Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

The bombs in the schools was your example. Don't gripe when people reply to the specific example that you give.

 

I responded to your example by bringing in Batman, because your example was straight out of a comic book itself. Given the "superficiality" of your example what is the point in giving a response that assumes a more complex universe? You come up with a plot that only Lex Luther or the Joker could pull off and cry foul when I bring in Batman. In something closer to real life, your criminal mastermind would get ratted out by one of his henchmen or the people who sold him the explosives before the explosives were ever planted. For that matter the explosives wouldn't even be real, they would fake explosives provided by undercover FBI agents.

 

You see the bad guys always getting beaten by the superhero as opposed to being taken down by the local SWAT team is also a genre convention. In real life law enforcement can be extremely competent, and would totally curb stomp a lot a of supervillains. The genre conventions ultimately do as much to protect the villains as the heroes.

 

So, if you want to talk about a world with Superman but without genre conventions we can do that. In such a world, Superman would have to change many things about his methods. He would not however find it necessary to abandon his beliefs or get killed. People far squishier than the Man of Steel with belief systems just as demanding manage to function in our world, I see no reason that Superman couldn't also. To convince me otherwise you are going to have to do a lot better than some stolen from a comic book/action movie bomb plot. That is just Space 1999 ragging on the physics of Star Wars and Star Trek. It certainly isn't real life.

 

That brings up another excellent point. In the real world, the Joker would be lucky to escape Arkham even once, Wilson Fisk would be serving 12 consecutive life sentences in some maximum security hell hole, and Bruce Wayne and Frank Castle would be chairing some Victims' Rights organization, not beating up muggers.

 

Realism makes every aspect of superhero comics impossible, not just the powers, secret identities, and costumes. Either way, who cares? I don't read superhero comics to see the real world. I read superhero comics to see a highly romanticized version of the real world. One in which Superman's moral code does work, where Batman doesn't get killed by a random thug with a 9mm, where some guy dressed in an American flag can stop alien invasions. Strict realism has no place here, just like it has no place on ER, Law & Order: SVU, Community, Charles Dickens's novels, Shakespeare's plays or any other form of fiction.

 

I think the criticisms are valid, but they are misplaced.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Realism makes every aspect of superhero comics impossible' date=' not just the powers, secret identities, and costumes. Either way, who cares? I don't read superhero comics to see the real world. I read superhero comics to see a highly romanticized version of the real world. One in which Superman's moral code does work, where Batman doesn't get killed by a random thug with a 9mm, where some guy dressed in an American flag can stop alien invasions. Strict realism has no place here[/quote']

 

*raucous applause*

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

I would add this: Is killing Superman worth the hassle? This question has been bugging me since I read John Byrne's Superman #1. If you don't remember, in that issue Metallo (the man with the Kryptonite heart) comes very close to killing Superman, ranting all the while about how he's going to be king of the Earth. I remember thinking to myself, "Are the rest of the world's superheroes going to let him get away with that?"

 

Think about it. You just killed the most popular and respected hero on the planet, the guy every other superhero takes their cues from (except Batman because he's a d--k). How are you going to prevent the Justice League, Doom Patrol, Metal Men, Teen Titans, The Outsiders, the local Green Lanterns, Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, the Spectre, and the Inferior Five for goodness sake, from curb stomping you with extreme prejudice? None of the people I mentioned are going to be stopped by a glowing green rock. The only reason Luthor tries is because he's arrogant. Most of Supes' other enemies are powerful enough that none of the people I mentioned scare them. So why try, unless you're so crazy and stupid that even Major Disaster's Injustice Gang thinks you're a loser?

OK. Before this starts up and derails things again;

 

The Superman example came about because I said that I found the DC comics to be a bit more superficial (I would now use the word 'simplified') than Marvel and certain people jumped in and said there was no superficiality. It was intended to show that there is a degree of simplification that occurs in DC's comic books.

 

It was not meant to show that there is more simplification in DC's books than Marvel's, that Superman should behave a different way, that schools should be blown up, that Superman is a bad character, that it is a good storyline, or anything else. Again, it is meant to show that there is a (quite probably necessary) degree of simplification that occurs in the stories and personalities and that is it.

 

Please only take issue with the example if you can honestly say that you feel that A) there is absolutely no simplification that occurs in DC comics and that your argument establishes that such an example is faulty because it would not be successful (not that it could fail but rather that there is no reasonable chance of success) in the 'real world' without any alteration of Superman's personality.

