TF Views

Sparky Prime wrote:again, who else according to legend would the original Cybertronians be? It might be a different name, but the implication is the same.

I'm actually trying to stay out of this argument, since it seems more futile than usual and it'll probably be settled for us at some point down the line in the comic itself. But I just want to point out here that, here on Earth anyway, there's about eleventy-billion legends that have gone around about who the "Original" Human beings were. Regardless of whether the Knights actually exist and who they turn out to be, it's entirely possible Drift is referring to a different legend, seperate from the one about the Thirteen.

Also, everywhere I see calls them 'The Original Thirteen Transformers' while the Knights here are referred to as 'the original Cybertronians' so there might be a meaningful distinction there. But again, we flat-out do not know until the book gets around to giving us more detailed, concrete information.

Dammit, I said I was supposed to be staying out of this!

Because Sparky likes to think he knows what's happening in the comics before it happens. The same thing happened with the Matrix argument I had with him back during AHM. My whole point was that until the damned book gets published stating what it does we don't know, but damned if he didn't argue otherwise for 14 pages.

Which is why I'm staying out of this one. Bottom line, we won't know till it happens regardless of what's been implied. Period.

Shockwave
-But I ain't gonna argue the 14 pages this time.

BWprowl wrote:I'm actually trying to stay out of this argument, since it seems more futile than usual and it'll probably be settled for us at some point down the line in the comic itself. But I just want to point out here that, here on Earth anyway, there's about eleventy-billion legends that have gone around about who the "Original" Human beings were. Regardless of whether the Knights actually exist and who they turn out to be, it's entirely possible Drift is referring to a different legend, seperate from the one about the Thirteen.

Well you've got a point there. Although, the trend in the Transformers franchise lately has been to start to talk about the Original 13 or at least reveal details about them, particularly with the "Aligned continuity" outlets which the comic has been headed more towards ever since the "Road to Chaos" two-parter. So really, what's more likely here?

Also, everywhere I see calls them 'The Original Thirteen Transformers' while the Knights here are referred to as 'the original Cybertronians' so there might be a meaningful distinction there. But again, we flat-out do not know until the book gets around to giving us more detailed, concrete information.

I can't see that there would be anything particularly significant that would distinguish between calling them Cybertronians or Transformers. The terms have been used fairly interchangeably (hehe) over the years.

Shockwave wrote:Because Sparky likes to think he knows what's happening in the comics before it happens.

Right, because that's totally the same thing as what I'm saying here. I'm just saying what's more likely here? That the Knights of Cybertron who have been called the original Cybertronians are the original 13, or some totally new unrelated group that also happen to be considered "original"?

The same thing happened with the Matrix argument I had with him back during AHM. My whole point was that until the damned book gets published stating what it does we don't know, but damned if he didn't argue otherwise for 14 pages.

That is so totally not what that argument was about at all. Remember when Megatron reached into Optimus Prime's chest back in "Escalation"? Why didn't he take the Matrix then as he thought he killed Prime? Why did he wait until AHM to take it? And why was Kup suddenly saying it was the cause of the war? Those were the types of point I was bringing up, not simply what it could do.

That's what I was arguing with the Matrix argument, that we didn't know anything for sure and wouldn't until it was written. And really my whole point with that argument was that you can't know for sure what's going to happen unless you're the writer. The only reason that argument ended is because you and I realized we were arguing two different things (and you still never acknowledged my orginal point). And really that's the same thing here. You're basically stating something as fact when really it's just your theory of what's going to happen and we're all saying that unless your last name is Roberts, you can't really know that FOR SURE. Yeah, you can probably reasonably infer it based on available evidence but you can't state it as fact because it hasn't been written yet.

Shockwave wrote:That's what I was arguing with the Matrix argument, that we didn't know anything for sure and wouldn't until it was written.

And what I was talking about was tied into events that already happened and didn't make sense regardless of AHM being complete at the time or not. So what?

