PIS Consistency vs Common Sense

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



darthgoober
Ok, I figured this topic was LONG over due to be discussed. PIS, should it be dictated by consistency, or common sense? For instance, Flash has a hard time with people WAY slower than he frequently in his books. Wolverine has continually showed the ability to cut/stab many characters with an INSANE level of durability, and takes shots from 100+ characters routinly. Deathstroke has been taking it to the Teen Titans(including FLash) since his introduction. Batman has managed to sneak up on Superman God only knows how many times. And, whether we like it or not, Spiderman has managed to take on(and take shots from) way more herald level characters than just Firelord(like Hulk, Masterson Thor, Silver Surfer, Juggernaut, Absorbing Man). Now forum rules say, that we disregard PIS and SMvF, and go by the high end showings. But what happens when the rules come into conflict(for instance, SMvF can't really be considered as such at this point, because he's taken on herald level characters consistently, and under different writers).

We're also supposed to go by high end feats, but who's? Wolverine taking on Namor, is a high end feat for him, but a low end feat for Namor? So in a thread between the two, which end are we supposed to go by? Daredevil being able to take on Spidey is also a high end feat for him, but a low end for Spidey. So which feats should be considered valid?


Thoughts?

The Pict
srug It the end I suppose it doesn't matter if what we think of "PIS" If we don't like it we can stop reading the comics.

Soljer
PIS is NOT contingent on consistency. The Flash should NEVER get hit by most of the people that tag him.

Spiderman should NEVER have trouble with someone who lacks superhuman speed.

Wolverine taking shots from class 100 characters isn't much of PIS, though, as he's been doing it since his inception. It's what his character was created to do.

Spiderman dancing around some superior characters using primarily his spider sense is not PIS.

Beating down Firelord with punches, though, was.

It's based off of common sense, for me.

darthgoober
Originally posted by The Pict
srug It the end I suppose it doesn't matter if what we think of "PIS" If we don't like it we can stop reading the comics.
Yes, but debates on the forum ALWAYS end up being about whether or not specific events should qualify as PIS. So I figured that it would be good to get everyone's feelings out into the open about what should qualify as such.

Badabing
I like to use common sense and then average out a character from all their showings.

xmarksthespot
It actually says in the forum rules PIS is not contingent on consistency.

darthgoober
Originally posted by Soljer
Wolverine taking shots from class 100 characters isn't much of PIS, though, as he's been doing it since his inception. It's what his character was created to do.
Yes, was created to take on 100+ character, but the same way Spiderman does. Through superior speed and agility. In Wolverine's first appearance(well technically second, cause the fight carried over a book), he was KO'd by a single GRAZING blow by the Hulk. THAT'S how he was meant to be.

darthgoober
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
It actually says in the forum rules PIS is not contingent on consistency.
But SMvF IS. And the to are often considered interchangeable.

Badabing
I think the best thing for us is to decide for ourselves. Most of the time, the KMCers can decide as a collective what's BS and what's not BS. We'll always have rabid fans who disagree but that's a way of life here.

jrodslam
I think if something is shown by a character on a consistant basis(7/10 times), i wouldnt call PIS at all. I try to go with whats more consistant.

darthgoober
Originally posted by jrodslam
I think if something is shown by a character on a consistant basis(7/10 times), i wouldnt call PIS at all. I try to go with whats more consistant.
Yes, but Flash's slow ass villians give him a good fight just about every book. And Supes NEVER uses his speed unless the opponent can take it.

jrodslam
Originally posted by darthgoober
Yes, but Flash's slow ass villians give him a good fight just about every book. And Supes NEVER uses his speed unless the opponent can take it.

True, but you have to think about what it is that they do. Many times they catch Flash off guard. We also know that Flash is cocky and usually underestimates and thats why his ass gets tagged. Should it happen? No. I guess thats why here on the forum, we put everyone at a bloodlusted level. BUT in character at the same time.

Accel
It really comes down to how you view it. If we base Flash's abilities off of his greatest showings, then it would be PIS whenever even some one as fast as Superman tagged him.

However, if we went by average showings, then Flash's highest showings would be just that- high showings- and not really an indication of how fast he generally is (at least not right off the bat).

darthgoober
Originally posted by Accel
It really comes down to how you view it. If we base Flash's abilities off of his greatest showings, then it would be PIS whenever even some one as fast as Superman tagged him.

