Agent X

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

I like to go with the theory that Supervillainry had nearly been eradicated. Even Bomb Voyage was little more than a guy with some dynamite and a funny suit.

Look at it like the movie, "Shane". When the bad guys are more powerful, you need to have dangerous people on your side. Once the dangerous people elminate the bad guys, there's no need for them to hang around. In fact, people get leery of them.

If the premise is to work, we must assume that the major bad guys had all been dealt with and the people were looking forward to the "threat" of superheroes running around with Nothing To Do.

Basically, the America of the Incredibles had moved beyond the Wild West and was moving into the 20th Century. The particular events of the movie were only a stylistic way of showing the trend.

 

Keith "Come back, Shane! It's not the same without ya!" Curtis

Why I brought this up is because there are folks who were talking about building a campaign around this concept of lawsuits driving supers out of activity and they apparently hadn't considered how plausible that really is.

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

Actually' date=' only one was a supervillain. The first was stopping some ordinary criminals in a getaway car, and the second was a mugger. Only Bomb Voyage could really be considered a Supervillain...[/quote'] Actually, one supervillain qualifies for me using the words Supervillain Activity. I've seen the movie too.

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

I think we have to assume conditions were such that driving away the superheroes was plausible' date=' since that's obviously a big part of the "sample" we have. So the supervillain threat must have been minor at best.[/quote'] Heck, Mr. Incredible couldn't even get to his wedding on time because of Supervillain Activity.

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

They did mention something about "memory erasing" in the movie' date=' and we saw it happen in the DVD short [i']Jack-Jack Attack[/i]. Perhaps most, if not all of the supervillains that were caught had some of their memories blanked out--most likely the ones relating to how to use their powers.

 

It would have to be kept secret--the uproar over civil liberties that would rise up would be more than the government could handle.

 

This obviously doesn't cover everything--I suppose we'll have to ask Brad Bird for a complete explanation. Anyone got his phone number?

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

There wasn't any need for superheroes.

 

We don't have much of a sample, but it's quite possible that supervillains were actually rare and low-powered by the time the heroes were forced to retire.

 

That's quite plausible, if there are no revolving doors on the prisons. All the big boys could have been taken out of commission.

 

A lot also depends on how many supers there actually were. (About 20-odd were mentioned in the film).

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

Yup' date=' he's on my list actually, a ways back. He's right above Elektra and DD on my list.[/quote'] I didn't think about Stick. I do my best to ignore Elektra.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

First time I saw it was in the Savage Land arc' date=' after they wscaped from Magneto's volcano lair.[/quote'] If you guys keep this up I'll be motivated to drag out the issues.

 

I've got GSX-Men #1, and #s 95 through the low 200s.

 

No #94 though.

Re: Don't Buy Everything In a Good Story (Topic: Supers and the Law)

There's always the possibility that the Supervillains weren't stupendously super.

 

In the downtime between Act 1 and Act 2 the authorities find that the cops can't handle the supervillains without the heroes around and change their policies. No more "Book 'em, Danno". Now it's "shoot on sight" with teflon-coated rounds. If it's got a cape, it's going down hard.

 

Most of the low- to mid-powered villains get out of the game, or develop toe tags. The higher-order villains start working behind the scenes before the PD start upgrading their weaponry to something that could even hurt them.

 

Naturally, since this is an upbeat Pixar movie, all this unpleasantness happens off-camera...

And I just don't buy the notion that Syndrome was the only credible supervillain threat the police weren't capable of handling.

And I don't think "secret superheroes" can actually deal with every standard Supervillain threat - some supervillains tend to be a bit public in demonstrating their power.

I like the movie but I wouldn't want to play in a campaign where the notion that you could force superheroes underground for decades was held up as plausible.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

Aren't you the one who reminds us to look at how a character has been depicted overall, rather than the aberrations?

 

But I do agree with Suleyman Rashid; Stephen Strange is a quite competent martial artist, and has demonstrated that several times over the years when magic wasn't an option for some reason, but he's not world-class like the others on this list. For Mantis it's the essence of her concept.

She's a very forgettable and inconsistent character, IMO.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

1. Captain America and Karnak

Sure, Karnak, has armor-piercing attacks or Find Weakness or both. But, if the two tangled I think it would be a draw.