And really my whole point with that argument was that you can't know for sure what's going to happen unless you're the writer. The only reason that argument ended is because you and I realized we were arguing two different things (and you still never acknowledged my orginal point). And really that's the same thing here.

This is the same thing as arguing about two different things? If so that might explain why I can't figure out why you keep saying I'm talking about things that are going to happen rather than has already happened... (What original point?)

You're basically stating something as fact when really it's just your theory of what's going to happen and we're all saying that unless your last name is Roberts, you can't really know that FOR SURE. Yeah, you can probably reasonably infer it based on available evidence but you can't state it as fact because it hasn't been written yet.

I'm not saying anything about what's going to happen *at all*. I mean, where is that even coming from? Where have I said anything about if/and/or when Rodimus finds the Knights of Cybertron that legend will turn out to be true or not? No where, because obviously I don't know where they will take the story. All I'm saying is that the Knights of Cybertron are the original Cybertronians according to the Cybertronians. That is a fact, they say as much in the book. And who else could the *original* Cybertronians credited with turning Cybertron into a paradise be if not the Original 13 that so much of the Transformers franchise has been building up lately? O6 even said that he believes the Knights are "supposed" to be the 13. I don't understand why this has even become an issue here.

Sparky
-The seeds of the fur... I've been watching too much Beast Machines.

In all fairness you're probably right. The Knights of Cybertron probably will turn out to be the 13. I think O6's point was that the IDW universe is different enough from the rest of the franchise that there's at least the POSSIBILITY that the Knights could be something different. And that's all I'm saying. Possibility. Regardless of how unlikely, the possibility is there. And you stating it as fact based on a line Drift said won't make it solid fact until it gets published. And guess what? On that day, when that happens, you can nyahnyahnyah me all you want. But until then, I'm going to keep my mind open to other possibilities.

Shockwave wrote:And you stating it as fact based on a line Drift said won't make it solid fact until it gets published.

And waiting for what ever they'll publish in the future wont change the facts they've got currently established until then. Can we move on now?

I'd just like to point out that the actual number of how many "Knights of Cybertron" hasn't been established by anybody. Even Drift only says they were the original Cybertronians; he doesn't say how many there were. If they find the Knights of Cybertron, and there's like eight of them, and they say "Yeah this is all of us; none of us died in the last 80 million years or whatever," and their names/appearances don't match up to (what we do know about) the Thirteen in any meaningful way, then no, they aren't the same literal thing.

If the Knights of Cybertron turn out to not be the Thirteen, that doesn't even necessarily mean that this universe 'has' a Thirteen--the Knights of Cybertron would just be their "stand-in" for this universe. (Kind of like how ROTF establishes there were only seven Primes, I guess. Although Hasbro's stance is that there were always Thirteen, and just seven of them are named "Prime." Whatever. Total mess.)

This could be like a Greek/Roman God distinction thing. Depending on who you ask, Poseidon and Neptune are either different interpretations of the same idea or two entirely different guys.

This would be a great question to actually ask IDW, but I fear that doing so would just give an answer of, "That's going to come up later in the book, so sit down and shut up." I'll readily admit that the "mystery" of whether or not the Knights of Cybertron actually ARE the Thirteen is half the reason I'm even interested in Rodimus' journey.

(I still say, though, that all they're going to find at the end is a gravesite.)

Onslaught Six wrote:If the Knights of Cybertron turn out to not be the Thirteen, that doesn't even necessarily mean that this universe 'has' a Thirteen--the Knights of Cybertron would just be their "stand-in" for this universe. (Kind of like how ROTF establishes there were only seven Primes, I guess. Although Hasbro's stance is that there were always Thirteen, and just seven of them are named "Prime." Whatever. Total mess.)

Yeah, I agree with that. I believe that's what the Knights of Cybertron is, just a different name for the Original 13 (or however many there are in the IDW-verse) not unlike the Dynasty of Primes.

Weren't the Knights of Cybertron those special sword guys that Drift met up with when he changed allegiance? And then he got a sword and was like an honorary Knight of Cybertron or some such? Who were those guys?