However, if we went by average showings, then Flash's highest showings would be just that- high showings- and not really an indication of how fast he generally is (at least not right off the bat).
See, I'm actually a big fan of average showings, but whenever you try to bring those up around here, people always start ranting "We go by the high end feats!(at least as far as our favorite character is concerned)". Which brings up the question, who's high end showings? Wolverine or Namor's? Spiderman's or Firelords? Batman's stealth or Supes hearing?

pr1983
Originally posted by jrodslam
True, but you have to think about what it is that they do. Many times they catch Flash off guard. We also know that Flash is cocky and usually underestimates and thats why his ass gets tagged. Should it happen? No. I guess thats why here on the forum, we put everyone at a bloodlusted level. BUT in character at the same time.

He's not cocky, he's impulsive (wally anyway), especially before the crisis... its his urgency to protect those around him that gets him hurt... messed

(sorry, i just hate it when people call him cocky embarrasment)

Originally posted by Accel
It really comes down to how you view it. If we base Flash's abilities off of his greatest showings, then it would be PIS whenever even some one as fast as Superman tagged him.

However, if we went by average showings, then Flash's highest showings would be just that- high showings- and not really an indication of how fast he generally is (at least not right off the bat).

thats true... its a fine line trying to decide whats PIS and what isn't... common sense says that deathstroke could never touch flash (given that nightwing can challenge him, and no disrespect to him), but then the comic gives some answer that while being seemingly bullshit, looking at it from another angle can show another worthy point of view...

jrodslam
Originally posted by darthgoober
See, I'm actually a big fan of average showings, but whenever you try to bring those up around here, people always start ranting "We go by the high end feats!(at least as far as our favorite character is concerned)". Which brings up the question, who's high end showings? Wolverine or Namor's? Spiderman's or Firelords? Batman's stealth or Supes hearing?

Ahh you see. Thats always gonna be a problem if people look at it like that. Whos high end showings? When you have say Hulk vs Namor, going by high showings, Hulk will always have them over Namor, but when they fight its always a good fight. Hulk even loses at times. Then youll have Wonder Woman vs Juggernaut. Juggy is said to be as strong as Hulk or Supes, yet he hardly has any feats to show for it. We make exceptions for certain people. Thats why i go more by what is consistantly shown in battles instead of individual feats.

jrodslam
Originally posted by pr1983
He's not cocky, he's impulsive (wally anyway), especially before the crisis... its his urgency to protect those around him that gets him hurt... messed

(sorry, i just hate it when people call him cocky embarrasment)

Youre right. Wrong choice of words on my part. Impulsive and sometimes loses focus and underestimates his opponent to a degree at times.

Soljer
Wally isn't impulsive. That was Bart.

Yeah, yeah, bad pun on my part.

pr1983
Originally posted by jrodslam
Youre right. Wrong choice of words on my part. Impulsive and sometimes loses focus and underestimates his opponent to a degree at times.

i'm sorry for flying off the handle like that... embarrasment

jrodslam
Originally posted by Soljer
Wally isn't impulsive. That was Bart.

Yeah, yeah, bad pun on my part.

Actually Wally was impulsive as well a bit. Very impatient and that got him in trouble many a times. Hes had to stop and think about what hes gonna do after the first try slaps him in the face.

jrodslam
Originally posted by pr1983
i'm sorry for flying off the handle like that too... embarrasment

All good man. No worries.big grin

Soljer
Originally posted by jrodslam
Actually Wally was impulsive as well a bit. Very impatient and that got him in trouble many a times. Hes had to stop and think about what hes gonna do after the first try slaps him in the face.

You missed the pun.

pr1983
Originally posted by jrodslam
All good man. No worries.big grin

big grin

jrodslam
Originally posted by Soljer
You missed the pun.

Doh! I got it, i just thought you were serious though.sad

darthgoober
Originally posted by jrodslam
Ahh you see. Thats always gonna be a problem if people look at it like that. Whos high end showings? When you have say Hulk vs Namor, going by high showings, Hulk will always have them over Namor, but when they fight its always a good fight. Hulk even loses at times. Then youll have Wonder Woman vs Juggernaut. Juggy is said to be as strong as Hulk or Supes, yet he hardly has any feats to show for it. We make exceptions for certain people. Thats why i go more by what is consistantly shown in battles instead of individual feats.
Yes but Namor and the Hulk is a bit of a different scenario. As far as pure strength and durability goes, yes Hulk has Namor beaten hands down. But Namor has a shot, because he has a MASSIVE speed advantage, the ability to fly, and far superior fighting skills. So it makes sense that the two of of them would be a good fight.

jrodslam
Originally posted by darthgoober
Yes but Namor and the Hulk is a bit of a different scenario. As far as pure strength and durability goes, yes Hulk has Namor beaten hands down. But Namor has a shot, because he has a MASSIVE speed advantage, the ability to fly, and far superior fighting skills. So it makes sense that the two of of them would be a good fight.

