That is unique to the G1 cartoon.

They arent treated as 1 persona in either the bios or the comics.

There are a number of Micromaster combiners that only combine to form alt modes.

If they can be called "combiners" why cant Reflector???

Yep

The name of the thread was "Whos your fav combiner" not which combiner can take the other.

 

I'm not sure I agree. Yes, the cartoon series bible specifies that the trio speak with one mind and voice. Otherwise his description is almost identical to his tech spec bio.

The elusive original G1 bio actually does seem to suggest that Reflector is in fact one consciousness spread over 3 components. Spectro, Spyglass and Viewfinder all have one bio that reads as if it is intended for a single character.

It was sort of vague in IDW just how much of a "shared" personality Reflector(s) had... AHM shows them pretty much as depicted in the G1 cartoon... Spotlight Wheelie was less pronounced, until they all died at least.  

Where else did Reflector appear?

You forgot to include Headmasters, Powermasters, and BreastForce in that category. And Pretenders too, if you wanted to get fussy.

I wouldn't call them "Combiners" either, at least in the conventional understanding of the term in the fandom. Arguably the Micromaster combiners are no more combiners than two robots stuck together in alt-mode would be, like Dreadwing, or Mudflap & Skids' Ice Cream Truck mode in ROTF. There is no merging of minds, no gestalt warrior mode, etc...

It would be like, when someone asks who your favourite Transformer is, answering "the wolf-man, because he technically transforms too".  

zmog

 

I dont even see how you can come to that conclusion.

They were given different names.

True the bios are the same but that only indicates a lack of interest in fleshing out the characters....not an indication that they were to be treated as 1.

Dreamwave TF G1 Volume 2.

And they had very detailed bios in their "More then meats the eyes" profile books.

I didnt so much forget those , I just didnt see a need to bring them up.,

But no one asked about Gestalt warriors.The topic says "whos your fav combiner".Now its true all gestalts are combiners....but not all combiners are gestalts.

And wether or not you agree in calling the Micromaster combiners "combiners" that is what Hasbro called them.

And again....if they can be called combiners I see no reason why Reflector can not.

Funny

 

What? No love for Monstructor? Surely a combiner and pretender, double your affection!

 

My Fav G1 is Devastator, because of the unified colour scheme and non asymmetrical look to him.

My actual fav combiner is RID Landfill/CR Build King. Now that toy absolutely rocks. Now if I could find the G1 Dev coloured one...

 

Computron. Never been recolored.

 

Besides Devs, even though I don't care for Menasor too much, I REALLY liked FAKE MENASOR for some reason, as in when Prime, Jazz, Mirage, Wind Charger, and Sunstreaker (?) pretended to be the stunticons.

I had always wondered what they would have looked like combined WITHOUT the camoflauge (paint/hologram?) masking them as Menasor.

 

I went with Predaking from the list. Although it was hard to choose between he and Computron. My top five are: Piranacon, Predaking, Raiden, Computron and Abominus.

 

Predaking rules them all!

 

And we have different names for our various body parts... what's your point? He has 3 distinct physical components, which all have names to distinguish them, but one personality and consciousness spread across them.

I disagree. If there's one thing you can't really say about those old first-year bios, it's that they didn't have any interest in fleshing out the characters. Rather the opposite. Reflector was unique at the time, and to some degree still is (unless you compare him to Sky Lynx) for having 3 robot components, but it would seem that he was conceived as 3 hosts of one mind.

Except Dreamwave already botched their continuity on that count. They killed off Reflector on Cybertron, and then covered their asses later by saying that the version of Reflector on Cybertron was just a "clone". So in that sense, the Dreamwave appearance is not only an exception to the general rule, but inconclusive as well.

Except you know very well what is meant when fans refer to "Combiners", so your whole argument feels facetious at best.

Because the etymology of the term in the fandom has evolved to represent a more specific phenomenon. You already know that.

zmog

 

My point is your jumping to a conclusion with out any direct evidence supporting it.

I dont deny its a possibility....I just dont see any reason to assume that the intent was to have one mind in the toy bios.

All the mail away firgures suffered from the same lack of info in their bios....should we assume they were all intended to be drones??

Oh it can be said for the mail away figures.

None of them really got any bios.

Reflector actully got the most said.

Theres no real continuity error.

