Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

[Greywind]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Bashful Benjy is a brick. Nothing but a brick. Even when he's depowered he's a brick.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

What archetype do you think he fits best?

 

Don't think he fits neatly into any one archtype any more than I think Superman is primarily a Brick, Energy Porjector or Speedster.

 

Batman is a Martial Artist, Gadgeteer, Waepon Master, with occassional trips into Power Armor, Patriot or Mentalist territory.

 

In otherwords, a Power Gamer in Normal Human clothing...

 

 

Bashful Benjy is a brick. Nothing but a brick. Even when he's depowered he's a brick.

 

Considering his skills in boxing and wrestling, one coud argue he's a Martial Artist as well.

[Greywind]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Only if you consider those "arts".

[Bloodstone]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Only if you consider those "arts".

 

Well, as a boxer and wrestler holding advanced rank in a variety of different armed and unarmed martial arts styles my educated opinion is "Yes they are".

 

Alternatly:

 

"You have insulted my honor! Prepare to die!!!"

 

 

If anyone actually wants to debate this, I'll be more than happy to do so in some other thread. It's been a bit of a hot button topic before though.

 

Now, that said, Ben's boxing and wrestling skills are often underplayed and aren't necessarily a core part of his character the way they are with somone like Batman or Iron Fist, so I can see the argment against as well.

[Martin2]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Bashful Benjy is a brick. Nothing but a brick. Even when he's depowered he's a brick.

 

But when he was powered down did not Reed give him a Thing suit so he could still be with the FF?

 

So in the life time of the Thing he could have been built as a a normal person who was Focus armed to get his powers.

 

So that could have made him a powered armour or a gadgateer character .

 

And he does know martial arts so could he have been a martial artist, powered armour, gadgateer, brick character???

 

 

Next one

 

[Orion]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

For me, Batman is first and foremost a gadgeteer. I don't care who creates them - it's the use of numerous gadgets that defines the archetype to me. Being a detective is a close second to gadgeteer. The belt, car, plane, cycle, etc are more iconic to me than his detective skills. Being a martial artist is way down the list, as the stories I have read tended to concentrate on him tricking opponents and capturing them with his gadgets, not beating criminals up. From what I see in today's comics, there's probably a good argument for this order to be reversed.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Being a long time HERO player I remember the Gadgeteering skill when it first appeared and it seemed perfect for what Reed Richard does at the last minute to save everyone. I agree that Batman uses gadgets but I don't consider him or even Tony Stark a Gadgeteer since neither typically takes their stuff apart and reconfigures it on the fly to do something it wasn't originally intended for. Even the times that Tony has done this it's usually been under the supervision of Reed or Hank. There almost needs to be another term to differentiate between a weapon master like Green Arrow/Hawkeye and more generic gadget carrying heroes like Batman/Moon Knight.

[Greywind]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Even the times that Tony has done this it's usually been under the supervision of Reed or Hank.

...or Doom.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

We used to call them Riggers, though that had some potentially negative connotations since not every used the term Jury Rig (and it caused some more confusion with Shadowrun players)

 

In the old Marvel RPG, doing field inventing was called Kit Bashing. Always liked that term as well...

[csyphrett]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I just recently read BATMAN: EARTH ONE.

 

It is an updated origin story that incorporates the recent film's idea that Batman does not invent most of the gadgets that he uses, especially what he carries in his Utility Belt, but instead finds people to do it for him. Based on this I don't believe he truly qualifies to be called a Gadgeteer. He's also not really a Weapon Master as those are only a small part of what he carries in his Belt.

 

I consider him a Detective first and foremost (not sure if that's an official archetype from Champions though).

 

What archetype do you think he fits best?

 

(I considered making this a poll but I'm more interested in folk's responses and reasons behind them)

 

HM

 

This is an old idea that was recycled sort of. It's been mentioned before that Batman hired people to build things for him in the seventies.

 

He falls in the masked crimefighter archtype from Pulp Hero as a mastermind detective with a lot of skills and gadgets. He's the equivalent of a Spider or Avenger.

CES

[Lucius]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Last Pulp Hero Standing

 

Lucius Alexander

 

It's a G______mn palindromedary tagline

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

How about Jack of all trades? Except in Bats case, he is a master of ALL! He has the power! (whoops that's another cartoon!)

[wcw43921]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

He can be a gadgeteer/inventor if he needs to be. I remember a early Golden Age story where Hugo Strange had a serum that affected the human "growth glands" that he used to turn men into monsters. He injected Batman with the serum and told him it would take effect in twelve hours. Batman escaped the cell Strange was holding him in and made his way to Strange's laboratory, where he tricked the two human monsters standing guard into fighting each other, then used Strange's equipment to concoct an antidote.

 

Another story by Mike W. Barr (done in a Silver Age style) had him facing a Satanic-themed villain called Brimstone. The climax had Batman trapped in some sort of "infernal pit" that had not only brimstone--aka sulphur--but saltpeter and charcoal lying around. Stuffing all three into a convenient lead pipe, he made a crude bomb. ("Crude--but it worked!" as he said to Robin.)

 

My own preference is that Batman should build his own gadgets, or at least have a hand in designing them, then outsourcing the components and performing the final assembly. One of my annoyances about the "Dark Knight" movies is that it seemed like he got all his equipment out of the DARPA surplus catalog, and when he put it all together it just happened to come up with the Batman look. It's like they were trying to make things as unlike the comic book as they could--which is why, I suppose, there was no attempt to bring in Robin, or the Penguin, or the Riddler, or Harley Quinn, or anyone else who might have been perceived as "comic-booky." But to get back on topic, I think that when Batman makes his own gadgets, weapons and vehicles, he's putting a part of his soul, his drive to destroy evil, into every item. They're all a part of the Batman identity, all part of his war against crime--all extensions of his self. That's something you just can't buy with money.