 

Unless you can honestly say both conditions are true then you are arguing to argue (either because you reject the argument but you agree that there is still simplification in the first case, which was all that it was suppose to illustrate, or because you have issues with the example but are doing absolutely nothing to argue against the point of the example).

[assault]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

The Superman example came about because I said that I found the DC comics to be a bit more superficial (I would now use the word 'simplified') than Marvel

...

It was not meant to show that there is more simplification in DC's books than Marvel's,

 

Whatever. This discussion has been over for days anyway. We're on a whole new derail now.

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Yes, I know, but it looks like some people are trying to resurrect that.

[Gary Miles]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

That brings up another excellent point. In the real world, the Joker would be lucky to escape Arkham even once, Wilson Fisk would be serving 12 consecutive life sentences in some maximum security hell hole, and Bruce Wayne and Frank Castle would be chairing some Victims' Rights organization, not beating up muggers.

 

Realism makes every aspect of superhero comics impossible, not just the powers, secret identities, and costumes. Either way, who cares? I don't read superhero comics to see the real world. I read superhero comics to see a highly romanticized version of the real world. One in which Superman's moral code does work, where Batman doesn't get killed by a random thug with a 9mm, where some guy dressed in an American flag can stop alien invasions. Strict realism has no place here, just like it has no place on ER, Law & Order: SVU, Community, Charles Dickens's novels, Shakespeare's plays or any other form of fiction.

 

I think the criticisms are valid, but they are misplaced.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

OK. Before this starts up and derails things again;

 

The Superman example came about because I said that I found the DC comics to be a bit more superficial (I would now use the word 'simplified') than Marvel and certain people jumped in and said there was no superficiality. It was intended to show that there is a degree of simplification that occurs in DC's comic books.

 

It was not meant to show that there is more simplification in DC's books than Marvel's, that Superman should behave a different way, that schools should be blown up, that Superman is a bad character, that it is a good storyline, or anything else. Again, it is meant to show that there is a (quite probably necessary) degree of simplification that occurs in the stories and personalities and that is it.

 

Please only take issue with the example if you can honestly say that you feel that A) there is absolutely no simplification that occurs in DC comics and that your argument establishes that such an example is faulty because it would not be successful (not that it could fail but rather that there is no reasonable chance of success) in the 'real world' without any alteration of Superman's personality.

 

Unless you can honestly say both conditions are true then you are arguing to argue (either because you reject the argument but you agree that there is still simplification in the first case, which was all that it was suppose to illustrate, or because you have issues with the example but are doing absolutely nothing to argue against the point of the example).

 

Of course there's simplification. My point is this: Who cares? There's simplification in just about every form of fiction you care to name. An example: I'm currently reading Charles Dickens's book Bleak House. There are many characters in there who are more archetypes than actual people. They don't behave like real people, they don't think like real people, they don't act like real people. In short it's a simplified world, just like everything in fiction. I could come up with a million more examples. The emperor isn't wearing his clothes.

 

I'm not arguing to argue and unfortunately I posted before I had a chance to read the rest of your opinions (I apologize for that). Either way, I'm missing the point you're trying to make. Assume I'm slow and dull witted (I usually am ) and explain your points again slowly.

 

You're saying that you prefer Marvel over DC because DC offers a simplified version of reality, right? You're also saying that there's nothing wrong with this, but it's not always your cup of tea, correct? You're saying that Star Trek is a million time better than Star Wars and that Captain Kirk would easily take out the Emperor and seduce Princess Leia halfway through the first movie, right? (Okay, I made that one up, but you know it's true. ) If I've mis-characterized your opinions or put words in your mouth I apologize in advance and eagerly ask for illumination, good sir.

 

However, if that is what you meant, how can you say that DC specifically, or superheroes in general are simplified, when all fiction simplifies reality to make a point? I don't go to the movies very often, but the Expendables is a realistic political thriller about people who sit around a table negotiating and making deals, in order to juggle the delicate balance of power in a complex world, right? Hunger Games was a about a young woman who lives in hopeless circumstances that never get better, until something, that has nothing to do with her, changes society, right?

 

If you don't enjoy a simplified version of reality, I can't argue against that. In the end, you like what you like and I like what I like. Nothing wrong with that.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Well, technically you are correct. It doesn't work in the genre where heroes never win.

