reason that he has all of those different types of blasters and shields at his disposal.

Gallowglass
2019-05-01, 12:46 PM
first, before this movie...

Thanos realizes that using the stones together is inherently dangerous. Has the universes best weapon smiths forge a guantlet that, alone and uniquely, can allow the user to "safely" use the stones together.

Thanos dons the gauntlet with the socketed stones and is okay besides a little discomfort. This is due to the special gauntlet design.

Thanos snaps the gauntlet, activating the stones together and severely damages himself. But the gauntlet at least lets him survive.

Thanos, 21ish days later, snaps the gauntlet again, and this time destroys the stones, destroys the gauntlet and permanently scars himself.

later, the heroes, who are NOT the universe's best weapon smiths, forge a different gauntlet based on what they have learned and gleaned from the first gauntlet. When hulk dons this gauntlet it causes some damage and severe discomfort. This jives with their gauntlet being inferior to the original gauntlet. When hulk activates the stones, he severely damages and permanently scars himself.

later, iron man grabs the stones with his nanotech swarm that forms his advanced armor. The nanotech swarm forms a new gauntlet based on Tony's conscious and unconscious design. Obviously, on some unconscious level, Tony is making on-the-fly improvements over the heroes' gauntlet that damaged the hulk. He no sooner forms the gauntlet, thus creating the matrix that combines the stones, than he activates it. Before it can start causing discomfort. When he activates it, he severely damages and kills himself.

Seems internally consistent to me.

Grod_The_Giant
2019-05-01, 01:19 PM
Iron Man was the MCU's big gun. He beat the Hulk in a head-to-head fight in Avengers 2, and his armor has only gotten more overpowered since then. At the same time, it wasn't the classic Hulk using the Gauntlet-- it was the Professor Hulk, who's physically weaker than the "HULK SMASH" version. So... yeah. You also have to figure that raw willpower plays a part in it too, and I'm willing to bet that Endgame-era Tony has a lot more of that than Banner.

Also, there seems to be a difference between just holding the stones and powering them up. Tony died more-or-less right after activating them for the first and only time.

Also, it's a movie based on comics, neither of which map at all well to D&D rules.

Pinjata
2019-05-01, 01:53 PM
Last two answers are splendid and really explain things well. Just one thing I missed: How much time did Stark have to build an improved gauntlet? The one he attached stones to in final battle?

Man_Over_Game
2019-05-01, 01:58 PM
Last two answers are splendid and really explain things well. Just one thing I missed: How much time did Stark have to build an improved gauntlet? The one he attached stones to in final battle?

About a minute or so. He likely came up with the idea mid-fight, and for all we know, he was creating it while Dr. Strange was telling him to wait. If I remember correctly, you didn't get a good look at his hands or anything.

I have a theory that if Dr. Strange didn't tell him to wait, he would have dashed towards Thanos, got 4 of the 5 stones, get mulched by Thano's Power Stone, and everyone would have lost. Waiting meant that Thanos would try again to snap, as opposed to being interrupted before moving the stone back into the gauntlet. Just a guess I've been considering. That split second that Strange told Tony to wait for was important enough for Strange to make sure it happened, and I don't really see too many other reasons why.

Gallowglass
2019-05-01, 02:15 PM
He had almost no time, but remember, Stark is wearing his nano-tech armor that constantly rebuilds itself based on his conscious, and subconscious design specs. He thinks "I need something to catch lightning, focus it, and turn it into energy blasts" and his amazing mind sub-consciously feeds the design to the nano-swarm that makes it as fast as he can imagine it.

So he literally leaps on Thanos, rips the gems out, his nano-swarm absorbs them, and as he's knocked back, in the few seconds Thanos gloats before realizing he doesn't have the gems anymore, Tony's mind is thinking "okay, I need a gauntlet to bind them together, and it has to work better than the last one, which I helped build and I've subconsciously been processing how to make it better since I saw Hulk get pwned by it so add in some additional power dampeners, or someway to shunt off the excess energy..." and its being build for him as the speed of his prodigious imagination.

