Well, when terms such as "Brick" or "Speedster" or "Street Level" or what have you have at least some general "exact" definition...
Yeah.
Edit:
Since Bentley mentioned what I was thinking, are there any other characters who fit the criteria (which I don't know and thus why I made the thread) of being called "Anti-Brick"s other than Wolverine? Because he's the only one I've ever seen the term applied to.
Last edited by Bluddflagg on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 12:28 AM
almost any character who has a power set that lets them not be touched by the Brick is generally going to be a good anti-brick character. Vision, Martian Manhunter, Superan, GL, Silver Surfer.
Newjack's got it. A character with an ability that inherently nullifies a brick's powers (ergo, intelligence and prep doesn't count. sorry Batman), would be the anti-thesis of a brick, I.E. Shadowcat.
I actually would claim that Wolverine isn't an anti-brick for that reason. His powers don't nullify bricks, it just makes him extremely resistant to them. As showings like his fight with Hulk in WWH show, Logan's regen can be taxed into remission by pure brute force. No character can do shit to someone like Martian Manhunter or Kitty with brute strength, though.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
To be fair, a lot of the characters Newjak named destroy any brick in raw power too. They don't need to nullify or avoid anything.
But to disagree with Blax a bit, it probably shouldn't matter if it's just a good matchup (Wolverine) or someone who can nullify the power (Kitty). Either way, it presents a tough matchup for a brick, and it allows someone like Wolverine to fight "outside their weight class" so to speak.
Ah, So "Anti-Brick" is more like "Street Level" than it is like "Brick"; it doesn't specifically detail a specific kind of power set but more of a wide variety of power sets that cover the same end goal for their definition.
Problem with that line of thinking is that Wolverine's powerset does not "present a tough match-up for a brick". It presents a tough match-up for SOME bricks. Luke Cage would have a tough match up against Logan. The Hulk would defeat him effortlessly, like he did in WWH. Superman or Thor would knock Logan out with a punch or two to the face. Any class-100 brick can effortlessly BFR Logan (despite what comic PIS tries to tell you). So how does Logan's powerset present a challenge to people like them? It doesn't, really. Ergo he really doesn't count as an "anti-brick", imo.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Superman and Thor aren't strictly bricks, and one-shotting Wolverine isn't likely even for them. Hulk's healing factor separates him from the usual idea of "brick" in this type of thread. In a way, Hulk's healing factor is an "anti-anti-brick."
Also, this thread has the potential to get hilarious considering the vague definitions of the things in question.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 05:22 AM
None of that stuff actually matters though, because even if those abilities don't make them strictly bricks, they don't NEED to use those abilities to beat Wolverine, which was the point that I was making. Hulk would annihilate Logan using nothing but his pure strength, even if he had no HF. Superman would one-shot Logan using purely his strength, even if that was the only superpower he had. Thor would one-shot Logan using just brute strength, even if that was the only power he had. Their other abilities are irrelevant.
Point being, if your powers weakness is "brute strength", which is the #1 weakness of Logan's HF besides plot devices, then that disqualifies the ability from being "anti-brick".
It's like having a suit that I call "fire-proof" even though it instantly melts when coming into contact with fire hotter than 1000 degrees (for example). Is it really fire "proof"? No. There's an obvious distinction between fire "resistant" and fire "proof".
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Last edited by Tzeentch on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 05:41 AM
That stuff does actually matter though. If all they had was super strength, they would lose pretty badly to Wolverine. Not only is a one-shot unlikely, but they'd lack the speed, durability, or healing factor to deal with Wolverine gutting them. Thor fighting as a brick will spawn pages of debate by itself, and it's not like the Wolverine side is completely without merit there. Same with Hulk sans healing factor.
It seems your definition of "anti-brick" is "functionally immune to bricks." You're welcome to use that definition of course; however, the concept refers to something slightly less concrete in typical forum use.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 06:10 AM
Yes it does. He beats most pure bricks and gives other hell.