 

My point, however, is that it doesn't work in the genre where it is possible for the heroes to legitimately lose (I had to append 'legitimate' to distinguish it from those lesser failures a character can sometimes suffer to increase dramatic tension).

 

Still sorting through this long-@$$ thread. Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but isn't that a problem of marketing as opposed to genre? Superman, Spider-Man, the Avengers, and Wolverine, never make that one colossal f--k up because who wants to read the "adventures" of Peter Parker's corpse every month? ("In the next pulse-pounding issue, the body continues to decompose! Dr. Evil uses his billions to turn Venezuela into his own personal abattoir! Annoying Girl Friend marries a used car salesman and settles down to domestic drudgery! Don't miss it True Believers!")

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Whatever. This discussion has been over for days anyway. We're on a whole new derail now.

 

Yes' date=' I know, but it looks like some people are trying to resurrect that.[/quote']

 

Sorry for resurrecting an old discussion. I was away for days (new boss at work, she expects more shifts). If you guys wanna drop this and get back to the original point of the thread, I'm game.

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Of course there's simplification. My point is this: Who cares? There's simplification in just about every form of fiction you care to name. An example: I'm currently reading Charles Dickens's book Bleak House. There are many characters in there who are more archetypes than actual people. They don't behave like real people, they don't think like real people, they don't act like real people. In short it's a simplified world, just like everything in fiction. I could come up with a million more examples. The emperor isn't wearing his clothes.

 

I'm not arguing to argue and unfortunately I posted before I had a chance to read the rest of your opinions (I apologize for that). Either way, I'm missing the point you're trying to make. Assume I'm slow and dull witted (I usually am ) and explain your points again slowly.

 

You're saying that you prefer Marvel over DC because DC offers a simplified version of reality, right? You're also saying that there's nothing wrong with this, but it's not always your cup of tea, correct? You're saying that Star Trek is a million time better than Star Wars and that Captain Kirk would easily take out the Emperor and seduce Princess Leia halfway through the first movie, right? (Okay, I made that one up, but you know it's true. ) If I've mis-characterized your opinions or put words in your mouth I apologize in advance and eagerly ask for illumination, good sir.

 

However, if that is what you meant, how can you say that DC specifically, or superheroes in general are simplified, when all fiction simplifies reality to make a point? I don't go to the movies very often, but the Expendables is a realistic political thriller about people who sit around a table negotiating and making deals, in order to juggle the delicate balance of power in a complex world, right? Hunger Games was a about a young woman who lives in hopeless circumstances that never get better, until something, that has nothing to do with her, changes society, right?

 

If you don't enjoy a simplified version of reality, I can't argue against that. In the end, you like what you like and I like what I like. Nothing wrong with that.

 

My original statement was that I preferred Marvel over DC because I found DC to be a bit more oversimplified, which isn't to say that I don't enjoy DC, just that if asked which publisher I prefer more then that's my response. That doesn't even take into account specifics because I am sure you can find certain Marvel titles that are more simplified than certain DC titles. However, if asked 'which publisher' that's going to be my response.

 

As far as 'who cares', well, I would have to say those people who jumped all over me and said there is no such simplification in DC. They weren't saying Marvel has more or that it's necessary. They were basically saying it didn't exist (in their defense I chose 'superficial' instead of 'simplification' but tried to make it clear what I was talking about when I used the word 'superficial').

 

As other people have pointed out, however, this aspect of the thread has pretty much died out and would be best allowed to rest in piece. I never thought my statement would be so contentious.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

I was watching an online debate between actresses representing She Hulk and Wonder Woman on who was stronger. She Hulk pointed out that while Wonder Woman was strong, since she wasn't actually invulnerable she could be taken down by having a box of sharpened pencils thrown at her. This got me wondering about how DC and Marvel present there characters conceptually.

 

Cyclops is a Loaded Gun, a character who can't control his powers do to an accident. He has to wear "ruby quarts" glasses in order to prevent his power from hurting any innocents. Always On disadvantage seems to have been created for him.

 

Superman is powered by the sun and has a wide range of powers and abilities. He's invincible unless you happen to have a piece of kryptonite, then he collapses to the ground. It's only the sadism of his enemies that keeps them from finishing him off. The word Susceptibility rings a bell.

 

Marvel has presented characters with limitations on how their powers work, and when then can be used. They also are bound to have more personal disadvantages and psychological limitations. DC has powerful stalwart characters with specific weakness that makes them absolutely helpless, and personal rogues galleries of frequent enemies.