But thats what im saying. Many people base the fights off feats and say how one person would destroy the other, yet when they fight 4, 5 or 6 times in the comics, the fights are drastically even. Dont get me wrong. there are some cases where that shouldnt matter at all, like Batman vs Superman or something like that. I personally dont go by feats, but rather whats displayed on a consistant basis because obviously some characters are less popular and dont have the feats or just havent been around as long.

Alfheim
Originally posted by darthgoober
Ok, I figured this topic was LONG over due to be discussed. PIS, should it be dictated by consistency, or common sense? For instance, Flash has a hard time with people WAY slower than he frequently in his books. Wolverine has continually showed the ability to cut/stab many characters with an INSANE level of durability, and takes shots from 100+ characters routinly. Deathstroke has been taking it to the Teen Titans(including FLash) since his introduction. Batman has managed to sneak up on Superman God only knows how many times. And, whether we like it or not, Spiderman has managed to take on(and take shots from) way more herald level characters than just Firelord(like Hulk, Masterson Thor, Silver Surfer, Juggernaut, Absorbing Man). Now forum rules say, that we disregard PIS and SMvF, and go by the high end showings. But what happens when the rules come into conflict(for instance, SMvF can't really be considered as such at this point, because he's taken on herald level characters consistently, and under different writers).



Im going to get grief for this. Well I think it depends wether characters are prescribed to do it or not. For example if the bio says that they can do something but the comics consistently prove them wrong like Powerman lifting more than 3 tons in a comic thats not PIS. IF both bio and comics back something up then its not PIS. For example:

Mantis

Her mastery of the Priests' martial arts, which focus on manipulation of nerve endings and pressure points, has enabled her to knock out beings as powerful as Thor.

When you have something like this you cant turn around as says its PIS because the Universe has prescibed her with the ability to do it. Saying this is PIS, is like saying humans on Mars cant die of radiation because you dont want to belive its true. People have to understand that physics are different in the MU. Another thing to bare in mind is that Spiderman and Wonder Woman should be bullet proof. Strength is relative to durability but their not, so to an extent you can't use common sense. The best way to tell if something is PIS or not is by seeing wether characters are prescribed to do it.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
It actually says in the forum rules PIS is not contingent on consistency.

Im looking but I cant see it anywhere.

No Mentioning Events of PIS

Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.

Character Induced Stupidity, or CIS, on the other hand, refers to any natural mental limitations that characters impose upon themselves and reduce their ability to use their own skills and powers effectively. Unlike PIS, CIS does not occur because the plot requires it, but because the character is genuinely that dumb. Examples of the CIS-afflicted include characters such as Rhino or Jar Jar Binks. Events of CIS are not exempt from debates.

Spiderman Vs Firelord says this.

Batman being able to sneak up on Superman is not because he has done so frequently under different writers.

This implies that PIS can be contingent to consistency eventhough this is in the SvFL section, SvFL is just a greater version of PIS and therefore can be applied.



Originally posted by Soljer
PIS is NOT contingent on consistency. The Flash should NEVER get hit by most of the people that tag him.

Spiderman should NEVER have trouble with someone who lacks superhuman speed.

Wolverine taking shots from class 100 characters isn't much of PIS, though, as he's been doing it since his inception. It's what his character was created to do.

Spiderman dancing around some superior characters using primarily his spider sense is not PIS.

Beating down Firelord with punches, though, was.

It's based off of common sense, for me.

Im sure you are contradicting yourself im sure in the Cap vs Spidey thread you said it was.

DarkCrawler
Physics are different in comics alltogether, not just Marvel Universe.

Alfheim
Originally posted by DarkCrawler
Physics are different in comics alltogether, not just Marvel Universe.

So you're agreeing with me?

DarkCrawler
Eh, pretty much. It's pointless to argue that something is PIS because it would not make sense in real world physics. If that was what you were meaning.