Grod_The_Giant
2019-05-01, 02:46 PM
Last two answers are splendid and really explain things well. Just one thing I missed: How much time did Stark have to build an improved gauntlet? The one he attached stones to in final battle?
Take your pick.
A) He's already got the design from the previous attempt
B) There's nothing fancy to design, he just made a couple sockets
C) Something something bull**** nanotech space-magic suit

Vogie
2019-05-01, 03:05 PM
Last two answers are splendid and really explain things well. Just one thing I missed: How much time did Stark have to build an improved gauntlet? The one he attached stones to in final battle?

He has a TON of random Iron Man stuff around, which were repurposed for the gauntlet. Knowing Stark in general works with contingencies in mind, he likely had a subroutine in place to move the stones from one gauntlet to another piece of Stark Tech - originally in case it started overloading, probably. He doesn't create a new gauntlet to steal the stones from Thanos, he simply moves them onto his suit's existing gauntlet.

And the only stones we know that actually harms people is the Power and Reality Stones, as seen in GotG & TtDW. Red Skull & Fury handled the Tesseract, although the former was "considered unworthy". The mind, time and soul stones don't seem to have any effect on those who handle them, from what we see in the other films.

Quertus
2019-05-01, 04:47 PM
And the only stones we know that actually harms people is the Power and Reality Stones, as seen in GotG & TtDW. Red Skull & Fury handled the Tesseract, although the former was "considered unworthy". The mind, time and soul stones don't seem to have any effect on those who handle them, from what we see in the other films.

Curiously, in the comics, the Power stone actually regenerated its bearer, whereas it was the Soul stone that was dangerous.

Max_Killjoy
2019-05-01, 07:40 PM
Also, it's a movie based on comics, neither of which map at all well to D&D rules.


THIS.

D&D is for playing D&D, it's its own genre at this point.

It is not for trying to map movies, or comics, or anything else, unless they're also D&D-based.

Quertus
2019-05-01, 09:14 PM
he was creating it while Dr. Strange was telling him to wait.

You interpreted that scene differently than I did. I didn't see that as "wait", but as "one".

Mark Hall
2019-05-01, 09:55 PM
It is an artifact. The rules which govern them are, in every edition, weird.

For example, the Gauntlet could have been based on Ego. In that case, while Bruce and Tony have similar intelligences and wisdoms, Tony's higher Charisma and level (he's had 3 movies, plus numerous cameos, while Bruce has been specifically avoiding experience) would enable him to more effectively gain control of the artifact, avoiding much of the damage.

KillianHawkeye
2019-05-01, 11:35 PM
I think that I have to challenge the assertion that Tony Stark is not one of the universe's best weaponsmiths. He's a genius inventor who casually figured out time travel in a cave, with a box of scraps! between dinner and bed time, and most of his inventions are weapons or weaponized power suits.

Galithar
2019-05-02, 02:33 AM
You interpreted that scene differently than I did. I didn't see that as "wait", but as "one".

Agreed. That was Dr. Strange telling Tony that this was the one. That was his 'We did it' because he knew Stark wouldn't be around for him to say it later.

Pleh
2019-05-02, 05:47 PM
Agreed. That was Dr. Strange telling Tony that this was the one. That was his 'We did it' because he knew Stark wouldn't be around for him to say it later.

Further, it was a warning that they weren't there yet. Tony looked like he wasn't sure if he should and Strange was telling him this was it. There was no other way.

Man_Over_Game
2019-05-02, 05:54 PM
Agreed. That was Dr. Strange telling Tony that this was the one. That was his 'We did it' because he knew Stark wouldn't be around for him to say it later.

My wife and I are actually started debating this within the hour of having watched the movie. We've even looked to see how many people agree with whom.

