>>56404331>When do you go from "Character X is based off Character Y" to "Character X is just Character Y with a different coat of paint"?Good question. Let me get back to you on that.
Jokes aside, there is literally nothing wrong with basing one character on another, as almost all characters can be deconstructed down to base archetypes based on our human condition if you peel back enough layers. Even entering direct exported character territory isn't inherently a bad thing, as it can give an older character a new lease on life that might even give them better chances to shine than their original appearance. I would say it only gets controversial when you're not willing to actually do anything new with the idea. When you can only repeat direct quotes or plots instead of further exploring the concepts behind them or steering them in a new direction, it raises the question of why I should care about this repeat when the original still exists, or what they actually add to whatever new setting they're in if they're not significantly changed by the difference in scenery.
>>56404379I for one would be overjoyed for the here-and-now, but by all means feel free to build up the suspense before the disco ball drops first. Rattle off some statistics, give out some accolades. Which card format was the most and least popular, etcetera.