Alfheim
Originally posted by DarkCrawler
Eh, pretty much. It's pointless to argue that something is PIS because it would not make sense in real world physics. If that was what you were meaning.

Yes

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by Alfheim
Im looking but I cant see it anywhere.

No Mentioning Events of PIS

Plot Induced Stupidity, or PIS, is when characters don't use their abilities or skills to the fullest extent as shown before, even within their personality ranges, for the sake of the story plotline. It makes lesser powered characters an actual challenge against higher powered characters in the comics. Examples of PIS include Flash stories lasting longer than three panels, or Toy Man as a threat to Superman.

Character Induced Stupidity, or CIS, on the other hand, refers to any natural mental limitations that characters impose upon themselves and reduce their ability to use their own skills and powers effectively. Unlike PIS, CIS does not occur because the plot requires it, but because the character is genuinely that dumb. Examples of the CIS-afflicted include characters such as Rhino or Jar Jar Binks. Events of CIS are not exempt from debates.Hmm, I recall it actually stated. Oh well, the examples given clearly imply that regardless of how many times a Flash story occurs where the opponent is tremendously inferior speedwise it is PIS. And that regardless of how many times Toy Man was written as a threat to Superman it would be PIS.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Spiderman Vs Firelord says this.
Batman being able to sneak up on Superman is not because he has done so frequently under different writers.

This implies that PIS can be contingent to consistency eventhough this is in the SvFL section, SvFL is just a greater version of PIS and therefore can be applied.It's a different section. You simply make biased inference because the characters you like are riddled with SvFL and PIS. Despite the example and name of SvFL, it generally refers to individual feats where a character has a showing beyond their abilities, while PIS generally refers to events or incidents where a character has been limited to enhance the story.

Regardless: "I prefer to rely on common sense to tell me what's BS."

Alfheim
Originally posted by xmarksthespot

It's a different section.

Yes I already stated that.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Despite the example and name of SvFL,


Yes I laready stated that

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

it generally refers to individual feats where a character has a showing beyond their abilities, while PIS generally refers to events or incidents where a character has been limited to enhance the story.



Ok so what you are trying to tell me is that SvFL and PIS are not similar concepts and they won't overlap?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

Regardless: "I prefer to rely on common sense to tell me what's BS."

Well you're the one who said that what determines wether a superhero can do something is wether it is prescribed or not.

xmarksthespot
They're similar concepts but they're distinct concepts. That's why there are two of them.

(Oh and FYI, the Kree are a genetically stagnant species because they failed the test of the Crystal of Ultimate Vision. Had Wolverine taken the omnipotence granted by the crystal when he became akin to a god, humanity would also be evolutionarily frozen.)

S-Ranger
I think we'll just have to keep finding common ground to agree on in each individual case because the problem is too complex to solve.

Alfheim
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
They're similar concepts but they're distinct concepts. That's why there are two of them.

Yes but if they are similar concepts that Batman example can still apply to PIS. Mars has a similar but distinct atmosphere, but its not so distinct that humans cant live there. Venus however is so distinct that humans cannot. Both examples merely talk about characters doing things they should not.


Originally posted by xmarksthespot

(Oh and FYI, the Kree are a genetically stagnant species because they failed the test of the Crystal of Ultimate Vision. Had Wolverine taken the omnipotence granted by the crystal when he became akin to a god, humanity would also be evolutionarily frozen.)

Well im not sure if I want to get into this again, because basically I stoped debating because you were being rude, but I will try again.

Im aware of Kree genetics but still the Kree did not experiment on the Skrulls, Shiar and probably 1000's of other aliens in the galaxy the humans are still distcintly special. Really if you want to talk about this you should go back to my thread, this is the wrong section.

Originally posted by S-Ranger
I think we'll just have to keep finding common ground to agree on in each individual case because the problem is too complex to solve.

I think prescription is good way of determining wether a character can do something or not.

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes but if they are similar concepts that Batman example can still apply to PIS. Mars has a similar but distinct atmosphere, but its not so distinct that humans cant live there. Venus however is so distinct that humans cannot. Both examples merely talk about characters doing things they should not.What the f**k? You do realise Mars' atmosphere is 95% CO2 right?
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well im not sure if I want to get into this again, because basically I stoped debating because you were being rude, but I will try again.

