Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I'd like some input and ideas on how we should handle the DC issues starting in September.

I've heard it will be a reboot, just a renumbering and just a retelling of origins and characters. I haven't been keeping up with what exactly DC is going to do regarding the past 20+ years of comic history.

I do know we can't disregard all the history since the first Crisis in the CB Vs Forum since it may take months to years for characters to gain enough showings and feats to be of use here.

Should we just integrate all the DC comics starting in September as if nothing happened?

Use all the prior feats and wait to see how this all plays out?

My main goal is not to have dozens of repeat threads just because all DC comics will be starting at #1 in September. Any suggestions are appreciated.

DCU gets remade

I vote we continue business as usual until every character has enough feats to be argued as separate.

I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis.

Until feats and any changes have some time to become established, I would just continue the status quo with post-crisis to pre-reboot being the standard.

Just my 2 cents.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis. Agreed.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis. agreed, when making a vs thread best to specify which version of the character. remake version or golden age or modern for example.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis.

That's great when they get some feats under their belts, but what do you assume when someone in September makes a "Superman vs. Blah" thread? Do you use pre-reboot feats or the one feat that new Superman has at that point?

Originally posted by Badabing
I'd like some input and ideas on how we should handle the DC issues starting in September.

I've heard it will be a reboot, just a renumbering and just a retelling of origins and characters. I haven't been keeping up with what exactly DC is going to do regarding the past 20+ years of comic history.

I do know we can't disregard all the history since the first Crisis in the CB Vs Forum since it may take months to years for characters to gain enough showings and feats to be of use here.

Should we just integrate all the DC comics starting in September as if nothing happened?

Use all the prior feats and wait to see how this all plays out?

My main goal is not to have dozens of repeat threads just because all DC comics will be starting at #1 in September. Any suggestions are appreciated.

DCU gets remade

This is too much, make it go away

Originally posted by Cogito
That's great when they get some feats under their belts, but what do you assume when someone in September makes a "Superman vs. Blah" thread? Do you use pre-reboot feats or the one feat that new Superman has at that point?
They should specify which one they are using.

Originally posted by King Kandy
They should specify which one they are using.

Should people even be allowed to use characters before they have real feats?

Obviously when characters are established there should be specificity...

Originally posted by King Kandy
They should specify which one they are using.

Originally posted by Cogito
Should people even be allowed to use characters before they have real feats?

Obviously when characters are established there should be specificity...
People use basically featless characters all the time. Does it lead to good discussion? Usually not. Should they still be allowed to do it? Of course.

I don't see any reason to apply a characters history if the comics themselves aren't doing it.

Not all characters will be effected. However, we know Superman will change. Probably dramatically. Batman won't. Green Lantern will probably stay the same, etc... Others like Captain Atom, Hawkman, and Firestrom will have changes as well. It all depends on the character.

If we do use the new DCU characters, how will we label it?

Originally posted by King Kandy
People use basically featless characters all the time. Does it lead to good discussion? Usually not. Should they still be allowed to do it? Of course.

I don't see any reason to apply a characters history if the comics themselves aren't doing it.

This is different from featless characters because people will use pre-reboot feats/assumptions that don't necessarily apply regardless

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Not all characters will be effected. However, we know Superman will change. Probably dramatically. Batman won't. Green Lantern will probably stay the same, etc... Others like Captain Atom, Hawkman, and Firestrom will have changes as well. It all depends on the character.

If we do use the new DCU characters, how will we label it?
Same deal with the crisis. People are quick to point out that new gods/gl/whoever is unaffected. Obviously, if they keep their history then we should as well. And if they don't we shouldn't.

I suggest staying simple. Pre/post Reboot.

Originally posted by Cogito
This is different from featless characters because people will use pre-reboot feats/assumptions that don't necessarily apply regardless
Well that's exactly what we should rule out, by having separate versions.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I suggest staying simple. Pre/post Reboot.

I agree...but not immediately. Keep it pre-only for most characters until they're established

If you want to discuss post reboot, with only the feats they actually have performed, I don't see the problem.

Or maybe, how do they say it? DCnU Superman?

Maybe I'm just excessively cynical and think unwarranted assumptions will carry over regardless (e.g. assumptions over Superman's speed/strength)

Edit: Just wanted to make it clear that I don't think I'm above making these assumptions also. In fact, I almost certainly would

people usually forget to specify which version of the character in a thread. if they dont specify its current. the problem with that is that when someone makes a superman vs thor thread later on without specifying. is that gonna mean current superman which is remake or original superman, since thats the version everyone is used to ?

thats where its gonna get confusing, so people need to start getting into the habbit with specifying which version.

chomper, ever the voice of reason.