 

Finally, you have to remember that Batman is a scientist, which can encompass a number of fields and disclipines. This was established in the episode of The Simpsons when Springfield got a monorail--

 

MARGE: "Homer, there's someone here who can help!"

 

HOMER: "Is it Batman?"

 

MARGE: "No, it's a scientist!"

 

HOMER: "Batman's a scientist!"

 

MARGE: "It's not Batman!"

 

Hope that helps.

[Greywind]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

No. It was done because Nolan wanted his movies to be grounded in reality.

[pinecone]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I just recently read BATMAN: EARTH ONE.

 

It is an updated origin story that incorporates the recent film's idea that Batman does not invent most of the gadgets that he uses, especially what he carries in his Utility Belt, but instead finds people to do it for him. Based on this I don't believe he truly qualifies to be called a Gadgeteer. He's also not really a Weapon Master as those are only a small part of what he carries in his Belt.

 

I consider him a Detective first and foremost (not sure if that's an official archetype from Champions though).

 

What archetype do you think he fits best?

 

(I considered making this a poll but I'm more interested in folk's responses and reasons behind them)

 

HM

 

Detective, or Ninja, with gizmos etc.... one of the animated versions was a Gadgeteer, and I liked it because it was differant...

[wcw43921]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

No. It was done because Nolan wanted his movies to be grounded in reality.

 

But how far can you take that before it's no longer in the superhero genre? You might as well forget about even wearing a costume--just get yourself some combat fatigues, a kevlar vest. an ALICE belt for your weapons and other gear, and a ski mask to hide your face. And forget all that batarangs and batrope nonsense--just get yourself some guns, man. Crimefighting through superior firepower, and all that. It may be more practical, and more grounded in reality--but it's not superheroes. It's certainly not Batman.

 

Trying to make a superhero story "grounded in reality" is like, as one writer suggested, trying to make a Peter Pan story with real pirates. It's like making an episode of Hogan's Heroes with a scene at a concentration camp--one look at the emaciated prisoners and any humor is killed in a half-second flat. Take away the outlandishly costumed villains with their grandiose schemes, take away the costume that defines the identity and the purpose--and what do you have? You might have a decent crime thriller, you might have a decent terrorist thriller (Nighthawks, with Sylvester Stallone and Rutger Hauer comes to mind)--but you wouldn't have Batman. You may have someone with that name, but not that character.

 

That's how it seems to me, anyway.

[Greywind]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

Made it last 3 movies with an opening for another sequel if WB wanted to pursue it.

[Cassandra]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I think Batman is a classic Multiform. He's what he needs to be.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I think Batman is a classic Multiform. He's what he needs to be.

 

Oddhat once posited that, though it was more of a 'two sheets ... Dark Champions Gotham City Batman, and Galaxy-Hopping Punches-Darkseid-In-The-Face Justice League Batman'.

[The Reaper]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I think Batman is primarily defined by his gadgets and gear, and by implication, his superior intellect as a resourceful inventor and planner for contingencies.

 

A detective or martial artist without the unique gadgets of Batman is just a detective or martial artist -- very perceptive and/or tough, perhaps -- but not able to deal with the obstacles Batman runs into and overcomes because of his gadgets.

 

Various writers have emphasized different aspects of Batman over the years, but to me, the Batman I grew up with is mainly a genius gadgeteer who will outsmart the villain. His greatest power is his intellect.

[phoenix240]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I just recently read BATMAN: EARTH ONE.

 

It is an updated origin story that incorporates the recent film's idea that Batman does not invent most of the gadgets that he uses, especially what he carries in his Utility Belt, but instead finds people to do it for him. Based on this I don't believe he truly qualifies to be called a Gadgeteer. He's also not really a Weapon Master as those are only a small part of what he carries in his Belt.

 

I consider him a Detective first and foremost (not sure if that's an official archetype from Champions though).

 

What archetype do you think he fits best?

 

(I considered making this a poll but I'm more interested in folk's responses and reasons behind them)

 

HM

 

I think of him as s detective/tough guy. Especially in the interpretation that have him acquiring his gadgets and weapons with his connections and wealth instead of designing and building them himself.

[The Reaper]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I think of him as s detective/tough guy. Especially in the interpretation that have him acquiring his gadgets and weapons with his connections and wealth instead of designing and building them himself.

 

As much as I love the Christopher Nolan Batman movies, I do feel something crucial was lost with Batman no longer being the builder/designer of (most of) his gadgets (sure, he still forged his own batarangs). Yes, it is much more realistic that he didn't. And for that reason, I can't really object to the decision to do make this change in the movies. But as a Batman fan, I missed the genius inventor of gadgets!

[phoenix240]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

As much as I love the Christopher Nolan Batman movies' date=' I do feel something crucial was lost with Batman no longer being the builder/designer of (most of) his gadgets (sure, he still forged his own batarangs). Yes, it is much more realistic that he didn't. And for that reason, I can't really object to the decision to do make this change in the movies. But as a Batman fan, I missed the genius inventor of gadgets![/quote']

 

I can understand that. I felt much the same way when Spider Man's webshooters were made organic and a part of his powers instead of something Peter created. Though that did make more sense. If he was that much of a chemical engineering prodigy afterall...

[Darren Watts]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

In Golden Age Champions I replace the Martial Artist archetype with the Mystery Man, which has several subarchetypes. Batman fits pretty much all of them, and IMO defines the main archetype. dw

[assault]

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else?

 

I agree with the Mystery Man archetype idea.

 

I'd suggest that the Masked Boxer types like the Atom and Wildcat were true Golden Age Martial Artists, though. Of course the only things that really differentiated them from other Mystery Men were their lack of gadgets, and slightly superior combat skills.