Tag: nate ford

leverage-commentary:

“The episode is very Beth-centric, by the way. Oh, and those weren’t her parents who lived in that house she blew up. Now whether those nasty abusive people were still in there or not … choose the answer that you like. We’re never, ever going to tell you everything about these characters. For example, you have no idea exactly who Sophie was married to at age 17, do you? Or why when Eliot said “I don’t like guns” in the pilot, he added “… you know that.” to Nate. Why would Nate know that?”

— John Rogers on Kfmonkey, LEVERAGE: Stork Raving Mad/Open Thread

Star Wars, take note: you do NOT have to explain absolutely everything about a character and their backstory.

traveling-magpie:

Okay but consider:

Leverage urban fantasy
AU.

Nate is a reluctant vampire who got turned in the same
incident that killed his son. He only goes after bad guys, and he’s never
killed anyone (that he knows of) but substance abuse is substance abuse, and
the fact that he can’t look in a mirror and see how bad he looks gives Sophie
many a fretful morning of “You were out again all night, I can see it. You didn’t
even wash up” accompanied by grouchy grunts from a freshly-self-loathing Nate.

Eliot is a were-creature of some kind. No one knows what,
because no one who’s seen him fully transformed has lived to tell the tale.
Those who have seen glimpses just know there are a lot of teeth involved. A lot of teeth.

Parker isn’t quite girl and she isn’t quite ghost. She’s
stuck halfway between – the result of not getting out of a certain exploding
house quickly enough as a child – which makes snacking a task sometimes (and
kissing even more so) but the perks are worth it. Being able to literally walk
through walls has made her the world’s greatest thief.

Hardison is human. Completely and totally. But in a world
where vanilla humans are often prey, he’s learned to defend himself with a
grasp of both technology and actual magic that rightfully earn him the title “wizard.”
He frequently uses fictional mages as aliases and Eliot will never let him live
down the time a flustered “Agent Gandalf” got laughed out of an FBI field
office.

Sophie is fey – as fey as they come. No one knows how old
she is (and no one dares ask) and while her acting skills leave much to be
desired (the fey can’t actually lie, after all), when she casts a glamour it
takes a strong mind to see anything other than exactly what she wants them to
see.

Just imagine: magical
Leverage.

polytropic-liar:

I was thinking today about Leverage–as one does–and about the various grifting styles we see the team employ, and how most of them have a very particular grift strategy that they rarely stray from when they have to be the main one in the spotlight. And what I think is really interesting is how their strategies are often exact opposites.

Eliot’s syle of grifting is to flatten himself, to make himself seem simple. He plays nerds, ‘manipulate-able’ fighters, awkward librarians and accountants and basically people it’s easy to dismiss or to pigeonhole as one thing (whereas in reality he’s anything but that). In direct contrast, Sophie’s entire grift style plays up her mysteriousness. She draws people in because they want to know more about her, because she’s intriguing and fascinating and there’s the suggestion that if only the mark were worthy of her time and attention, she knows things they could only dream of.

Nate’s style is to be incredibly obnoxious. Which, let’s all congratulate him on playing to his strengths, first of all. But second of all, it’s a really interesting grift style, because basically it manipulates people by annoying them. While Sophie draws people in and directs their attention and clouds their judgement by making them want her around, Nate directs people’s attention and clouds their judgement by making them want him to leave. They’re both very effective at getting a person to do exactly what they want!

And while Eliot’s grift style almost always involves him pretending to be bad at something (physically harmless alien nerd, unsophisticated boxer who can’t people good, etc), Hardison’s grifts almost always involve him being an expert at something (Iceman, FBI agent, even conspiracy theorist) and using his expertise to gain access, authority, etc.

And then I was thinking about Parker and trying to pin down her style, and I realized that another reason why she was an excellent choice of leader is that she can kind of do them all. Every grift she does has that tinge of ‘weird’ to it, because that’s who she is, but she’s able to switch between strategies in a way that the others never really employ. She can be unassuming and underestimated (Alice, baby reporter), off-putting and upsetting (that pop star with the duck), an expert who comes in and takes over (FBI agent), or intriguing and enticing (that scene with the diamond necklace, you know the one, we all know the one, you whispered “oh no she’s hot” at the screen don’t lie). I wouldn’t say she’s the best grifter, that’s definitely Sophie, but she might be the most versatile one.

Basically Parker is the best, Leverage is the best, we all knew that, thank you for your time.

bemusedlybespectacled:

metanoianmayhem:

thetavernknight:

we-are-rogue:

Image found on the internetz. I don’t think Sophie would have anything resembling a combat class, but if you HAD to pick one Roguish archetype for each of the Leverage team, that’s certainly as close as it gets. 😀

Not sure I’d put her as a Swashbuckler, but she might be a Thief/Bard multi-class. 

Dude. Elliot is so not an assassin. he’s a freakin tank

Technically I think they’re what happens when you have an all-rogue party, but consider instead:

Nate: Inquisitor. Though a religious class akin to a cleric or paladin, Nate approaches the cons with a religious-like zeal for justice and righteousness. Class skills include Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Intimidate, all the Knowledges, and Sense Motive – all things that Nate has in abundance.

Sophie: Bard, Brazen Deceiver archetype. A Brazen Deceiver isn’t a rogue with bard skills, they’re a bard with rogue skills. Brazen Deceiver’s bardic skill is lying (read: grifting), and it replaces most bard skills with rogue skills, which is important for Sophie since she’s terrible at actually acting.

Eliot: Monk. Unlike fighters, who usually do your classic hit-with-sword/shoot-with-arrow, monks are masters of martial arts and focus on unarmed combat. And unlike barbarians, who are all about unbridled rage, monks are self-contained and self-controlled. And monks have to be some kind of lawful alignment, and I think out of all of them, Eliot is the most lawful of the crew, given his strict adherence to principles like “don’t con your own team” that the others don’t follow.

Hardison: Alchemist, Tinkerer archetype (Lucille is his clockwork familiar). It was hard for me to think of a suitable class for Hardison, since there isn’t really a fantasy analogue to “hacking,” but I think that his abilities in creating things (the crying statue, the 1700s diary, the energy drink that tastes like dust because it’s made out of dust and food coloring) translate well to alchemy. Also he’s got some mad scientist in him and that’s absolutely alchemy.

Parker: Rogue, Acrobat archetype. I don’t even need to explain this one.

Source: we-are-rogue

panzertorte:

#the fact that eliot   #who always moves carefully knows where to put his feet where to rest his weight how to move regardless of the situation   #goes skidding to get to Hardison that much faster   #and that Hardison who’s so careful with how he touches and when   #never demanding   #unless it’s to give Eliot shit   #is just openly clinging   #…this entire scene hurts my heart so bad but I love it   #and that’s not even talking about Hardison and Parker here holy hell   (via distinctivelibrarians)

Also the fact that he doesn’t go hug Parker because that is just too much for her. She has to process this in his own way and even though he wants to hug her he still gives her space.

Source: insertusernameici