Originally posted by King Kandy
People use basically featless characters all the time. Does it lead to good discussion? Usually not. Should they still be allowed to do it? Of course.

I don't see any reason to apply a characters history if the comics themselves aren't doing it.

cosigned. But I don't have a stake in this forum so much anymore. Nice that it's being discussed though.

Originally posted by Badabing
Any suggestions are appreciated.


I say we treat pre crisis, post crisis, imaginary stories, movies, Spiderman vs Firelord, bad writing, and cartoons as one big single canon continuity.

You asked for suggestions.

Originally posted by cdtm
I say we treat pre crisis, post crisis, imaginary stories, movies, Spiderman vs Firelord, bad writing, and cartoons as one big single canon continuity.

You asked for suggestions. ohno

You just made my dur list!

Originally posted by cdtm
I say we treat pre crisis, post crisis, imaginary stories, movies, Spiderman vs Firelord, bad writing, and cartoons as one big single canon continuity.

You asked for suggestions.



ftw

Seem simple enough to me.

DCnU canon vs. New Earth canon. Specify which version of the character (and virtually everyone should be effected by the revamp, GL's included) and go from there.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis.

Agreed. Unless someone is particularly shown not to change- possibly the case with Batman and the GLs- they're different characters.

People just need to familiarize with DCU's characters and different eras.The 3 eras of DC.

1.Pre-Crisis
2.Pre-FlashPoint(which was referred to as Post-Crisis before)
3.Post-FlashPoint(which would be the current continuity in DCU coming in September)

Since DCU's Post-FlashPoint Characters doesn't have feats yet, whenever someone makes a thread saying Current Superman Vs this character.We should assume its Pre-FlashPoint/Post-Crisis Versions as a default since Post-FlashPoint characters are virtually zero on the feats department yet.Then when the Post-FlashPoint characters have enough showings, then that's the time they can be assumed as current.

Just out of curiosity, cause I'm not really keeping up with DC recently, is DC storywise retconning everything like in the first crisis or did the editor just said "**** it it sucks we restart it"?

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis.

Originally posted by Parmaniac
Just out of curiosity, cause I'm not really keeping up with DC recently, is DC storywise retconning everything like in the first crisis or did the editor just said "**** it it sucks we restart it"?

This will occur after FlashPoint.Here are the details.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=32566

Agreed with King Kandy.

I think we should wait until the #1 issues are all released and it'll become more obvious what approach to take. It could be more like Zero Hour and Infinite Crisis retcons, where histories are fudged (sometimes majorly) but more or less preserved. It could be more Crisis on Infinite Earths retcon, where nearly everyone has a clean slate.

If it's Zero Hour/Infinite Crisis, then we do what we've always done: ignore it completely out of convenience. If it's Crisis on Infinite Earths, then we denote the pre/post Flashpoint eras. Right now, it's looking like the latter. If that's the case, then so be it.

But I do think it'll be obvious when the #1 issues are released. With Brand New Day, it was obvious from the get-go that they fudged things but insisted that Spiderman has had his adventures, just not his marriage. And it was obvious with the Heroes Reborn #1 titles with it's fresh new take/clean slate history.

If we have to decide now, just do what we always do: Originally posted by King Kandy
They should specify which one they are using. We already differentiate "classic/current JMS" Wonder Woman. "Kid" Loki doesn't have any feats yet really, so we always debate about "classic" Loki. Same thing with "classic" Juggernaut. It's not like this concept is new to us or difficult to put into practice. We already do it more or less.

Let's just say that they have all the feats of the pre- and post crisi era

No.

PreC
PostC
New Age (NA) or DCnU or FP

And now vs threads till they have at least some high and low feats.

Overall, I agree with OnedumbGO, but if anything else I say DCnU. That's what all the kids are saying.

I think we need to consider this a completely new continuity delineation like Pre and Post Crisis. Some characters are going to be relatively untouched by the change, but how to we as readers supposed know the minutia of what is or isn't excepted canon? Batman for example is supposed to be more or less the same... but Tim Drake is pretty much a completely different character, which by extension changes Batman's continuity and I really doubt DC is going to take the time to explain which parts of their shared mythos actually matter now. And it isn't like Drake is the only rebooted character that ties heavily into the Batman mythology. Unless it is printed in the pages of the new issues, we can't be sure of anything.