2. Shang Chi and Iron Fist

Iron Fist rocks! Just because he doesn't look like Bruce Lee doesn't mean he's not as good as Shang Chi. If you compare their origins he's been tested more than Shang Chi has.

3. Daredevil and Black Panther and Ka-Zar and Wolverine and Black Widow

4. Moon Knight and Falcon

I don't think either of these guys would whip Daredevil or Black Panther or Wolverine and they would only draw with Ka-Zar and they both have better gadgets than Ka-Zar. And Black Widow has a history.

5. Batroc and Zaran and Kingpin - Bad Guys who threaten the best Good Guy Martial Artists

6. Hawkeye - Trained by Cap with years of experience (I don't care if they killed him off)

7. Puck and Mockingbird

8. Punisher

9. Nick Fury and Red Skull

10. Ben Grimm (The Thing has used his fighting skills and heart against much tougher opponents to come out as the victor, or at least not the loser.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

Hadn't seen that - was that in the last few years? If so, it would fall under that "confusing mess" that I mentioned.

 

I could direct you to the details, but I'm afraid it's nearly as nauseating as what they did to Thor recently.

 

EDIT: Oh, what the heck... read if you have a strong stomach:

 

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/2855/mantis.html

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

Is Cap at "peak of human" or "low-end superhuman" levels right now?

 

Either way, I'd put him a nudge below Shang-Chi in raw skill; the Super-Soldier enhancements are probably enough that Cap would beat Shang-Chi in a fight though.

 

Which just goes to show:

 

Winners do use drugs!

 

It's not Shang Chi's fault that his comic was trying to be a bit more realistic - but that means he has to pay the price and not be ranked #1 in my forthcoming list.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

I had no idea Mantis was so tough / capable. Can I change my list Enforcer? If so' date=' I would tie her with Karnak. Thanks for the education LL[/quote'] Don't let the hype fool you - she got punked, in hand-to-hand combat, by none other than Dr. Strange.

I was just reading, elsewhere, a few gamers' comments on the Incredibles and it got me thinking. They were buying into the premise of the Incredibles, a movie I like, but still can see the huge gaping hole of a problem with.

The notion that lawsuits and public sentiment against supers would cause Superheroes to be forced by the government to retire has a huge gaping flaw in it: What about the Supervillains?

Supervillains are already doing stuff the government and the public doesn't like. They're not going to stop being Supervillains. A "ban" against Superheroes isn't going to last very long when the Evil Society takes over the Island of Manhattan and threatens the rest of the world with its storm-making machine. The minute the Supervillains have done something like that, the public and the government would be forced to revisit their position and change it.

If the Supervillains don't do stuff like that - oh well, I guess Superheroes weren't needed anyway.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

That's cool. Give me your top ten.

Re: Marvel's Best Martial Artists

I think Cap is better than Shang Chi.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

I realize this is outside comics, but having played a lot with supernaturally-based energy and directly supernatural attacks, I didn't find Busiek's basic contention (regardless of the details of Mjolnir) at all a contrivance. And in terms of comis themselves, I also think it's true in general:

 

Magically created weapon <> magical attack when weapon hits

 

The magically created weapon MAY have a magical attack when it hits, but that's a separate issue.

 

Of course, it may be that Mjolnir has a magical attack inherent in its physical strikes. I'm not trying to weigh in on that specifically. But the logic seems fine to me. If people can produce data from the comics that shows that when Thor hits something it necessarily bypasses normal defenses, then fine, I would say Busiek's wrong. If they can't, I'd say he's right.

1) Physics behind the swing.

2) The Hammer is tough enough to not be destroyed by a Thor swing so Thor gets the advantage of the Physics behind the swing.

3) The Uru is enchanted to increase the physical damage caused by the hammer.

Busiek accepts 1 & 2 but from what I've read he discounts number 3 and that's where I have a problem with him.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

Oh, btw, fun fact -- who wrote FANTASTIC FOUR vs. X-MEN (we've been getting the title wrong) limited series?

 

Hint -- the same guy who, at that time, was writing the regular UNCANNY X-MEN title.

 

Who was the *editor* for FF vs. X-MEN?

 

Hint -- the same lady who, at that time, was the editor for the UNCANNY X-MEN title (and the other X-books).

 

So, your thesis of Wolvie getting jobbed out by Marvel editorial or pro-FF writers? Not hardly, bub. The same crew what did that storyline was doing the regular Xbooks of that era. Heck, it pretty much *WAS* a four-issue UNCANNY arc with the FF guest-starring.