Im aware of Kree genetics but still the Kree did not experiment on the Skrulls, Shiar and probably 1000's of other aliens in the galaxy the humans are still distcintly special. Really if you want to talk about this you should go back to my thread, this is the wrong section.
The Skrull also failed the Crystal's test. As did many others. That was just an FYI I've no further interest in "debating" your crackpot theories.
Originally posted by Alfheim
I think prescription is good way of determining wether a character can do something or not. A combination of prescribed characteristics, logic and common sense are adequate.

Alfheim
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What the f**k? You do realise Mars' atmosphere is 95% CO2 right?

The point im trying to make is that Mars is not so disticnt from Earth that humans cant find a way to live on it. Humans cannot live on Venus. roll eyes (sarcastic) I also stated that:

If SvFL and PIS are similar examples than the batman example still applies. Isn't SvFL and PIS merely just about characters doing things they should not be able to do?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

The Skrull also failed the Crystal's test. As did many others.

The skrulls may have failed the test but there genetics are still greater than the Kree. The fact they can all shapshifte proves it. In fact they have more genetic potential in the fact that all Skrulls have powers, not all humans do. Despite this the Kree still decided to experiement on humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skrull#Abilities

Abilities

Skrulls are known for their ability to shapeshift. All Skrulls are highly versatile shapeshifters who are not only able to mimic other humanoid species, but also to assume virtually any shape, from non-humanoid species such as cows to abstract shapes such as a box.

Did the Shiar fail the test? Can you also state the other races that failed? Eventhough other may have failed there are probably still loads of other.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

That was just an FYI I've no further interest in "debating" your crackpot theories.

Well why did you go blantantly off topic? Its not an FYI, otherwise you would have stoped debating by now.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

A combination of prescribed characteristics, logic and common sense are adequate.

Thats fine.

xmarksthespot
"Isn't SvFL and PIS merely just about characters doing things they should not be able to do?"

Aren't and "no". Only if one oversimplifies. They're distinct concepts.

PIS is about things happening to characters that shouldn't or fights lasting longer than they should etc. because of plot-induced lowering of a character's or characters' abilities in comparison to their other showings.

SvFL is about characters doing things blatantly beyond their abilities, as a statistical outlier, and it needn't be plot-induced.

FYI means what it means, for your information. That was for your information.

Alfheim
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
"Isn't SvFL and PIS merely just about characters doing things they should not be able to do?"

Aren't and "no". Only if one oversimplifies. They're distinct concepts.

PIS is about things happening to characters that shouldn't or fights lasting longer than they should etc. because of plot-induced lowering of a character's or characters' abilities in comparison to their other showings.

SvFL is about characters doing things blatantly beyond their abilities, as a statistical outlier, and it needn't be plot-induced.

roll eyes (sarcastic) Im done with this. Im not going into this because this is just going to be a complete waste of time. They are similar concepts and you know it.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

FYI means what it means, for your information. That was for your information.

Well thank you for making my argument even stronger.

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by Alfheim
roll eyes (sarcastic) Im done with this. Im not going into this because this is just going to be a complete waste of time. They are similar concepts and you know it. Originally posted by xmarksthespot
They're similar concepts but they're distinct concepts. That's why there are two of them.You're a waste of time in general.Originally posted by Alfheim
Well thank you for making my argument even stronger. What argument? Could you be any more incoherent? It was an FYI, an aside, an NB, an annotation, in parentheses.

Alfheim
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Could you be any more incoherent? It was an FYI, an aside, an NB, an annotation, in parentheses.

I could elaborate but im not going to bother.

Howard_Jones
I'm gonna be honest about something. Screaming PIS in every argument is just flat out bullshit, and nothing ever gets solved. That's why I'm guessing Wolverine vs Spider-Man has gone on so long. However, whenever feats happen in comics, nobody ever takes in mind a few things:

1. Context
2. Character
3. Purpose

Here's what I mean by that.

Context is why either two characters are fighting. This is the problem in analyzing most Hulk fights, and why he's taking down top tier characters. About 80 percent of the time, that character is trying to just subdue banner, but it never turns out that way.

Character determines how a person fights. Superman will never, and I mean NEVER use the full extent of his powers in a battle unless he's away from earth. If he did, he would regret it for the rest of his life. It's not in his character to constantly go around and whup up on people going 15 times lightspeed and such.