She agrees with you, but I'm still convinced otherwise. 1 indicating the perfect universe is a lot less intuitive than the universal sign of "Wait one second". Note that Thanos did not recollect the stones into the gauntlet until he thought he had a chance to snap, which gave Tony the opening he needed. It would have made a lot more sense for Tony to swarm Thanos while he was distacted with Marvel, rather than guessing that Thanos would be vulnerable AFTER recovering.

Jay R
2019-05-03, 08:07 AM
-Hulk, a goddamn epic level Barbarian ...

The Hulk is not an epic level Barbarian. He is a high-level scientist with a recurring Baleful Polymorph curse.

Gallowglass
2019-05-03, 10:09 AM
I think that I have to challenge the assertion that Tony Stark is not one of the universe's best weaponsmiths. He's a genius inventor who casually figured out time travel in a cave, with a box of scraps! between dinner and bed time, and most of his inventions are weapons or weaponized power suits.

point the first: Hank Pym invented Time Travel. Tony took that and improved on it by adding a GPS function. Like a good engineer. I don't see how anyone could look at the movies and not think "Hank Pym is smarter than Tony." A worse engineer absolutely, but better theoretician.

point the second: per Rocket: "careful. you're smart... for earth." The universe is vast. Could tony make Mjolinor? No.

That being said, I agree. It's Tony's sublime genius that allows him to modify his nanoswarm to let him build the third gauntlet that keeps him alive long enough to snap his fingers (and have some heartfelt goodbye scenes)

Mark Hall
2019-05-03, 10:15 AM
The Hulk is not an epic level Barbarian. He is a high-level scientist with a recurring Baleful Polymorph curse.

Really, it functions more like lycanthropy, but with a trigger of anger, rather than phases of the moon. In Avengers (well, end of Hulk, really), we see that he's beginning to get a hold on it. The strength of that hold varies over time, but I think lycanthropy remains a better good analogy... he hulks out and he gets modifications to his physical form and attributes. As he learns greater control, he's able to direct the were-form to a greater degree.

Galithar
2019-05-04, 12:32 AM
Really, it functions more like lycanthropy, but with a trigger of anger, rather than phases of the moon. In Avengers (well, end of Hulk, really), we see that he's beginning to get a hold on it. The strength of that hold varies over time, but I think lycanthropy remains a better good analogy... he hulks out and he gets modifications to his physical form and attributes. As he learns greater control, he's able to direct the were-form to a greater degree.

And he finally mastered the hybrid form for End Game! Lol

The Mod Wonder: Spoilers, dude

I agree that it's a better analogy. Gamma Wave Lycanthropy is how I shall refer to The Hulks condition from now on.

Pleh
2019-05-04, 08:15 AM
Could tony make Mjolinor?

He recreated the gauntlet, which had previous only been crafted by the dwarves. I have no doubt he could create something similar to Mjolnir, as it's basically a rocket hammer with AI support.

HunterOfJello
2019-05-04, 05:25 PM
Tony using his magical nanotech could also have made it so that his new gauntlet did not count as "equipped" until a nanosecond before the snap.

noob
2019-05-04, 06:23 PM
In dnd physics the infinity stones are probably artefacts and the infinity gauntlet is just a wondrous item with travel through time, time stop, wish, miracle and gate all at will(possibly shapechange too) as well as an intelligent item.
Then the intelligent item agree to use those powers only if it is toward a specific purpose and only if it is carrying around infinity stones and makes the wearer suffer proportionally (even through its power are not dependant on the infinity stones)

Pinjata
2019-05-06, 05:35 AM
Great thinking, guys. In order for me to not open another thread, I have another question.

So ... Soul stone scene. Again, I was watching this through DM's eyes. Rules were quite adamantly written in avengers 1: one character must amass the willpower to kill someone, dear to him/her. No way around it. If my PCs were doing it, what Black Widow and Hawkeye were doing, I'd have Red Skull say: Guys, it is pointless. One of you needs to will the other to die and kill him/her.