Sounds like we have almost complete consensus.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
I think we need to consider this a completely new continuity delineation like Pre and Post Crisis. Some characters are going to be relatively untouched by the change, but how to we as readers supposed know the minutia of what is or isn't excepted canon? Batman for example is supposed to be more or less the same... but Tim Drake is pretty much a completely different character, which by extension changes Batman's continuity and I really doubt DC is going to take the time to explain which parts of their shared mythos actually matter now. And it isn't like Drake is the only rebooted character that ties heavily into the Batman mythology. Unless it is printed in the pages of the new issues, we can't be sure of anything.

Pretty much.

And like ODG said before, we already do this anyway as a rule.

I agree with ODG and KK, it's more or less what we've always done when retcons happen.

I'd like to point out Storm Watch characters will likely be hit harder since they'll be thrown into an entirely new continuity, which means Digi's respect threads are officially useless

This thread raises the question of which different versions of each character "exist", obviously an exhaustive list would be impossible, but its part of what makes cannon rules hard.

Originally posted by Bentley
I agree with ODG and KK, it's more or less what we've always done when retcons happen.

I'd like to point out Storm Watch characters will likely be hit harder since they'll be thrown into an entirely new continuity, which means Digi's respect threads are officially useless

This thread raises the question of which different versions of each character "exist", obviously an exhaustive list would be impossible, but its part of what makes cannon rules hard.
That's what I was trying to get done in the character ruling thread. Which now it seems will never actually come to anything.

He means Wildstorm characters.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
He means Wildstorm characters.

I probably meant that

It is entirely dependent on how different the new versions of characters will be in comparison to their current selves. For instance, we'll almost certainly have to differentiate between pre/post Flashpoint Superman- but we likely won't have to do the same for guys like Swamp Thing, who aren't being retooled down to the molecular level.

Only time will tell.

If we do differentiate, will we call current versions 'Post Crisis' or 'Pre-FP/PFP' or something?

^ If it comes down to it, I'd suggest:

"PC" for pre-Crisis
"classic" for post-Crisis to pre-Flashpoint
"current" for post-Flashpoint

Phuck Flashpoint. It's Age of Apocalypse-lite.

PC = Pre-Crisis
PF = Pre-Flash-Point (the versions we used here for years)
no mentioning = new stuff

It's not rocket sience really we already did this stuff.

I suggest:

Pre-Crisis
Pre-Reboot
Post-Reboot

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ If it comes down to it, I'd suggest:

"PC" for pre-Crisis
"classic" for post-Crisis to pre-Flashpoint
"current" for post-Flashpoint

Phuck Flashpoint. It's Age of Apocalypse-lite.



Whatever we call them or break them down into, the vast majority of us will all know what we mean.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ If it comes down to it, I'd suggest:

"PC" for pre-Crisis
"classic" for post-Crisis to pre-Flashpoint
"current" for post-Flashpoint clapclap

Likely the best route to travel.

Pre-reboot or Pre-Flashpoint will be better than Classic in the long run, Classic should be clear cut though -an older established version can only be the pre-reboot version by any logic-.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I suggest:

Pre-Crisis
Pre-Reboot
Post-Reboot

I'd go with this. Simple enough...


DC is really pissing me off with this reboot... All that time collecting years of history only to have apart of it be changed. thumbdown

I like Kandy's suggestion as well, except that it can't be abbreviated. For instance, we know what "PC" means without question- but if someone only used the abbreviation "PR" Superman in a thread (which would inevitably happen), we wouldn't know whether they mean post-reboot, or pre-reboot. Ya feelz me?

This is going to be a headache of course.

You still get people regular do threads staring "Batgirl!" without specifying which one, and often meaning Cassandra even though Steph's been BG for two years.



Which turned out to be kinda needless- Odyssey WW is a one-storyline wonder who never stayed on one power level long enough to debate until she's practically back to classic.

^ It's been over a year since JMS has wrung Diana through the ringer. That's even longer than Heroes Reborn. Originally posted by Galan007
I like Kandy's suggestion as well, except that it can't be abbreviated. For instance, we know what "PC" means- but if someone stated only "PR" Superman in a thread, we don't know whether they mean post-reboot, or pre-reboot. Ya feelz me? I would lol everytime I see "PR Superman." I'd think of -Pr-.

And "PF Wonder Woman" sounds like Phoenix Force Wonder Woman.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I suggest:

Pre-Crisis
Pre-Reboot
Post-Reboot I think this may cause confusion as pre-crisis can also be considered pre-reboot

I'd go with ODG's suggestion

pre-crisis
classic (from post crisis to pre reboot)
current (post-reboot)

Classic makes me thing PC, but I don't give a shit - I'll go with whatever.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ If it comes down to it, I'd suggest:

"PC" for pre-Crisis
"classic" for post-Crisis to pre-Flashpoint
"current" for post-Flashpoint

Phuck Flashpoint. It's Age of Apocalypse-lite.
I was thinking PC-Pre Crisis, NE-New Earth, and Current-Post Flashpoint

Right now we have Pre and Post Crisis... not sure why Post Crisis needs a new moniker in the wake of Flash Point.