 

(I anticipate with amusement any attempt at explaining why Chris Claremont and Ann Nocenti allegedly didn't know how to properly write Wolverine circa 1987.)

But I've always enjoyed Wolverine getting whipped by the Thing and always will.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

Note that if we went with that approach, Superman would logically have died on the first hit, which means there's no way to write this story *at all*.

 

I can forgive a contrivance like this if a) there's an unavoidable necessity for it because nothing less can save the plot from *poofing* into total nonexistence in act one and the writer puts some actual work into making it sound intelligent.

 

Now if Busiek did it just to make Thor job 'cause he's a raving Superman fanboy, that would be different. But he didn't. He did it because otherwise there's no way to write an entertaining Thor/Superman fight *at all*(1), 'cause Superman going from "unhurt" to "strawberry jam" on the first blow is entertaining to neither Thor fans nor Superman fans.

 

Besides, now that Thor knows about Supes' weakness, the rematch will have him juggling Clark's head like a hacky-sack, so what's to complain?

(1) If somebody wants to bring in A Certain Other Discussion' date=' let me remind them that we suggested several ways that the Spidey/Firelord fight could still be drawn-out, entertaining, and yet *not* end with Spidey going SSJ3 and punking Firelord like a mook. So don't.[/quote'] What's with all the commands?

 

You're not the boss of me.

 

Frankly, I think Spidey's success over Firelord is much less contrived than Busiek's explanation of how Mjolnir works against Superman.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

Can you really blame 'em though? I mean at 20 posts per page this thread is exceeding 100 pages. I stopped around page 26 because' date=' well, real life gave me better things to do. Having to read 75 pages when most of it is people not listening to each other is a bit tedious.[/quote'] Yeah, I can. [This is not really directed at you] And I'm getting tired of folks coming in here pretending to be more reasonable by making claims such that "most" people are not listening to each other. I know it's easier to get on here and pretend to be above it all and lump all the earnest debaters into the same camp of behavior but it's simply not the case. The rampant distortion has been very one-sided.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

Since this is not directly on topic, hope I will be forgiven for sidesteping my vow of silence. I really did mean to respond to this earlier, but when I went back I couldn't find it.

 

"HERO combat and do you assume that the only blows delivered are those reflected by to-hit and damage rolls?"

 

Yes.

 

The concept of END and charges means we do need to keep tract of the attacks.

 

Imagine the alternative. You have a six-gun, simply as the prototypical focus with charges. You fire in your first phase, angain in your second. In your third phase the hammer clicks on an empty chamber.

 

"What happened to my other four bullets?"

 

"They were implied to have been fired, off panel, between phases."

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

Yup. My point is... ok' date=' to use Champions gamespeak, it's not Discriminatory. It doesn't tell him "You are in danger because six elephants, two piles of bricks, and an evil clown are falling off the roof above you!' It simply yells in his ear "GET THE HELL AWAY FROM WHERE YOU'RE STANDING *RIGHT NOW!* YOU'RE ABOUT TO GET SMASHED!"[/quote'] It does clue him in as to which way to dodge.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

He never says Thor hits harder with his fists, he in fact states the very opposite.

 

And he wasn't downplaying Mjolnir, he was saying that while it packs a lot of magic, that doesn't really effect Superman, or Hulk or Gladiator for that matter. If you replaced Mjolnir with an adamantium hammer of the same size, Thor would do the same amount of damage to Superman, Hulk and Gladiator as he does with Mjolnir.

And he's still wrong on Adamantium = Uru Mjolnir for smashing.

I do agree though that Supes would not fold over because he got hit from Mjolnir.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

The spider-sense is supernatural though. It alerts him to threats he couldn't possible sense normally' date=' and one at least one occasion, probably more, knew a crook was bluffing about attacking him because he spidey-sense didn't go off.[/quote'] But Spidey's spider-sense has failed before AND folks in heightened emotional states tend to fixate a bit and ignore possibly important sensory input.

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

So if Superman sans invulnerability is akin to Thor' date=' what edge does the invulnerability give him?[/quote'] Apparently he was always invulnerable against physical attacks (which does not ring true with how he's reacted to powerful attacks) or just slightly vulnerable to massive physical attacks.