Feats vs Appearances

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



Sin I AM
How many appearances does a character need in order to equal another?

You can use Thorr Odison vs Jane Foster as a template

ghostman
only one.


if whore thor ran through a heard of celestials, galactus and LT than that is above anything thor has ever done.

so only one.

ghostman
Originally posted by ghostman
only one.


if whore thor ran through a heard of celestials, galactus and LT than that is above anything thor has ever done.

so only one.

carver9
Agreed.

Cogito
Depends on how vague the feat is.

Surtur
Originally posted by Sin I AM
How many appearances does a character need in order to equal another?

You can use Thorr Odison vs Jane Foster as a template

I think you need a feat to say you equal someone. If you have one appearance and one feat that shows you equal someone, well then I would say you equal that someone.

I think the more feats a person has the more we look at consistency. While if you only have a few appearances we take whatever you do at face value.

If Spider-Man's first appearance was fighting Firelord, people wouldn't of questioned it.

DarkSaint85
For those saying once...

What happens if it is someone like.....Batman? Who is supposed to be 'human' level - and yet, does things far out of the ordinary (and has done so on many, many times)?

ghostman
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
For those saying once...

What happens if it is someone like.....Batman? Who is supposed to be 'human' level - and yet, does things far out of the ordinary (and has done so on many, many times)?

batman at this point is a joke character and shouldnt be taken seriously


also key words there, "supposed to" but hes not. and hasnt been for YEARS. you should know that humans in dc>>real life. you really shouldnt have used batman with all the wanking dc does with him.

and batman has thousands of appearances

DarkSaint85
Originally posted by ghostman
batman at this point is a joke character and shouldnt be taken seriously


also key words there, "supposed to" but hes not. and hasnt been for YEARS. you should know that humans in dc>>real life. you really shouldnt have used batman with all the wanking dc does with him.

and batman has thousands of appearances

DCnU Batman, perhaps I should have clarified - who only has about 100 or so battle showings. Kicking robot heads off, smashing motorbikes in two, taking a faceful of concrete from WW whilst injured etc....

But this is my point. If you say that all it takes is one showing to put someone at a certain level, then why ignore Batman?

carver9
That's the thing. Batman has enough appearances for us to get an average. I don't think that's the question. The question is "how many appearances". One appearance should suffice for any character. Batman has enough fts for us to determine an average for him.

ghostman
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
DCnU Batman, perhaps I should have clarified - who only has about 100 or so battle showings. Kicking robot heads off, smashing motorbikes in two, taking a faceful of concrete from WW whilst injured etc....

But this is my point. If you say that all it takes is one showing to put someone at a certain level, then why ignore Batman?

youre just making this way more complicated than it has to be.


were not talking about a well established character with a general history of going above his level. we know enough of batman to know his average.

ghostman
Originally posted by carver9
That's the thing. Batman has enough appearances for us to get an average. I don't think that's the question. The question is "how many appearances". One appearance should suffice for any character. Batman has enough fts for us to determine an average for him.

this. all it takes is one, and i assume the op is talking about a hypothetical character and not an already established one with hundreds to thousands of showings. if its the latter than its an outlier, if its the former than thats his average until he shows otherwise

-Pr-
One is far too few for me, tbh. At least half a dozen for me, maybe a dozen.

The only exceptions imo are the "villain of the month" types that are only supposed to be powerful enough to move the story along.

DarkSaint85
Originally posted by ghostman
youre just making this way more complicated than it has to be.


were not talking about a well established character with a general history of going above his level. we know enough of batman to know his average.

So with the OP's example - Jane Foster has the power of Thor (if they be worthy, etc etc).

If she takes on the Celestials, LB Galactus, the Beyonders etc and kills them all - with the power of Thor - is that not an outlier? Same Mjolnir, same enchantment etc. All that is different, is that we have replaced a half Asgardian, half Elder God warrior prince....with a cancer patient. Everything else should be exactly the same.

So no, not a hypothetical. We are already in that age.

Moreover, if what you're saying is correct - and I am NOT saying you are wrong, btw - then relying on 'flavour of the month' showings, as it were, would be a bit premature.

DCnU Batman is completely separate from DCU Batman. We can't interchange their feats. Therefore, we cannot interchange their low showings, nor their averages either.

And Batman's average in the DCnU, thus far, seems to be higher. KOing SuperTitan Gladiator, the WW showing, motorbikes, robots, fighting 28 hours straight against trained killers whilst holding back...

Of course, as time goes on, perhaps his average will come down. But you are being tainted by the memories of his hundreds/thousands/tens of thousand showings in the DCU.

ghostman
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So with the OP's example - Jane Foster has the power of Thor (if they be worthy, etc etc).

If she takes on the Celestials, LB Galactus, the Beyonders etc and kills them all - with the power of Thor - is that not an outlier? Same Mjolnir, same enchantment etc. All that is different, is that we have replaced a half Asgardian, half Elder God warrior prince....with a cancer patient. Everything else should be exactly the same.

So no, not a hypothetical. We are already in that age.


didnt thor say something along the lines of "mjolnir never moved for me like that" and didnt whor thor beat odin? obviously things arent the same if those things happened. i dont think it would be an outlier because we know mjolnir likes the whor more than thor (as thor pretty much said with the quote i said in the beginning)

ghostman
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So with the OP's example - Jane Foster has the power of Thor (if they be worthy, etc etc).

If she takes on the Celestials, LB Galactus, the Beyonders etc and kills them all - with the power of Thor - is that not an outlier? Same Mjolnir, same enchantment etc. All that is different, is that we have replaced a half Asgardian, half Elder God warrior prince....with a cancer patient. Everything else should be exactly the same.