Purpose is why the hell they're fighting in the first place. If you're just fighting for sparring, and someone out of nowhere stabs you in the head, that's just crap. The best example is the training session between Wolverine and Spider-Man when Wolvie stabs him for no damn reason, and Spidey passes out. 2 words: cheap shot.

So, you've gotta take the low feats and high feats with the context of the situation. If there's no explanation whatsoever for a low feat, then it's crap.

Alfheim
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
I'm gonna be honest about something. Screaming PIS in every argument is just flat out bullshit, and nothing ever gets solved. That's why I'm guessing Wolverine vs Spider-Man has gone on so long. However, whenever feats happen in comics, nobody ever takes in mind a few things:

1. Context
2. Character
3. Purpose

Here's what I mean by that.

Context is why either two characters are fighting. This is the problem in analyzing most Hulk fights, and why he's taking down top tier characters. About 80 percent of the time, that character is trying to just subdue banner, but it never turns out that way.

Character determines how a person fights. Superman will never, and I mean NEVER use the full extent of his powers in a battle unless he's away from earth. If he did, he would regret it for the rest of his life. It's not in his character to constantly go around and whup up on people going 15 times lightspeed and such.

Purpose is why the hell they're fighting in the first place. If you're just fighting for sparring, and someone out of nowhere stabs you in the head, that's just crap. The best example is the training session between Wolverine and Spider-Man when Wolvie stabs him for no damn reason, and Spidey passes out. 2 words: cheap shot.

So, you've gotta take the low feats and high feats with the context of the situation. If there's no explanation whatsoever for a low feat, then it's crap.

Very good point.

Howard_Jones
Thanks much. I don't really like the whole PIS or SVFL system, because it's honestly far too raggedy and torn. Isn't it the system that CBR initially used?

Alfheim
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
Thanks much. I don't really like the whole PIS or SVFL system, because it's honestly far too raggedy and torn. Isn't it the system that CBR initially used?

Whats that?

Howard_Jones
Comic Book Resources.

Honestly, it's the most notorious forum for fanboys. I can't stand it, or their debate rules. Debates go WAY too long with them.

Roldz
Unfortunately fanboys lack common sense and does not listened therefore its quite difficult to explained the pisseness (doubt thats a word) of a panel being shown...

Dinalfos
The system is flawed as hell. One isolated incident that isn't very convenient and the fanboys go ape shit. But still, we need these terms as something of a guide line.

darthgoober
Originally posted by Dinalfos
The system is flawed as hell. One isolated incident that isn't very convenient and the fanboys go ape shit. But still, we need these terms as something of a guide line.
I know. I think that the terms need to be better defined, so that there will be less arguing over what qualifies.

H. S. 6
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
I'm gonna be honest about something. Screaming PIS in every argument is just flat out bullshit, and nothing ever gets solved. That's why I'm guessing Wolverine vs Spider-Man has gone on so long. However, whenever feats happen in comics, nobody ever takes in mind a few things:

1. Context
2. Character
3. Purpose

Here's what I mean by that.

Context is why either two characters are fighting. This is the problem in analyzing most Hulk fights, and why he's taking down top tier characters. About 80 percent of the time, that character is trying to just subdue banner, but it never turns out that way.

Character determines how a person fights. Superman will never, and I mean NEVER use the full extent of his powers in a battle unless he's away from earth. If he did, he would regret it for the rest of his life. It's not in his character to constantly go around and whup up on people going 15 times lightspeed and such.

Purpose is why the hell they're fighting in the first place. If you're just fighting for sparring, and someone out of nowhere stabs you in the head, that's just crap. The best example is the training session between Wolverine and Spider-Man when Wolvie stabs him for no damn reason, and Spidey passes out. 2 words: cheap shot.

So, you've gotta take the low feats and high feats with the context of the situation. If there's no explanation whatsoever for a low feat, then it's crap.

Well said. thumb up

Dinalfos
Originally posted by darthgoober
I know. I think that the terms need to be better defined, so that there will be less arguing over what qualifies.

Well, I've always been actively pro-logic and completely anti-panel as the main source of evidence. Going by comic book appearances only is a terrible system for several reasons. That's not to say that what happens on panel should be ignored entirely, but the the ratio definitely needs to be adjusted, imo.

Howard_Jones
Originally posted by H. S. 6
Well said. thumb up

Thanks much. Funny thing is that I learned those priciples from Theological Study. In any book, especially scripture, all three of those principles apply all the time.