 

I ask then, which to you prefer?

 

Has anybody noticed that Marvel has a lot of Gods without off-switches?

 

Don't believe me?

 

Silver Surfer

Thor (some versions)

Doctor Strange

Hyperion

Black Bolt

The Eternals

The Hulk (Peter David version)

Phoenix (whoever she is this week)

Quasar (Mark Gruenwald version)

The Sentry

 

The last two are rather interesting, because Quasar has Green Lantern's powers without the yellow weakness, 24 hour recharge time limit, or the removable focus. The Sentry is Superman, as seen by a Marvel fan who's never read a Superman comic in his life. That's not literally true, but he does seem like it.

 

As for which I prefer, I like good stories. That's it. There's nothing else. Any attempt to prefer one over the other will lead to someone pointing out that one inspiring Superman story or that time Spider-Man did something that made them cheer. I used to have preferred characters. Now I just want good stories about people I can identify with. Sometimes I identify with the Man of Tomorrow, other times it's the Webhead.

 

It would have to be a pretty freaking amazing story for me to identify with the guy with the claws though. (Are we really from the same country?)

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

My original statement was that I preferred Marvel over DC because I found DC to be a bit more oversimplified, which isn't to say that I don't enjoy DC, just that if asked which publisher I prefer more then that's my response. That doesn't even take into account specifics because I am sure you can find certain Marvel titles that are more simplified than certain DC titles. However, if asked 'which publisher' that's going to be my response.

 

As far as 'who cares', well, I would have to say those people who jumped all over me and said there is no such simplification in DC. They weren't saying Marvel has more or that it's necessary. They were basically saying it didn't exist (in their defense I chose 'superficial' instead of 'simplification' but tried to make it clear what I was talking about when I used the word 'superficial').

 

As other people have pointed out, however, this aspect of the thread has pretty much died out and would be best allowed to rest in piece. I never thought my statement would be so contentious.

 

Hey, do ANY Marvel vs. DC comparison and things are going to get heated. Especially when everyone secretly knows that DC is vastly superior to Marvel in every way.*

 

*That's a joke by the way.

[Ranxerox]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

My original statement was that I preferred Marvel over DC because I found DC to be a bit more oversimplified, which isn't to say that I don't enjoy DC, just that if asked which publisher I prefer more then that's my response. That doesn't even take into account specifics because I am sure you can find certain Marvel titles that are more simplified than certain DC titles. However, if asked 'which publisher' that's going to be my response.

 

As far as 'who cares', well, I would have to say those people who jumped all over me and said there is no such simplification in DC. They weren't saying Marvel has more or that it's necessary. They were basically saying it didn't exist (in their defense I chose 'superficial' instead of 'simplification' but tried to make it clear what I was talking about when I used the word 'superficial').

 

As other people have pointed out, however, this aspect of the thread has pretty much died out and would be best allowed to rest in piece. I never thought my statement would be so contentious.

 

Emphasis added by me.

 

Nope, nobody said this. What was said was that Superman could live in a less simplified universe with his moral code intact and not get killed over it. That is not the same thing as saying the DC universe is not simplified. Everybody that you debated with understands that both the DC and Marvel universes are very simplified relative to our own.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

 

It would have to be a pretty freaking amazing story for me to identify with the guy with the claws though. (Are we really from the same country?)

 

Yes. It's one of those Alberta versus Ontario things. I'd explain further, but I'm off to smoke dope, have a Japadog and do vigorous outdoor things while wearing Lulu Lemon-brand outdoorsy clothes in fashionable colours. (Personal details thanks to my narcissistic self involvement!)

 

Oh, and only Marvel has a Canadian team. With a comic book. That I even paid attention too at some points. Needed more Canadian stereotypes, but apart from that, definitely a selling point for Marvel.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

That brings up another excellent point. In the real world, the Joker would be lucky to escape Arkham even once, Wilson Fisk would be serving 12 consecutive life sentences in some maximum security hell hole, and Bruce Wayne and Frank Castle would be chairing some Victims' Rights organization, not beating up muggers.

 

Realism makes every aspect of superhero comics impossible, not just the powers, secret identities, and costumes. Either way, who cares? I don't read superhero comics to see the real world. I read superhero comics to see a highly romanticized version of the real world. One in which Superman's moral code does work, where Batman doesn't get killed by a random thug with a 9mm, where some guy dressed in an American flag can stop alien invasions. Strict realism has no place here, just like it has no place on ER, Law & Order: SVU, Community, Charles Dickens's novels, Shakespeare's plays or any other form of fiction.

