Cleaning the Tarnish: Iron Age to Silver Age

[Dead guy on tab]

After reading the postings on the "Why I hate Marvel Editors" http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65091&page=3
I began to think what would I do if I was made EIC of Marvel right now. My answer relates to the thread title.

What I would do is gather as many writers who respect continuity and silver age/bronze age comics (e.g. Kurt Busiek, Steven Robinson, Roy Thomas, etc.) and hammer out what the group thinks a Marvel Universe should be a how to get there with a one time transition, i.e. how do you reconstruct characters after years of deconstruction? I would then put each of the writers in charge of their own section of the universe and hold a "fantasy draft" of characters. Whoever drafted the character would control how he/she is used. I would then continue with character "bibles" and continuity oversight so that multiple crisis do not become necessary.

Now relating this to Champions campaigns, has anyone run a campaign where there was a iron age/dark age as a back story and the characters were trying to return the luster to the hero world. Sort of the opposite of the watchmen or at least watchmen revisited 20 years later. Paranormals reached the brink and turned back.

[McCoy]

After reading the postings on the "Why I hate Marvel Editors" http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65091&page=3
I began to think what would I do if I was made EIC of Marvel right now. My answer relates to the thread title.

What I would do is gather as many writers who respect continuity and silver age/bronze age comics (e.g. Kurt Busiek, Steven Robinson, Roy Thomas, etc.) and hammer out what the group thinks a Marvel Universe should be a how to get there with a one time transition, i.e. how do you reconstruct characters after years of deconstruction? I would then put each of the writers in charge of their own section of the universe and hold a "fantasy draft" of characters. Whoever drafted the character would control how he/she is used. I would then continue with character "bibles" and continuity oversight so that multiple crisis do not become necessary.
Depending on how many titles you would have, I think you might want to make these people associate editors rather than writers. Don't see Perlmutter signing off on this, but the basic idea is sound.


Now relating this to Champions campaigns, has anyone run a campaign where there was a iron age/dark age as a back story and the characters were trying to return the luster to the hero world. Sort of the opposite of the watchmen or at least watchmen revisited 20 years later. Paranormals reached the brink and turned back.
Nope, can't say I ever was in a campaign like that, would be interesting.

[BoloOfEarth]

In regards to a Champions game, I ran a campaign that got very iron-age / dark tone, and the only way I could turn things back around was to start an entirely new campaign, and I was very explicit that the new campaign would be Silver Age.

[Hermit]

Now relating this to Champions campaigns, has anyone run a campaign where there was a iron age/dark age as a back story and the characters were trying to return the luster to the hero world. Sort of the opposite of the watchmen or at least watchmen revisited 20 years later. Paranormals reached the brink and turned back.

I have run some settings where I had the local NPC superheroes who came before the PCs matched the 'ages' of the comic books. The heroes of the WW2 era to 50s were Golden Age in outlook, very pro government for the most part even if they could get rough (They were in a war for part of this) or cheesy (by modern standards). Sometimes the cliched but intriguing 'McCarthy hearings on heroes' was used to end that age.

Then I have the 60s (Sometimes later 60s) to mid to late 70s, where the NPC hero team was Silver age, trying to hold themselves to impossible standards, but doing so successfully more or less for some time. Aliens and radiation accidents abound.

The firmly Bronze 80s introduce slightly more troubled superheroes, or have existing Silver heroes deal more and more with serious personal problems. Mutancy and the like are more common origins, and the social issues of the heroes themselves are explored (registration acts, etc)

The Iron Age starts in the 90s, and it all goes to hell. The new generation of heroes, many having seen the standards the Silver agers use seem to fail or even bite same heroes in the butt, throw the baby out with the bathwater and many take up ruthless measures, where as others decide to be heroes for reasons that basically amount to getting their guns off. A few decent people in spandex remain, but it is universally accepted 'their time is done.' Of course, this all goes to hell eventually as scandal rocks even heroes, or some vigilante is tricked into killing the wrong guy. Sometimes the few non Iron heroes at this time are the ones who make it right, other times it is the public, and sometimes it is the villains...sadly, mostly the increasingly rusty iron age mentality is self destructive and the heroes end themselves, one way or another.