Dinalfos
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
I'm gonna be honest about something. Screaming PIS in every argument is just flat out bullshit, and nothing ever gets solved. That's why I'm guessing Wolverine vs Spider-Man has gone on so long. However, whenever feats happen in comics, nobody ever takes in mind a few things:

1. Context
2. Character
3. Purpose

Here's what I mean by that.

Context is why either two characters are fighting. This is the problem in analyzing most Hulk fights, and why he's taking down top tier characters. About 80 percent of the time, that character is trying to just subdue banner, but it never turns out that way.

Character determines how a person fights. Superman will never, and I mean NEVER use the full extent of his powers in a battle unless he's away from earth. If he did, he would regret it for the rest of his life. It's not in his character to constantly go around and whup up on people going 15 times lightspeed and such.

Purpose is why the hell they're fighting in the first place. If you're just fighting for sparring, and someone out of nowhere stabs you in the head, that's just crap. The best example is the training session between Wolverine and Spider-Man when Wolvie stabs him for no damn reason, and Spidey passes out. 2 words: cheap shot.

So, you've gotta take the low feats and high feats with the context of the situation. If there's no explanation whatsoever for a low feat, then it's crap.

That's great and all, but on these forums bloodlust is automatically on. That means no beating around the bush or jobbing. Some of the PIS fights are only PIS because they shouldn't usually happen, not because they CAN'T happen at all. The bloodlust rule serves as way of stripping a fight of narrative pretenses, commercial interests and multi-interpretability. Only then can a fight have a truly logical outcome. However, CIS is usually on, so there is still some connection.

Your example of Superman is valid, but the problem is that it's nearly impossible to decide how badly Superman must hold back against who. And what it means for the fight. You will experience the wrath of fanboys if you try to pinpoint it. That's why it's so much easier to just have everyone go all out against everyone. That way, you won't see too many mismatches.

leonidas
PIS occurs to me anytime a book/character breaks its/his own internal consistency. when that happens suspension of disbelief goes out the window. if batman harms superman with a kick one time, it's PIS. if he's harmed ww and cap marvel and manhunter and hulk and many other similar type characters with a kick, it is not PIS in my book because the character has maintained its own internal consistency. another way to say it is the mode of a charactter's showings, as opposed to his/her mean or median. meh, that may NOT be the way the forum decides PIS, but that's my own view.

frankly, PIS is screamed far too often -- and generally by a person who is getting their ass handed to them in a debate . . .

PIS has next to nothing to do with "real-world-logic". how could it? we're talking about comicbooks, where logic can apply one instant and not the next. that very inconsistency is the antithesis of logic.

Howard_Jones
Originally posted by Dinalfos
That's great and all, but on these forums bloodlust is automatically on. That means no beating around the bush or jobbing. Some of the PIS fights are only PIS because they shouldn't usually happen, not because they CAN'T happen at all. The bloodlust rule serves as way of stripping a fight of narrative pretenses, commercial interests and multi-interpretability. Only then can a fight have a truly logical outcome. However, CIS is usually on, so there is still some connection.

Your example of Superman is valid, but the problem is that it's nearly impossible to decide how badly Superman must hold back against who. And what it means for the fight. You will experience the wrath of fanboys if you try to pinpoint it. That's why it's so much easier to just have everyone go all out against everyone. That way, you won't see too many mismatches.

You're forgetting something. Bloodlust is NOT standard. I read the rules when I got here.

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by leonidas
PIS occurs to me anytime a book/character breaks its/his own internal consistency. when that happens suspension of disbelief goes out the window. if batman harms superman with a kick one time, it's PIS. if he's harmed ww and cap marvel and manhunter and hulk and many other similar type characters with a kick, it is not PIS in my book because the character has maintained its own internal consistency. another way to say it is the mode of a charactter's showings, as opposed to his/her mean or median. meh, that may NOT be the way the forum decides PIS, but that's my own view.

frankly, PIS is screamed far too often -- and generally by a person who is getting their ass handed to them in a debate . . .

PIS has next to nothing to do with "real-world-logic". how could it? we're talking about comicbooks, where logic can apply one instant and not the next. that very inconsistency is the antithesis of logic. The problem being that you're ignoring the inconsistency in the opposing character, be it WW, Captain Marvel or MM, created by them being harmed by someone grossly inadequate to do so. They've been reduced. Being in a fight with this particular character, in this example Batman, has caused them to lose the speed they normally exhibit that would allow them to simply avoid the kick, or the durability they normally exhibit to simply take it without feeling a thing. If this is plot induced - which it often is - then it is PIS, and will continue to be PIS.