So no, not a hypothetical. We are already in that age.

Moreover, if what you're saying is correct - and I am NOT saying you are wrong, btw - then relying on 'flavour of the month' showings, as it were, would be a bit premature.

DCnU Batman is completely separate from DCU Batman. We can't interchange their feats. Therefore, we cannot interchange their low showings, nor their averages either.

And Batman's average in the DCnU, thus far, seems to be higher. KOing SuperTitan Gladiator, the WW showing, motorbikes, robots, fighting 28 hours straight against trained killers whilst holding back...

Of course, as time goes on, perhaps his average will come down. But you are being tainted by the memories of his hundreds/thousands/tens of thousand showings in the DCU.


than batman is at that level, and DC is bullshitting by calling him a human, which is why i dont take him seriously. for batman you need to look at him from an outside of comics perspective, hes dcs biggest cashcow and is wanked to high heaven on just about every form of media. of course they're going to give him EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA special treatment in all matters.

Sin I AM
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
For those saying once...

What happens if it is someone like.....Batman? Who is supposed to be 'human' level - and yet, does things far out of the ordinary (and has done so on many, many times)?

Carver gave me this idea (props for him for that) we had a debate about the validity of a feat by some mooks fighting Chulk. Basically the mooks were stated on panel as each being the equal of She-Hulk ( it was 5 to 7 of these I believe) and I just couldn't see it. Because to me it discredits Jen by saying her feats could be replicated by any one of said mook. He on the other hand took the statement verbatim which is cool because that's what it said.

ghostman
Originally posted by Sin I AM
Carver gave me this idea (props for him for that) we had a debate about the validity of a feat by some mooks fighting Chulk. Basically the mooks were stated on panel as each being the equal of She-Hulk ( it was 5 to 7 of these I believe) and I just couldn't see it. Because to me it discredits Jen by saying her feats could be replicated by any one of said mook. He on the other hand took the statement verbatim which is cool because that's what it said.

feats=/=statements ?

Sharivan
A good example would be the Midnighter hurting Apollo at all.

Obviously not possible with what we have seen him do because in order to hurt Apollo he would need to be able to dish out much more firepower than what it would take to destroy a continent.

Which he can't.

I say with outliers like those defer to what we see them do on their own.

Sin I AM
Originally posted by ghostman
feats=/=statements ?

Yes according to carver

Insane Titan
Originally posted by Sin I AM
Yes according to carver that's the problem, he has no problem believing and using stupid statements to make a character look good. Yet he won't accept a character saying something about himself.

Delta1938
Originally posted by Sin I AM
Yes according to carver

Only when it supports his preferred character though.

TheHulk
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
For those saying once...

What happens if it is someone like.....Batman? Who is supposed to be 'human' level - and yet, does things far out of the ordinary (and has done so on many, many times)? All within reason, DS. As long as it's all within reason.

Sin I AM
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So with the OP's example - Jane Foster has the power of Thor (if they be worthy, etc etc).

If she takes on the Celestials, LB Galactus, the Beyonders etc and kills them all - with the power of Thor - is that not an outlier? Same Mjolnir, same enchantment etc. All that is different, is that we have replaced a half Asgardian, half Elder God warrior prince....with a cancer patient. Everything else should be exactly the same.

So no, not a hypothetical. We are already in that age.

Moreover, if what you're saying is correct - and I am NOT saying you are wrong, btw - then relying on 'flavour of the month' showings, as it were, would be a bit premature.

DCnU Batman is completely separate from DCU Batman. We can't interchange their feats. Therefore, we cannot interchange their low showings, nor their averages either.

And Batman's average in the DCnU, thus far, seems to be higher. KOing SuperTitan Gladiator, the WW showing, motorbikes, robots, fighting 28 hours straight against trained killers whilst holding back...

Of course, as time goes on, perhaps his average will come down. But you are being tainted by the memories of his hundreds/thousands/tens of thousand showings in the DCU.

I must've missed this. Good read. But this reminds me of Rulk. When he came on the scene he was tanking hammer strikes to the face and knockin out watchers....couple arcs later he's choked out by simon. It takes ALOT more than obe one showing to show someone is the real deal

leonidas
Originally posted by Sin I AM
How many appearances does a character need in order to equal another?

You can use Thorr Odison vs Jane Foster as a template

certainly not one. in fact, the idea of one is pretty exactly OPPOSITE to what the forum preaches--consistent performances. we exclude crazy outliers for a reason. with a single appearance, we have no way of knowing if said performance will ultimately be nothing more than an outlier.

in tourneys we used to have a 10 appearance limit for characters so we all have a good idea of what they can do, but even 10 isn't really very many.

jane still has a long way to go to proving she is a match for the real thor imo.

this idea of a single performance being used is why we get so many ridiculous 'jumping the gun' threads started where the new character of the month first appears, does something great, then everyone is comparing him to galactus or whatever.....

the answer is many.

DarkSaint85
thumb up To the two posts above mine. Otherwise, Starbrand would be awesome.

Rulk won't get choked out.

Golgo would be Galan.

Madness, I tell you.

jrodslam
Originally posted by Surtur
I think you need a feat to say you equal someone. If you have one appearance and one feat that shows you equal someone, well then I would say you equal that someone.

I think the more feats a person has the more we look at consistency. While if you only have a few appearances we take whatever you do at face value.

If Spider-Man's first appearance was fighting Firelord, people wouldn't of questioned it.

^^^

Surtur
When it comes to statements I only really pay attention to the ones that have feats to support them.

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