Also, it needs to be someone special. For you, Hawkeye, it is your wife or one of your children, for you, Black Widow, it is ... i dunno? No one?

The life stone scene just seemed ... breaking the preestablished rules. What do you think?

Frozen_Feet
2019-05-06, 06:36 AM
It didn't break the rules at all.

For one of the persons involved, the other was their best friend, who saved them from darkness and who they were trying to save from darkness in turn.

For the second person involved, the other is basically a sibling at this point, someone they named one of their kids after and the last living member of their family.

Through the movie, no other living people are shown to be this important to them.

Seeing & accepting the other's death counts as symbolically sacrificing not just that person, but also their idea of that person and their opinion of themselves.

I mean, it's the Soul stone, I except the psychological / spiritual level to be more important than who pushed who off a cliff. :smallwink:

Pleh
2019-05-06, 06:41 AM
Great thinking, guys. In order for me to not open another thread, I have another question.

So ... Soul stone scene. Again, I was watching this through DM's eyes. Rules were quite adamantly written in avengers 1: one character must amass the willpower to kill someone, dear to him/her. No way around it. If my PCs were doing it, what Black Widow and Hawkeye were doing, I'd have Red Skull say: Guys, it is pointless. One of you needs to will the other to die and kill him/her.

Also, it needs to be someone special. For you, Hawkeye, it is your wife or one of your children, for you, Black Widow, it is ... i dunno? No one?

The life stone scene just seemed ... breaking the preestablished rules. What do you think?

Pretty sure Red Skull made it clear that you must lose someone you love, that it's more the loss that is the condition than killing them yourself, and that you have to not want to lose that person. The Soul Stone wants to make sure you appreciate the terrible capabilities of its power by taking the soul of someone you truly love. It's less about seeing you demonstrate willpower and more about seeing you demonstrate true concern for other souls.

Imbalance
2019-05-06, 07:11 AM
Have you ever, like, read a comicbook?

Pinjata
2019-05-06, 07:21 AM
Have you ever, like, read a comicbook?

Nope, just saw the movies. But again, this is IMO gretly explained by Frozen_Feet and Imbalance.

Vogie
2019-05-06, 11:17 AM
In dnd physics the infinity stones are probably artefacts and the infinity gauntlet is just a wondrous item with travel through time, time stop, wish, miracle and gate all at will(possibly shapechange too) as well as an intelligent item.
Then the intelligent item agree to use those powers only if it is toward a specific purpose and only if it is carrying around infinity stones and makes the wearer suffer proportionally (even through its power are not dependant on the infinity stones)

Not necessarily. The stones themselves are the artifacts providing the various powers, and the gauntlet is an item that allows the wielder to simultaneously attune to all 6 artifacts, and combine all of their powers into a single massive Wish... without the stones, it's just a fancy glove. There'd also be a moment whenever any number of them are combined that stuns the wielder.