Enter the new millennium (No relation to product of same name) and suddenly, we're in the Steel Age (at least in my games). Heroes who came before, of every age, have learned bitter lessons, some lessons even requiring 'the greatest sacrifice' (Which in turn, inspire others of what heroes at their best), and those remaining, if they can be found, willing to pass on some of those lessons to newer heroes. The PCs are here, and they cherry pick the best of all the ages, though admitedly, they may not agree just what those were. The public is eager to have REAL heroes again, but there are old scars from the all too recent Iron Age that could tear open anew. It is a new Dawn.

But as for a massive change within the PCs time itself? Mmm ,don't think I have.

[assault]

What I would do is gather as many writers who respect continuity and silver age/bronze age comics (e.g. Kurt Busiek, Steven Robinson, Roy Thomas, etc.) and hammer out what the group thinks a Marvel Universe should be a how to get there with a one time transition,

This is close to what Crisis on Infinite Earths was supposed to be for DC. It actually mostly worked. Unfortunately they couldn't leave well enough alone.

In this kind of situation continuity is a strange thing. After all, you are massively overwriting it in many respects, and preserving it in others. It might just as easily be worthwhile simply ignoring most of it.

If I was going to rework a campaign without simply restarting from the beginning, I would work on basis of agreed collective amnesia. Basically, anything that doesn't get mentioned didn't happen, and therefore is without consequences.

This is a bit like how continuity used to work before Marvel got excited about crossovers. Things tended to be conveniently forgotten, and most of what happened in stories published five years or so ago simply never happened.

[Dead guy on tab]

I agree with you that Crisis was supposed to fix this, but where DC fell down in my opinion was that they didn't maintain strict editorial control following the Crisis; so they just went through the massive effort to clean up old continuity problems (and undo Roy Thomas' continuity uberwork in All Star Squadron) and they allowed the new writers to introduce new continuity problems. So what was DC's solution another Crisis every couple of years. My point was if you are going to go through the pain to clean the slate, you need to maintain your discipline not to mess it up again. In addition, you can't exactly ignore all the previous material because that pisses off the long time collector/disengages them from the universe you are trying to get them addicted to.

[assault]

So what was DC's solution another Crisis every couple of years.

Up until the early 70s, at least, there would be periodic reboots in individual titles. Things wouldn't happen company wide, but the titles edited by a particular editor would often undergo a radical change.

Especially if the names "Mort Weisinger" or "Julius Schwartz" were involved.

Examples: Superman had effective reboots when Weisinger took over, and then when Schwartz took over from him. Batman had reboots in 1964, losing a lot of his 1950s accretions, and then again in the early 70s when he lost much of the camp feel he had picked up from the TV series.

Most other series tended to have their continuities effectively negated when they were cancelled, of course! Or rebooted if they were relaunched.

So periodic mini-crises preceded periodic companywide mega-Crises.


In addition, you can't exactly ignore all the previous material because that pisses off the long time collector/disengages them from the universe you are trying to get them addicted to.

This of course didn't really become an issue until the emergence of an adult fandom, who took their collecting seriously. Unfortunately they (we) are a very important part of the much reduced market these days.

[Hugh Neilson]

There's also the issue that clutter accumulates over extended periods.

There was a tempest in a teapot early in the first Batman and the Outsiders run when someone noted that Metamorpho learned Batman's identity in an old Brave & Bold. The author indicated that he felt that story fell outside current continuity. In particular, he felt any story where Batman needed Metamorpho to escape a police lockup clearly fell outside the "real earth" parameters of the character, so that must have taken place on an alternate earth wiped out by the Crisis.

The real difference between the old reboots and the Crisis and subsequent ones was that the old reboots made no effort to explain why things had changed. They just changed.

[wylodmayer]

Now relating this to Champions campaigns, has anyone run a campaign where there was a iron age/dark age as a back story and the characters were trying to return the luster to the hero world. Sort of the opposite of the watchmen or at least watchmen revisited 20 years later. Paranormals reached the brink and turned back.

Let first register my sympathy for those who hate the current Marvel regime. They blow.

However, I have trouble imagining a game where paranormals "reach the brink" and then "turn back," except perhaps in some special case, like maybe a bunch of them come awfully close to overthrowing the gov't and then decide that it's, you know, not heroic.

If, however, by "the brink," you mean just basically being dark and jerk-ish, well, how do you "turn back" from that? Individuals, maybe, but not a whole groups, especially since supers don't represent a group. They're individuals, with individual personalities. They get their powers (usually) in many different ways, some of them nearly random. Certainly, in most superhero worlds, there's not a propensity for one personality type to receive superpowers above all others. Supers, then, will describe a wide range - possibly even a thorough cross section - of possible personality types. Some of them will be inveterate jerks.