Hulk is a god awful example. For starters Hulk not a simply a brick he also has insane level of healing. He also beat entire teams of avengers and x-men during WWH. Wolverine gave him one of the biggest fight. he also foughten Hulk more then any other character......not sure how that proves your side of the argument at all.
Really because Thor failed to when Wolverine fought him. Wolverine did quite alright in melee as well. Superman nor thor are brick anyways. Your arguments are rather ridiculous. All the characters you said were actual "anti bricks" have and or would loses to Hulk, Superman or Thor. So your arguement seem kinda iffy to be honest.
Wolverine would not bee Koed by BFR. And by such logic any Heavy hitter who hit another heavy hitter first would win the fight. Sorry but real world logic is not comic logic.
No he does count as an anti brick, you just have no grasp on what a brick is. It super strong character with super human durbaility. SUperman and Thor are much more then simple bricks. Hell so the Hulk.
Wolverine an anti-brick because he significantly faster, can take there punches and has claws which bypass there durability. Which makes him a bad match up for typical bricks like Thing, luke cage ect.
An anti-brick is a fast moving or intangible character that can get through powerful physical defenses without much trouble. Pretty much you have to nullify the durability and the strength, which are the main concepts behind basic bricks.
Superman and Hulk happen to have extra powers that makes them slightly more than "just bricks", a real example of a brick would be Colossus or Thing when not tapping into the Heart-force.
And of course people should also take into account weight class.
Against some characters Spider-man would be a good anti-brick due to his strength, speed, pre-cog, and wall crawling ability.
But once he hits a certain weight class of brick it becomes moot.
Wolverine's the way. The difference though that due to his healing and adamantium claws I say he can go further away from his weight class then say Spider-man can.
Also the further up you go the harder it is to find a pure brick who doesn't have some other ability like a healing factor.
But in general I think a good definition for an anti brick is someone who possesses the ability to dodge a brick's punch's and other limited attacks (agility, speed, quickness, flight, intangibility, teleportation) and possess some way to put a brick down quickly due to some good attack (telepathy, very sharp powerful weapons, soul steal, super-powered energy attack, intangibility again, bfring power).
Of course a character's ability to be an anti-brick can also very based on weight class.
And I wouldn't classify Thor and Superman as bricks
Superman is a brawling type character in imo. He is the arch type for a brawler to me.
Thor's a mixture just about any type you can think of. He's a good brawler, a very versatile powerset.
Superman and Thor are no brick at all. In fact, Thor isn't as versatile as the Heralds of Galactus, but he's not that far behind.
As for Superman, he got himself other powers that just "being strong".
Bricks would be Hulk, Thing, Colossus, Luke Cage...
And in that list, only Hulk can deafeat soundly Wolverine. The others are in huge risk of being gut.
Uh no... Wolverine represents a tough-matchup for MOST bricks...
The only reason why Hulk is able to take the edge over Logan in their fights is because of his absurd healing factor which runs on infinity. If it wasn't for that, he would have bled to death during the WWH fight, and Lulz @ you using WWH to try and discredit Logan. Maybe you didn't notice but that version of Hulk was one and three shotting other bricks of high calibur left and right. Wolverine actually took way more punishment than a number of them.
Thor's already hit Wolverine with his hammer, he didn't knock Wolverine out. Thor's punched Wolverine in the face during the reigning, it didn't knock Wolverine out. So yeah, you're wrong there too.
Thing is, comics have shown us that Wolverine DOES present a challenge to bricks 95% of the time he fights them. He can take their punishment on a level that is either equal to their damage soak or better and can bypass their durability because he has a broken offensive weapon for melee.
Wolverine's fought the Hulk more times than he's fought Captain America, Deadpool, and Spiderman combined and Marvel typically tells us it isn't an easy fight for Hulk.
__________________ "damn jinzin, you're a real trooper, you provde fact after fact and pages and pages of proof and these wanton miscreants just keep at it"~MERC
KMC Community Forums
Jan 21st, 2012 06:48 PM
"damn jinzin, you're a real trooper, you provde fact after fact and pages and pages of proof and these wanton miscreants just keep at it"~MERC