The Time Stone provides Time Stop, and minor time travelling abilities, but are limited by the intelligence of the wielder - You see the other sorcerers terrified of potential time loops or time-based shenanigans. In Doctor Strange, the Ancient One basically only uses it to channel power from the timeless Dark Dimension to essentially make her ageless as well.
The Space Stone provides raw ambient power (which can be tinkered into weaponry) as well as an at-will Gate, which is limited by the ability of the wielder to focus on what they really want. The reason that Red Skull was teleported from Earth to Vormir in the First Avenger was because of his ambition - he wanted "the power of the gods", then grabbed the Tesseract/Space Stone... so it complied, even if he couldn't use it. When Loki focused his minions to bring in the Chitauri forces, it opened up the portal to them.
The Mind Stone is an intelligent item in itself, but is limited by what it is bound to - if bound to a weapon, it's a weapon; if bound to an intelligence, it absorbs that intelligence; placing it on a construct, it takes over the form. It would provide a collection of Enchantment-based spell powers (we see no-concentration, multitarget Dominate Person and Command effects). I've heard a theory that I like that the Mind Stone, originally held by Thanos, was the origin of his desire to create balance via genocide.
The Power Stone contains raw destructive power. However, it has a very short range, requires the Strength and Constitution to wield and seems to require the bearer to have tunnel vision towards their goal - if someone doesn't have the stats to wield it, like the Collector's assistant, they'd be destroyed by its power. It would provide the strongest of the Evocation and similar spells, such as Disintegrate & Shield, alongside a immunity to minor damage, and resistance to major damage.
The Reality Stone would act largely like a god-level illusion/transmutation wizard - creation of things from nothing, no-concentration illusions that can be manipulated and made real, greater invisibility, and polymorphing multiple targets at incredible speed. However, it is very taxing to the wielder, and seems to require the bearer's sight to control - as soon as they aren't regarding the area, the new reality leaves with them. We see this in The Dark World, where Malekith has a very small (once per 5000 years) window to use it to impose his will on the universe based on the Convergence of the Realms making all 9 of them close enough together for wormholes to open in-between them, which would allow him to see & use the Aether on all of them, simultaneously.
The Soul Stone is the one we know the least about, but know it has certain capabilities - We see in Infinity War that it can locate souls, augments weaponry to hit the spirit form of targets, can heal the wielder, can be used to speak with the dead with no limitations inside its pocket demiplane, referred to as Soulworld. It also has a cost, as it can only be wielded by those who have sacrificed whom they love before it will even appear.
The limitations and gates of the various stones can be augmented by combining them with the others... but using them all in concert with each other makes the bearer take the brunt of all of their taxing in the same instant.

Segev
2019-05-06, 11:32 AM
What bugs me about the Gauntlet killing its wielders is that, if you're able to survive long enough to make even one use of it, you shouldn't have a problem. Use #1: Transform yourself into a creature able to withstand it. Given its infinite power, a creature that looks and functions just like you did before (possibly with a more idealized body, if you feel like it) but is, like Starlord but moreso, able to safely use the Infinity Gauntlet without harm. Sure, you just burned off your arm in the process of putting it right back and making yourself physically perfect, but the end result is physical, mental, and spiritual perfection (or at least immense fortitude) sufficient to control the thing.

Use #2: Go back in time to the moment before use #1 and do whatever it was you were going to "snap" to accomplish, so that nobody can take advantage of that time gap.

Use #3: Go back in time again, if needs be, to make sure you're bodyguarding yourself for uses #1 and #2.

I get the need for drama, but the Infinitey Gauntlet is actually too powerful to have a drawback greater than the Soul Stone's own. Add a drawback like that for gathering the others, perhaps, and each is irreversible, but the idea that it's too dangerous to use when it's a literal reality-warping do-anything MacGuffin is demonstrating a lack of imagination.

That said, "I am Iron Man," is a remarkably badass line in that context.

Also, managing to make "Hail Hydra" not one of the dumbest plot twists ever, is also genius writing. I'm almost disappointed they didn't put that in a trailer without context.

noob
2019-05-06, 12:50 PM
What bugs me about the Gauntlet killing its wielders is that, if you're able to survive long enough to make even one use of it, you shouldn't have a problem. Use #1: Transform yourself into a creature able to withstand it. Given its infinite power, a creature that looks and functions just like you did before (possibly with a more idealized body, if you feel like it) but is, like Starlord but moreso, able to safely use the Infinity Gauntlet without harm. Sure, you just burned off your arm in the process of putting it right back and making yourself physically perfect, but the end result is physical, mental, and spiritual perfection (or at least immense fortitude) sufficient to control the thing.

Use #2: Go back in time to the moment before use #1 and do whatever it was you were going to "snap" to accomplish, so that nobody can take advantage of that time gap.

Use #3: Go back in time again, if needs be, to make sure you're bodyguarding yourself for uses #1 and #2.