Originally posted by Starscream M
I think this may cause confusion as pre-crisis can also be considered pre-reboot

I'd go with ODG's suggestion

pre-crisis
classic (from post crisis to pre reboot)
current (post-reboot)
I hate the term classic. To me classic means the oldest version. It wouldn't call post-crisis "classic" when most of the characters had already had decades of history by that time... Hell, superman was over 50 years old when the crisis hit. Hardly "classic".

I think we should always tie it to a specific event. That way there is no confusion where one starts and one ends.

I have an alternate idea that carries this goal out, with four designations:

pre-1956 (golden age)
pre-1985 (pre-crisis)
pre-2011 (post-crisis)
post-2011 (rebooted)

with this system, there would be no vagueness in which showings are valid.

Originally posted by Mr.Mxyzptlk
I vote we continue business as usual until every character has enough feats to be argued as separate. Originally posted by Cogito
Until feats and any changes have some time to become established, I would just continue the status quo with post-crisis to pre-reboot being the standard.

Just my 2 cents. Originally posted by OneDumbG0
I think we should wait until the #1 issues are all released and it'll become more obvious what approach to take. It could be more like Zero Hour and Infinite Crisis retcons, where histories are fudged (sometimes majorly) but more or less preserved. It could be more Crisis on Infinite Earths retcon, where nearly everyone has a clean slate.

If it's Zero Hour/Infinite Crisis, then we do what we've always done: ignore it completely out of convenience. If it's Crisis on Infinite Earths, then we denote the pre/post Flashpoint eras. Right now, it's looking like the latter. If that's the case, then so be it.

But I do think it'll be obvious when the #1 issues are released. With Brand New Day, it was obvious from the get-go that they fudged things but insisted that Spiderman has had his adventures, just not his marriage. And it was obvious with the Heroes Reborn #1 titles with it's fresh new take/clean slate history.

If we have to decide now, just do what we always do: We already differentiate "classic/current JMS" Wonder Woman. "Kid" Loki doesn't have any feats yet really, so we always debate about "classic" Loki. Same thing with "classic" Juggernaut. It's not like this concept is new to us or difficult to put into practice. We already do it more or less.
So, can everyone agree that we should take things slowly at first, like what's been posted above?

And then as time goes on, take a look at characters an implement what's been posted below?
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
I think we need to consider this a completely new continuity delineation like Pre and Post Crisis. Some characters are going to be relatively untouched by the change, but how to we as readers supposed know the minutia of what is or isn't excepted canon? Batman for example is supposed to be more or less the same... but Tim Drake is pretty much a completely different character, which by extension changes Batman's continuity and I really doubt DC is going to take the time to explain which parts of their shared mythos actually matter now. And it isn't like Drake is the only rebooted character that ties heavily into the Batman mythology. Unless it is printed in the pages of the new issues, we can't be sure of anything. Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis. Originally posted by King Kandy
Well that's exactly what we should rule out, by having separate versions. Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Seem simple enough to me.

DCnU canon vs. New Earth canon. Specify which version of the character (and virtually everyone should be effected by the revamp, GL's included) and go from there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Q99
This is going to be a headache of course.

You still get people regular do threads staring "Batgirl!" without specifying which one, and often meaning Cassandra even though Steph's been BG for two years.



Which turned out to be kinda needless- Odyssey WW is a one-storyline wonder who never stayed on one power level long enough to debate until she's practically back to classic. Unfortunately that's a part of these forums. People are vague, then try to change the stips several posts/pages into the thread. And easy fix is if the thread starter PMs me with the requested changes to the title and/or OP.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by King Kandy
I hate the term classic. To me classic means the oldest version. It wouldn't call post-crisis "classic" when most of the characters had already had decades of history by that time... Hell, superman was over 50 years old when the crisis hit. Hardly "classic".

I think we should always tie it to a specific event. That way there is no confusion where one starts and one ends.

I have an alternate idea that carries this goal out, with four designations:

pre-1956 (golden age)
pre-1985 (pre-crisis)
pre-2011 (post-crisis)
post-2011 (rebooted)

with this system, there would be no vagueness in which showings are valid. Does everyone agree with KK's post above?

Originally posted by Badabing

Does everyone agree with KK's post above?