I mean, there's no bright line between hero and villain. There's the Big Blue Boyscout, who fights what people commonly recognize as evil while respecting the law to its utmost. Then there's Daredevil, who fights bad guys but sometimes has to break the law, which is even more questionable considering he's an officer of the court. Plus, I gotta say, he spends a lot of time Daredeviling - has any client's case ever been hurt because he didn't put in the due diligence? There's a thorny matter right there. I'm not saying Daredevil's a villain, but just that he's not pure as snow - there are ethical issues with his actions as a superhero.

So, some superheroes will be dark, some will be jerks. Some might misuse their power in certain ways while still fighting for the good overall. Some might fight for the side of right for what other heroes consider the "wrong" reasons. I certainly don't agree with Marvel's current trend of making all heroes a**holes, but that's just bad writing in general. Making them ridiculously UNrealistic and UNnuanced, as per 99% of the Silver Age comics, is just as bad.

Basically, let me put it this way. If I ran a world that was a flat and lifeless as Silver Age, there would be no way the characters COULD head toward "the brink" in the first place - because to run a world like that, anything resembling psychological realism would have to be taken off the table first thing. So there could be no "turn around," either.

Conversely, if I ran a game with, you know, actual psychological realism, there could be no "turn around" for heroes as a group, because heroes as a group... well, don't exist, not really. There's just no useful generalizations you can make, psychologically, about them.

[Dead guy on tab]

As far as "turning back" I am referring to the way the paranormals behave en mass. Newer heroes would not use the marginal criminal tactics that their predecessors employed. Some old heroes might return trying to redeem themselves. The public itself would be suspicious of the heroes since the previous heroes weren't much better than criminals. As far as "the brink", I think heroes who were of the sort that the ends justify the means would be close to crossing the line. I'm not saying that I'd want to go back to the goofiness of early Silver Age, but rather the more complex late Silver Age (Bronze Age?) ala Astro City. Imagine if your campaign started in the Watchmen 10 years after the end of the book. Ozymandias is getting old, his utopia didn't work out as planned and the new heroes discover how scummy the previous generation were and vow to make things better by embracing "the old rules".

[assault]

In the Marvel Universe, "turning back" would involve the FF, the Avengers, Spider-Man and probably Dr Strange. Nobody else really matters!

Well, OK, maybe someone with an cleaner version of Professor X's vision might set up a new, less messed up version of the X-Men.

But that's about it.

[steamteck]

In regards to a Champions game, I ran a campaign that got very iron-age / dark tone, and the only way I could turn things back around was to start an entirely new campaign, and I was very explicit that the new campaign would be Silver Age.

I can't see any other way to do it that would really work myself. Now it it were set up originally to be a transition campaign and you never really ran an iron age campaign and your players were on board. It might work fine. Those sorts of players would probably rather just go bronze or silver anyway but you might find some up for the challenge. All my group loathe ( not too strong maybe too weak a word) and are enraged by iron age too much to sign on though.

[FenrisUlf]

Now relating this to Champions campaigns, has anyone run a campaign where there was a iron age/dark age as a back story and the characters were trying to return the luster to the hero world. Sort of the opposite of the watchmen or at least watchmen revisited 20 years later. Paranormals reached the brink and turned back.

You could look at the DC Comics graphic novel Kingdom Come for some ideas on this.

[Badger]

Dont we need some kind of alchemist to turn Iron into Silver? :doi:

[bubba smith]

Dont we need some kind of alchemist to turn Iron into Silver? :doi:
i recomene edward alrec theFULLMETAL ALCHEMIST

[FenrisUlf]

Dont we need some kind of alchemist to turn Iron into Silver? :doi:

He already exists, and his name is Kurt Busiek.

[steamteck]

You could look at the DC Comics graphic novel Kingdom Come for some ideas on this.


I dunno I never saw the sparkle in "Kingdom Come'. It just seemed to miss the point to me. There is some hope at the end but since they misunderstood ever single problem and IMO The final conclusion that he concentrated on the "Super" and ignored the "man" was exactly backwards I found it an extremely unsatisfying read and pretty iron age. I realize I'm in the minority here though.