The Dreamwave novels arent the same continuity as the Dreamwave comics.

Hardly.

Or are you suggesting that if everyone is going the wrong way on a highway its ok???

I would argue the oppisit is true.

The term "combiner" started out only being applied to characters that combinered to form a different bot.

But with the introduction of the Micro master combiners the etymology of the term "combiner" has evolved to include any with combiner tech.

 

Well, except for the fact that the bio clearly treats Reflector as one entity. Reflector is only referred to in the singular, and with no differentiation in his personality traits. That's pretty much it right there.

The Cartoon bible pushes the concept further, but the depictions of Reflector are still congruous with each other... to the point that it's an even greater leap to say that "the shared consciousness is only part of the cartoon canon".

That's probably because Reflector was originally intended to be part of the main release, so his bio was likely already written (almost certainly, since it's almost identical to his Cartoon Bible entry).

Did the other mail-aways get any bios at all? I had Overdrive, but I don't remember him coming with a bio. But having a bio that treats Reflector as one character is quite a different thing than having no bio whatsoever. Didn't Overdrive & company get bios much later? And for that matter, I think I remember some conflicts, like one bio describing Overdrive as a Strategist, and another as a Warrior.

Not quite true, at least so far as Reflector in the novels actually makes specific reference to the fate of the Reflector "clones" in the comics... there is at least a one-way shared continuity in effect.

No, I'm suggesting that you shouldn't go to England, knowing that they drive on the other side of the road, and then insist that they're doing it the wrong way.  

I call BS on this... "combiner tech" as a general concept didn't really exist at that point, at least not in reference to Micromasters. They combine, but they are not Combiners, especially as the term has come to represent something very specific in the Transformers fandom, and your contribution seems to want to ignore that.

Formally speaking, neither "gestalt" nor "combiner" were official Hasbro terms, though now "Combiner" has become the accepted norm.

Moreover, the parameters of this poll make the implied meaning of "combiner" even MORE obvious... so trying to make a case for Reflector sounds a lot more like someone trying to distort the issue and impose his personal preferences on the larger group.

zmog

 

Bruticus hands down. I've always thought the Combaticons were bad@$$es. I was super happy to get the Bruticus reissue.

 

No, its not a "fact" that the bio clearly treats Reflector as one entity.
Theres 1 bio and 1 bio only....but 3 characters.

Its seems more likely that they wrote the "combined" bio, and neglected to write out the bios for the individual characters.

Otherwise...why give each a name.

It is only in the cartoon that they are referred to as 1.

Hardly identical.

The cartoon bible directly says they are 1 mind.

The toy bios says nothing about it.

Heres his toy bio...

Loves to observe things: vegetation, architecture, Earthen topography, and particularly comrades' mistakes. Likes to blackmail his associates and is impressed with his own ability. Has highly-developed infra-red vision that can record images in darkness, through camouflage and at great distances. In camera Mode, can emit powerful flash explosion that leaves enemy blind and disorientated for up to 15 seconds.

It referes to the character as a "him" but this could have only been intended to be the bio for the "camara"....not the 3 components.

In the 2nd [or 3rd] year , a different mail away form was put in the boxes.This one had either Ultra Magnus or Prowl [cant remember which] introducing the Omnibots giving them functions.

But there was some contraction when Dreamwave filled in their bios.

Would you mind elaborating?

Which is hardly the case here.

If everyone is thinking that all combiners are gestalts then everyone else is wrong not I.

Then your calling "BS" on the official word from Hasbro.

They are called Micro Master Combiners.

They are combiners.

Furthermore even TF wiki agrees with me that there are different types of combiners.

Combiner - Transformers Wiki

Now, as you can see Reflector is mentioned on that page as a combiner alt mode.....along with Dreadwing and the Micro Master combiners.

And if "Star Saber" is a combiner in their eyes I see no logical argument that can say Reflector is not.

That depends on what you consider an official Hasbro term.

If I recall the toy catalogs for 86 first coined the term "combiner".

Thats an offical word from Hasbro in my book.

Why....because he only listed "gestalts" to chose from???

That hardly disqualifys Reflector.

Not to insult the op or anyone but just because someone cant see past their short sighted views doesnt mean I cant cite an on point example.

Again from TF wiki

A combiner is a group of Transformers that assemble and combine their bodies into a single machine, or that composite machine itself.