 

I think the criticisms are valid, but they are misplaced.

 

By the way, I'd like to add that I did enjoy Watchmen and the Wild Cards novels.* I think realism has its place. I think crapsack worlds and grimdark settings have their place. The Iron and Rust Ages have some truly great moments (to me if no one else). However, I don't want to read a Justice League story about rape or one where Spider-Man makes a deal with Satan, or one in which (and esampson has said this numerous times) Superman's moral code gets him or others killed.

 

Like I said, I like Watchmen. I also liked the Authority, Irredeemable, Empire, Newuniversal, Supreme Power, and Miracleman. And I like Legion of Superheroes (almost all eras), Superman, the Avengers, Justice League Unlimited, Batman:TAS, Astro City, Alan Moore's Supreme, and a lot of stuff Jack Kirby did. Great stories transcend genre.

 

*Not that those are terribly realistic either.

[Andrew_A]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Yes. It's one of those Alberta versus Ontario things. I'd explain further' date=' but I'm off to smoke dope, have a Japadog and do vigorous outdoor things while wearing Lulu Lemon-brand outdoorsy clothes in fashionable colours. (Personal details thanks to my narcissistic self involvement[/quote']

 

What's a Japadog? I'll have to ask my brother about the Alberta vs. Ontario thing. He's seen more of this great nation than I have. I've never worn anything by Lulu Lemon, but I do own some of their yoga gear (strap, blocks, mat, and bag). I don't "do" outdoors. Outdoors is something that should be enclosed by a city of some kind.

 

Oh, and only Marvel has a Canadian team. With a comic book. That I even paid attention too at some points. Needed more Canadian stereotypes, but apart from that, definitely a selling point for Marvel.

 

Until they screwed it up after Byrne left. Hell, they screwed it up before Byrne left.

 

To be fair, I'm not sure this country even exists in the DC universe or if it does exist, nothing ever happens here. (Didn't I say realism has no place in fiction?)

[esampson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

...Nope' date=' nobody said this. What was said was that Superman could live in a less simplified universe with his moral code intact and not get killed over it. That is not the same thing as saying the DC universe is not simplified. Everybody that you debated with understands that both the DC and Marvel universes are very simplified relative to our own.[/quote']

I said I preferred Marvel over DC because I thought DC tended to simplify a bit more. I used Superman as an example (not with 4 bombs, that came later). I was told:

In any case, Superman is generally used as a strawman in these kinds of discussions. He's not typical of DC characters, and frankly isn't even typical of himself as he tends to be represented in these threads.

The only way for Superman to be a Strawman is if I am attributing characteristics (simplification) to him that do not exist, so yes, people did say that (or at the least strongly implied it).

 

I went out of my way time and again to point out that the only purpose of my Superman example (the 4 bomb example now) was to show that the characteristic existed. People continued to argue that the example broke genre, wasn't the type of story they wanted to read, Marvel did the same thing, suggested I read other stories, etc., none of which addressed the point of the example. Maybe I wasn't fully clear in the beginning but once I wrote that that was the reason for the example it became pretty unambiguous, and people still argued against the example.

 

I'm not sure anyone tried the trick of arguing that he could exist in a universe that was less simplified with his morals intact because had I realized they were I would have said they were absolutely correct. You remove the smallest simplification and the universe is 'less simplified' yet probably would not compromise Superman. That doesn't really mean anything though. You still have Superman surviving in a world with artificial constraints, and again that does nothing to disprove the (now) explicitly stated point of the example.

[Midas]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Writers were much more concerned with drama than being accurate.

 

:think:OK, I know a lot of internet posters are writers, (intending, successful, or failed), but virtually all of us?

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Having looked yours over' date=' I wouldn't complain even if you used those in a WWII campaign, you might need to adjust a few things (skills mostly, I don't recall what all your version had off-hand, but some skills are in appropriate depending on the era), but otherwise I'd even use those as NPCs. I'm not asking for Superman to be built in all of his Supermanly glory, I'm asking that he be built with respect to his minimums, and with respects to what the rest of the world is capable in accordance with the environment rules. You should only have to adjust the DCs of the characters (PC and NPC) and even then not very much. You shouldn't have to adjust the environment to fit one character and how it interacts with him.[/quote']The only problem I'm seeing here with your request is that Superman's minimums are subjective, speculative, and open to opinion.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

You shouldn't have to adjust the environment to fit one character and how it interacts with him.