Everyone knows particular characters have jobber auras.

Also all logic is not devoid in comics, just as all physics are not devoid. Common sense shouldn't be compromised for ludicrous things repeated two or three times in decades of comics.

Dinalfos
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
You're forgetting something. Bloodlust is NOT standard. I read the rules when I got here.

Bloodlust = fighting to the best of abilities, within character. That means Spiderman won't kill his opponent, but he will NOT job to those weaker than him either. He will go for the win in the quickest way possible.

Or at least that's what how I got it. The word bloodlust is not to be taken too literally.

Howard_Jones
Originally posted by Dinalfos
Bloodlust = fighting to the best of abilities, within character. That means Spiderman won't kill his opponent, but he will NOT job to those weaker than him either. He will go for the win in the quickest way possible.

Or at least that's what how I got it. The word bloodlust is not to be taken too literally.

Dinalfos, read the quote. It says that it's not standard. Bloodlust means, literally, out for blood. The general rule is that the fighters are in tip-top shape, but not that they're going for the throat.

leonidas
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The problem being that you're ignoring the inconsistency in the opposing character, be it WW, Captain Marvel or MM, created by them being harmed by someone grossly inadequate to do so. They've been reduced. Being in a fight with this particular character, in this example Batman, has caused them to lose the speed they normally exhibit that would allow them to simply avoid the kick, or the durability they normally exhibit to simply take it without feeling a thing. If this is plot induced - which it often is - then it is PIS, and will continue to be PIS.

Everyone knows particular characters have jobber auras.

Also all logic is not devoid in comics, just as all physics are not devoid. Common sense shouldn't be compromised for ludicrous things repeated two or three times in decades of comics.

obviously not all logic is devoid, but logic cannot be used in a vacuum to settle debates as it fails ultimately when a comic is probed too deeply -- as so often happens in the forum. and long ago i said common sense should be the ultimate arbiter. wink

in any event, i was speaking of internal consistency of a character or book. hypothetically, if bats ko'd people like ww all the time, that is consistent with his character, and therefore, when it happens, logically it may make no sense, but common sense turned upon the comic world tells me that i can't just cry PIS. if we swap points of view and see that ww is NOT ko'd often by someone of batman's level we can assume 1 of 2 things is happening: batman is somehow 'special' and is capable of ko'ing someone not usually able to be ko'd by people of his level, or ww is jobbing/falling prey to PIS. but if bat's consistently ko's characters of her level, i choose the former explanation. why? because i hate calling PIS, mostly, but also because he has remained "in character" and proved time and again that he IS special irregardless of what real-world logic tells me SHOULD happen. likewise, in a reverse situation, if ww absolutely makes bats look like a fool and whoops him without effort -- that would also be fine. she has also maintained her established, internal consistency.

this example is convoluted because bats really doesn't consistently ko people like ww with a kick. that WOULD be out of character -- for both -- and imo be PIS.

it may sound as though i am doing a little "picking and choosing". meh, maybe i am. but i trust my knowledge of the characters i debate for to help me determine when internal consistency is maintained or broken. you said something about feats once every decade or so. by definition a feat accomplished so infrequently would be INCONSISTENT with how the character is portrayed. so i agree -- such a feat may well be PIS. my own loose definition allows me to filter out the extremes both on the high end and low end.

complex? maybe. but it works for me.

Dinalfos
Originally posted by Howard_Jones
Dinalfos, read the quote. It says that it's not standard. Bloodlust means, literally, out for blood. The general rule is that the fighters are in tip-top shape, but not that they're going for the throat.

No, it implies that bloodlust has a different meaning on this forum. Everyone who is willing to kill in comic books, will act accordingly on this forum. Everyone else will fight to the best of his abilities, but in a way that ensures a win win without killing. This is also considered bloodlust on this forum.

Howard_Jones
Originally posted by Dinalfos
No, it implies that bloodlust has a different meaning on this forum. Everyone who is willing to kill in comic books, will act accordingly on this forum. Everyone else will fight to the best of his abilities, but in a way that ensures a win win without killing. This is also considered bloodlust on this forum.

Dude, I'm gonna be honest. You need to read the rule. Both cannot be the same thing when they're radically different.

darthgoober
Bump.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.