I get the need for drama, but the Infinitey Gauntlet is actually too powerful to have a drawback greater than the Soul Stone's own. Add a drawback like that for gathering the others, perhaps, and each is irreversible, but the idea that it's too dangerous to use when it's a literal reality-warping do-anything MacGuffin is demonstrating a lack of imagination.

That said, "I am Iron Man," is a remarkably badass line in that context.

Also, managing to make "Hail Hydra" not one of the dumbest plot twists ever, is also genius writing. I'm almost disappointed they didn't put that in a trailer without context.
Maybe using the infinity gauntlet to make yourself able to use it more is automatically punished by instant complete annihilation or some other nonsense: some infinities stone had more or less a mind on their own and maybe they do not want to do all the stuff their wielder wants to do.

Segev
2019-05-06, 01:09 PM
Maybe using the infinity gauntlet to make yourself able to use it more is automatically punished by instant complete annihilation or some other nonsense: some infinities stone had more or less a mind on their own and maybe they do not want to do all the stuff their wielder wants to do.

With this logic, the Infinity Gauntlet is the worst kind of plot device. "Why can it do X? Because it wants to. Why can't it do Y? Because it doesn't want to." It becomes a character in its own right, and the quest for it is stupid because it clearly wanted to wipe out half the universe and then restore it after killing a bunch of people for no constructive purpose.

Grod_The_Giant
2019-05-06, 02:04 PM
What bugs me about the Gauntlet killing its wielders is that, if you're able to survive long enough to make even one use of it, you shouldn't have a problem.
On the other hand, the idea that "this is so powerful that you can only ever make one wish" is a reasonably plot-limit for an artifact like that. It seems to be implicit; the only person we see who was able to make a second wish at was pretty much totally crippled in the process, and I think it's fair to say that Thanos is the most powerful being in the MCU. (And in the comics, he's uniquely good at using stuff like the Stones and Cosmic Cubes)


That said, "I am Iron Man," is a remarkably badass line in that context.
God yes. Not only was it a perfect badass one-liner, it wraps up both Tony's character arc and the entirety first three stages of the MCU in a bow (started with "Actually...I am Iron Man," and ended the same way).

Lapak
2019-05-06, 02:05 PM
Maybe using the infinity gauntlet to make yourself able to use it more is automatically punished by instant complete annihilation or some other nonsense: some infinities stone had more or less a mind on their own and maybe they do not want to do all the stuff their wielder wants to do.
No need for that. All the way back in the original Avengers they established one thing the Stones cannot do: protect against their own or each others' effects. They use the Mind Stone to penetrate the shield established by the Space Stone. The Gauntlet isn't the comic version with full omnipotence, and it makes sense with the information given that one hard limit is that the Stones can't create an effect that protects you from themselves. Channel them all at once and you are going to burn for it, no matter how strong you are.

Quertus
2019-05-06, 07:46 PM
So, two questions of my own (and, dude, if you're reading a clear spoiler thread this far, I have no sympathy):

1) the stones cannot protect against the stones… but the gauntlet can undo the gauntlet? The gauntlet can return to life everyone it killed… but not those who died by other means? The Time stone can virtually resurrect, and time travel can kinda resurrect, but the gauntlet cannot?

2) Cap was just…there (and then) at the end. So, time travel… puts you in your own past? So, everyone (except maybe 9? Or maybe just 3?) remember Loki escaping? And this doesn't change anything? (Like, if their timeline's Thanos wasn't there to get the gauntlet to snap in the first place…)

tyckspoon
2019-05-06, 08:01 PM
So, two questions of my own (and, dude, if you're reading a clear spoiler thread this far, I have no sympathy):

1) the stones cannot protect against the stones… but the gauntlet can undo the gauntlet? The gauntlet can taken to life everyone it killed… but not those who died by other means? The Time stone can virtually resurrect, and time travel can kinda resurrect, but the gauntlet cannot?