I think that works fine.

I'm about to like the new reboot. I already ordered the 52 titels .

Yeah, I agree too.

If the "retcon" turns out to be short lived and brings back most of what came before the soft reboot, maybe we can reconsider later...

Although if I had my way, I'd make GL's an exception. Even between the pre and post crisis eras, they hardly got affected at all, and it looks like they're going to be largely unaffected by this new reboot as well.. (Maybe some of the feats were a little crazier, sure, but compared to Pre Crisis Superman...?)

Originally posted by Badabing
Does everyone agree with KK's post above?

Aye

^ I think it's best.

See you guys in 24 years when it's re-rebooted

A character's origin ALONE shouldn't necessarily change their other history. I think they should be argued as the same UNLESS or UNTIL clear evidence points otherwise.

Otherwise, we would have 100's of duplicate threads instead of using the same ones. Plus I'm pretty sure that most characters are going to keep the same power set and power level anyway (maybe not all though).

Lastly, just for the sake of having good debates on KMC, it would probably be best to at least allow the character's post crisis feats, at least in the beginning (until enough time has past for the character to build enough feats on their own). Otherwise, no D.C. character wouldn't have a leg to stand on for a debate. It would be an automatic win for a Marvel character or at least a inconclusive debate until months to years pass building up the D.C. character.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think they should be argued as separate characters, just like pre vs post crisis.

This

Originally posted by h1a8

Lastly, just for the sake of having good debates on KMC, it would probably be best to at least allow the character's post crisis feats, at least in the beginning (until enough time has past for the character to build enough feats on their own). Otherwise, no D.C. character wouldn't have a leg to stand on for a debate. It would be an automatic win for a Marvel character or at least a inconclusive debate until months to years pass building up the D.C. character.

Why should this matter?

It goes for any character with few established feats vs one with a larger pool that the latter may have a distinct advantage.

What does it matter if its an entire company's worth just because it's DC? A DC vs Marvel debate doesn't have to be 'fair' just because they are both prominent.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
Why should this matter?

It goes for any character with few established feats vs one with a larger pool that the latter may have a distinct advantage.

What does it matter if its an entire company's worth just because it's DC? A DC vs Marvel debate doesn't have to be 'fair' just because they are both prominent.

I agree with this. I also think that DC needed this reboot...badly. I think everything will go well and I also believe that this will give q lot of other characters the spotlight to shine.

H1 is just angry because he can't use 50 earth weight anymore.

^Actually it have been 257+ Earth weights, he forgot the Sun and the Moon in his calculations, also he didn't consider the Dark Matter and the influence of the Dark Energy and earth rotation....

I'd say that every character not pertaining to the Batman or Green Lantern family of titles, should be considered as a new version entirely and none of the prior 'feats' to be admissable. But for the other two, an emphasis was put on nothing changing for them so at the very least, the last few years of their titles should still be in continuity. Even in the reboot, they're literally continuing where they left off (Sinestro as a GL, Hal banished after killing Krona, Kyle making a team of the 'ranbow' corps, Dick back to Nightwing, Batman Inc. relaunching from where it left off etc.). Not to mention that, again, it's the same writers who've been prior to the reboot on the titles (Johns, Tomasi and Tony Bedard for the GL, and Morrison, Scott Snyder, Tony Daniel for the Bat-family) and both sides have said everything stays the same. None of the JLA or other type of appearances should count in any way, though.

When is Marvel doing a reboot? They don't need it as bad but it would he helpful.

Originally posted by carver9
When is Marvel doing a reboot? They don't need it as bad but it would he helpful. Marvel just needs to stop ****ing up it's own contunity for the sheer fun of it. A reboot means nothing if everyone does the same shit again after it.

EDIT: Actually I like the DC reboot because now I can directly get into the new universe ad don't have to read a shitload of issues that I missed over the years before I liked DC.

Just read the new JL, and i got to say am ****ing pump, especially when Darkseid name was mentioned and Superman made his appearance by busting through Hal shields.

But i was let down when Batman for some ****ing reason was able to remove Hal ring. I was like, really, ****ing really.

Originally posted by carver9
When is Marvel doing a reboot? They don't need it as bad but it would he helpful.

Marvel needs one MORE.

Originally posted by carver9
When is Marvel doing a reboot? They don't need it as bad but it would he helpful.

Hopefully never.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Hopefully never. Agreed. A reboot would make my skin crawl.

I agree with the KK (but not the KKK). I didn't read it before my other post though.

^ lol wtf?

I think he's reffering to Kid Kurdy but not the Kid Kurdy Klan