So its not just my preference.

With the exception of the cartoon....Reflector does fit that definition.

 

WORD!!!  

On a sidenote can't wait for the reissue to come out this year (as reported by S250).

 

Yea me to, I just hope that idea was not canned or anything, since we had no real updates on it.

 

They give them names the same reason that sparkless things like the Deployers get names. They have to be called something, and there are 3 units, so you may have occasion to refer to a particular unit without including the other 2.

Also, they are shown as one being in the cartoon and in IDW. In Marvel, they never even spoke, so we can't know there. DW was also unclear on the matter.

- Coeloptera

 

liokaiser
but voted predaking

 

yes predaking

 

Yes... one bio, referring to ONE individual, NAMED REFLECTOR. The bio treats Reflector as one entity with one set of traits.

It also makes a point of talking about his camera mode, meaning that "Reflector" doesn't just refer to the combined camera mode, but rather the whole trio in both modes.

I already told you why. Although their mind is shared, they still have 3 distinct components, so they must be distinguished somehow. Roller has a name too... he's not just called "Optimus Prime", even though he doesn't represent a distinct personality, only an extension of Prime's own mind.

No? Let's take a look at them:

The bracketed comment about them speaking with one voice is a note for the writers, but otherwise, the Tech Spec reads as a truncated version of the Cartoon Bible... it is almost certain that they share the same source, probably the Budiansky long profiles (like the other Cartoon Bible bios). It's pretty likely a long profile existed for Reflector. A shame it was never published.

Though more likely it is referring to "him" because he IS the 3 components. That is the overwhelmingly obvious conclusion.

I haven't read the novels, but this is the note from the TF Wiki:

Sounds like they were treating it as one continuity if they felt the need to address the continuity error like that.

If everyone else has decided that for them "Combiner" generally applies to "gestalts" then it IS you who are wrong. Or at least wilfully contrary.

If you want to get technical, then they are called "Micro Master Combiners", which is not the same thing as simply "Combiner".  

I also agree that there are different kinds of Combiners... but at the same time, I recognize that the term is usually applied to "gestalts" (for lack of a better specific term), and that things like Reflector and Duocons are considered to be non-normative, unconventional combiners.

I ALSO recognize when I come into a thread, like say... this one... that the term "Combiner" is VERY CLEARLY being applied to the conventional definition, meaning a "gestalt". There is no mistaking that.

If you're trying to make a case for off-hand generic copy used in the catalogues as "official word" from Hasbro, then the Minibots are technically "Messengers".

But also your memory serves you poorly. The 86 toy catalogues refer to the Combiners as "Super Robots". So I guess that should be our new official Hasbro-approved term for all Combiner-team giant robots.  

Yes. EXACTLY because he only listed "gestalts" to choose from. That rather explicitly disqualifies Reflector.

You can certainly point out that Reflector could be considered an unconventional example of a combiner. But instead you stated that he unequivocally was the "first combiner" and are even now arguing that he should be included in the parameters of the poll, ignoring the fact that Reflector is a very different type of entity than those generally thought of under the "combiner" banner. To me, that is a rather telling display of short-sighted views, on your part.

Essentially, knowing full well what most fans consider the term "Combiner" to signify, you decided to barge in here and advance a radical view that Reflector should be considered a combiner by that same conventional measure, and call foul on the opening poster. Sto, we've had differences in the past, but to me this is a pretty low point for you.

To turn around and play your game of dissecting and re-interpreting the written word in legalistic detail, is Reflector a "group of Transformers" or just one single "Transformer" that happens to have 3 humanoid bodies that are not attached physically? This is often the way he is portrayed, and as such, this makes him similar to say... SkyLynx, but dissimilar to the Duocons, who rather clearly have autonomy in both their components.

If we broaden that definition enough, Omega Supreme would be a Combiner. Or even Megatron, since he combines with his fusion cannon and various accessories to form his complete gun mode.  

Again, by the broadest definition of "combiner" Reflector could fit, but not under the more commonly used definition. This goes back to our discourse about words and context. All words have a number of possible meanings, both broad and specific, but based on their context we are expected to understand their meaning in colloquial circumstances. The context here is pretty clear. To be consistently, insistently, pathologically incapable of discerning semiotic meaning based on context, actually points to a deficiency. Sorry dude.

zmog