They didn't try, we don't know whether or not the Stones (individually or together) could be used to bring back the dead. We don't know what kind of intention to use that would take or what kind of unwanted side effects it might have. They did know there was a specific single event that the Stones were used for, so reasonably you could use the Stones to undo that specific single event, and that's what they went for. (I'm inclined to say yes, between all the stones you could easily create a body [Reality, mostly] and inject it with whatever nebulous something you require for it to be considered a real person [Soul, Mind], but doing that for everybody across the universe that died in the intervening 5 years who otherwise wouldn't have died if there had not been a Snap.. might be an overly large order to fill in trying to define who you're trying to affect.)

For the second part, I mentioned it in the main Endgame thread in Media, but.. Time Travel is a big warning sign that everything that follows it is going to be nonsense. Don't think too hard about it, you'll just hurt your ability to enjoy the story :smallsigh:

CharonsHelper
2019-05-06, 08:28 PM
He recreated the gauntlet, which had previous only been crafted by the dwarves. I have no doubt he could create something similar to Mjolnir, as it's basically a rocket hammer with AI support.

It was a vastly inferior version. I doubt that Hulk would have been nearly so torn up if it were the original gauntlet.

It was sort of too bad no one snagged that from Thanos's corpse as trophy - but I figured that was so that it was a Stark gauntlet and became reasonably that he be able to yoink the stones off quickly. I don't think the original's stones came off so easily (or they would have done that when they had Thanos's arm pinned in Infinity War).

MesiDoomstalker
2019-05-06, 08:31 PM
2) Cap was just…there (and then) at the end. So, time travel… puts you in your own past? So, everyone (except maybe 9? Or maybe just 3?) remember Loki escaping? And this doesn't change anything? (Like, if their timeline's Thanos wasn't there to get the gauntlet to snap in the first place…)

The Russo Brothers confirmed that Old Cap, when he went back to the 40s and reunited with Peggy, created a split timeline and his appearance at the end of Endgame is him traveling from that alternate timeline. It's not revealed how he was able to do so (the time travel we see seems to be limited to horizontal movement through time, not lateral movement across timelines). Similarly, Loki escaping with the Tesseract in 2012 and the complete annihilation of Thanos and his forces from 2014 create timeline splits as well.

DM_Danger
2019-05-06, 08:42 PM
Time travel is messy, especially when you establish rules and then contradict them.

Max_Killjoy
2019-05-06, 08:59 PM
Time travel is messy, especially when you establish rules and then contradict them.

When the only rule for time travel in your work is "how does it serve The Plot at this instant?", it's always going to be messy.

Pleh
2019-05-06, 09:40 PM
So, two questions of my own (and, dude, if you're reading a clear spoiler thread this far, I have no sympathy):

1) the stones cannot protect against the stones… but the gauntlet can undo the gauntlet? The gauntlet can return to life everyone it killed… but not those who died by other means? The Time stone can virtually resurrect, and time travel can kinda resurrect, but the gauntlet cannot?

2) Cap was just…there (and then) at the end. So, time travel… puts you in your own past? So, everyone (except maybe 9? Or maybe just 3?) remember Loki escaping? And this doesn't change anything? (Like, if their timeline's Thanos wasn't there to get the gauntlet to snap in the first place…)

The gauntlet can ressurect people. I suspect Nat was not able to be brought back because the soul stone wouldn't help cheat its own rules. Gamorra wasn't saved from her sacrifice. She was stolen from her time, creating a split universe. There will always be one of the timelines without Gamorra. As it is, we have one timeline where Quill loses her and gets her back only for her to leave because she never met him. Then there's anothet universe where she disappeared before they ever met. The price was still paid.


It was a vastly inferior version. I doubt that Hulk would have been nearly so torn up if it were the original gauntlet.

It was sort of too bad no one snagged that from Thanos's corpse as trophy - but I figured that was so that it was a Stark gauntlet and became reasonably that he be able to yoink the stones off quickly. I don't think the original's stones came off so easily (or they would have done that when they had Thanos's arm pinned in Infinity War).