 

Why not? I've tiered 'normal' vs 'superhuman' for quite some time and observed no problems with it. For instance, normal people with normal tech just can't hurt superheroes/supervillains. I don't even roll the dice; depending on concept, the character will either dodge the shots or bounce them or otherwise just laugh them off.

[Blau Stern]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Why not? I've tiered 'normal' vs 'superhuman' for quite some time and observed no problems with it. For instance' date=' normal people with normal tech just can't hurt superheroes/supervillains. I don't even roll the dice; depending on concept, the character will either dodge the shots or bounce them or otherwise just laugh them off.[/quote']Because it's too much work. You're basically rewriting the entire game because you want your version to work. Even lifting capacity would need to be changed if your Superman only has a 40 strength, because he's been shown throwing tanks, and you need a much higher strength to actually do that. Furthermore: there are weapons that can seriously injure superheroes, mundane, ordinary, modern, realistic, boring weapons.

 

@Greywind: not nearly as much as you'd think. His peaks are a lot more inconsistent than his minimums, like all Superheroes. The only ones with some wacky minimums are the Avengers, thanks to Bendis.

[Greywind]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Not really. Everybody that throws up a version of Superman is throwing up a "correct" version if they're being honest with themselves when they write it up. But then the basic argument here seems to be everyone has to agree what is correct.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

The main points vis a vis any Superman writeup, imo:

1. He's as strong as the strongest characters in the setting.

2. He's as tough as the toughest characters in the setting.

3. He can fly or at least leap really far.

4. Being bulletproof seems like a de minimis requirement.

5. If he's something other than the Golden Age version, he has a suite of secondary powers--x-ray vision, heat vision, super senses, super speed, etc.

6. He can be built within a point limit if you stick to a de minimis interpretation, but generally capturing everything one of the more expansive interpretations can do requires bucketloads of points.

7. He's essentially a "mega hero", "paragon", "epic hero", "icon", or even "master superhero"--the heroic equivalent of a megamenace, megavillain or master villain. He can take on a team of lesser or average villains, or a whole superagency base, or a megavillain/megamenace.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

The main points vis a vis any Superman writeup, imo:

1. He's as strong as the strongest characters in the setting.

 

So there is no one stronger in the DCU than Superman? While in the upper echelons, I don't believe he has been established as "the strongest one there is".

 

2. He's as tough as the toughest characters in the setting.

 

Same issue. Is Doomsday neither stronger nor tougher than Superman? He lacks a lot of Supes' other powers, but I'd say he was stronger and tougher, given he went up against a lot of other tough opposition before fighting Supes to a draw.

 

3. He can fly or at least leap really far.

 

At least "over a tall building with a single bound"!

 

4. Being bulletproof seems like a de minimis requirement.

 

Here the issue becomes a Hero problem in that "Bulletproof" is hard to structure, yet seems a requirement of many Supers. Damage Negation helps a lot in this regard.

 

5. If he's something other than the Golden Age version' date=' he has a suite of secondary powers--x-ray vision, heat vision, super senses, super speed, etc.[/quote']

 

At a minimum, he's "faster than a speeding bullet", so he should be pretty fast. The rest evolved over time, but have been around a long time.

 

6. He can be built within a point limit if you stick to a de minimis interpretation' date=' but generally capturing everything one of the more expansive interpretations can do requires bucketloads of points. [/quote']

 

This is true of many long-published characters. Maybe we need to allow a more expansive Power Skill to better simulate comic book characters' wide array of seldom-used powers, rather than buying everything.

 

7. He's essentially a "mega hero"' date=' "paragon", "epic hero", "icon", or even "master superhero"--the heroic equivalent of a megamenace, megavillain or master villain. He can take on a team of lesser or average villains, or a whole superagency base, or a megavillain/megamenace.[/quote']

 

Other solo Supers have taken on opponents who have given Supes a run for his money, and Supes has been challenged by other heroes' rogues gallery. Green Lantern, the Flash and Wonder Woman come to mind as examples of characters of comparable power. We can certainly establish that most DCU Supers have 1,000+ points. Or we can set the benchmarks lower and accept some artistic license.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design.

 

Among the Heroes, Superman is the Strongest. Editorial decree.