We don't actually know this. The gloves were never compared. We really don't know their relative strength.

Vogie
2019-05-07, 09:23 AM
2) So, everyone (except maybe 9? Or maybe just 3?) remember Loki escaping? And this doesn't change anything? (Like, if their timeline's Thanos wasn't there to get the gauntlet to snap in the first place…)

There's a question of whether or not that happened - they don't say if Cap fixed that or not - We know he knew about it, as they told him right after it happened. It does coincide with Disney announcing a Loki tv show on their Disney+ Streaming service, so the ambiguity may be a nod to that.

Max_Killjoy
2019-05-07, 09:32 AM
There's a question of whether or not that happened - they don't say if Cap fixed that or not - We know he knew about it, as they told him right after it happened. It does coincide with Disney announcing a Loki tv show on their Disney+ Streaming service, so the ambiguity may be a nod to that.

And if there's a character you can never be certain about... it's Loki.

Segev
2019-05-07, 09:34 AM
It does coincide with Disney announcing a Loki tv show on their Disney+ Streaming service, so the ambiguity may be a nod to that.

:smalleek::smallsmile::smallbiggrin::smallcool:

This is joyous news. I must learn more. TO THE INTERNET!

Malphegor
2019-05-07, 02:00 PM
I think a better question is: How did the stones just magically socket into the Iron Man suit's gauntlet? Did Tony Stark design it with sockets, just because ... who knows, maybe one day they'll come in handy?! oO

I believe the answer to this is

“Nanobots, son!”

Braininthejar2
2019-05-07, 04:08 PM
A tinkerer? I'm pretty sure he'd be an artificer.

Anything that requires nanomachines would be magic at most worlds' standards.

And you don't build a time machine at level 10.

ExplodingRat
2019-05-07, 11:43 PM
I think the real question here is scale. At what point does the gauntlet stop dealing serious damage? I'd imagine somewhere around divine levels, but it probably makes sense that a mid-level character could use it once if he had massively OP armor (_+3, adamantine, etc) if he was willing to be completely obliterated afterwards.

NorthernPhoenix
2019-05-08, 09:23 AM
I think the real question here is scale. At what point does the gauntlet stop dealing serious damage? I'd imagine somewhere around divine levels, but it probably makes sense that a mid-level character could use it once if he had massively OP armor (_+3, adamantine, etc) if he was willing to be completely obliterated afterwards.

You need to be about as strong as Thanos to just wear it without issue, but to use its full power repeatedly you'd probably need to be much more powerful. In 5e at least, this is beyond what the player can normally achieve.

Segev
2019-05-08, 01:16 PM
You need to be about as strong as Thanos to just wear it without issue, but to use its full power repeatedly you'd probably need to be much more powerful. In 5e at least, this is beyond what the player can normally achieve.

"I wish to be able to use the Infinity Gauntlet without issue," only has a 30% or so chance of making you lose the ability to cast wish ever again.

Vogie
2019-05-08, 01:43 PM
You need to be about as strong as Thanos to just wear it without issue, but to use its full power repeatedly you'd probably need to be much more powerful. In 5e at least, this is beyond what the player can normally achieve.

Definitely. Endgame, pre-gauntlet Thanos is a CR 30 villain according to mathing by DM Dave (https://dmdave.com/thanos-5e-dnd), and post-gauntlet Thanos was able to only do it twice, with days in between, and looked messed up.

Having a single use eliminate a high-level human artificer and maim a 20+ homebrew monstrosity with plot armor is more than fair.

noob
2019-05-08, 01:50 PM
"I wish to be able to use the Infinity Gauntlet without issue," only has a 30% or so chance of making you lose the ability to cast wish ever again.

I believed you lost spellcasting?
I guess that it is less harmful than I did think.
I was probably confusing that with disjunction on an artifact.