Spider-Man vs. Firelord - the rematch

Originally posted by MERCILOUS
That would be generally accepted, If say, those characters you mentioned hadn't been killing 100's of guys tougher than Spiderman at the same time on a regular basis.

Fair point, except Spider-Man beat a lot of those same guys. Doesn't that put him in that same league? Match Gladiator's greatest victories compared to Spider-Man's greatest victories. I'd argue that the edge actually goes to Spider-Man.

I was just reminded. Spider-Man also beaten Rachel Summers - Phoenix.

Originally posted by long pig
Everytime Strange is fighting someone his shields are up, he doesn't say "let me caste a shield before I fight you!", they just tend to be there.

Of course there are errors and such, but the majority his shields are up with seemingly no concious effort.

Flash is hella inconsistant, and Spiderman is too. The difference is Flash has a viable REASON or an EXCUSE to be able to do the insane things he does, Spiderman doesn't.

Doom can't beat Warlock, Wolverine can't beat Hulk....not the majority, and not with both having equal footing. Not happening.

Oh, well, that doesn't mean they're auto-shields that protected him unconsciously, when he's, for example, sleeping. Or being sniped by the Punisher. It could just be like Magneto's or Doom's shield...they just will it up without any production.

What is Flash's excuse for being inconsistent? He has an excuse for being fast...he's the Flash. But what's his excuse for having to run around explosives and run into a sword one comic and evacuating a city of millions in less than a second the next? Are neither PIS? Both PIS? Where's the truth? And how is that different from Spider-Man's NUMEROUS victories against herald level opponents? It's not a one time thing...what I wrote establishes a track record. Is it PIS? How much can someone credibly dismiss of a character's history before it becomes too much?

Sniped by Punisher? Did that happen?
He was once sniped a wraith of Death, but the projectile bounced off his shield.
I'm guessing having a shield up takes his energy reserves bit by bit, so he relies on his sleep protection spells and mansion spells to keep him safe, instead of keeping a shield up.

I'm guessing you just go with what you want to believe, nothing is permanent or infailable, even the PIS argument isn't always correct.

Also, you got to take in the fact that these characters are people, and they sometimes mess up and do the wrong thing the wrong way, or don't go all out.

How much can someone dismiss before it becomes too much?
The majority.

Originally posted by MERCILOUS
As far as I know yes, I've never even heard of him being ambushed before.

I named a few a post of two ago, and I'm hardly an expert in Strange. When are some times he's been sneak attacked and he was protected by these auto-shields?

Flash is inconsistent but at least they try to give an explanation, and since the science is over the head of the average reader they get away with it. On the other hand you have a Class 100 character who can't break cement.

Is the attempt at an explanation an excuse, though? is the fact that the science is poorly understood an excuse? They don't often explain the science of it. Different writers just portray Flash differently. Most people are ok with that, but up in arms about Spider-Man beating certain people.

As for Juggernaut....if it's cement, it's possible that because it's wet, Juggy never had the leverage necessary to get out. Once Hulk got stuck in quicksand. PIS both times?

But Doom has done it, without any circumstance, so it must be true. Is it likely that it happens again, that I don't know.

Hmm...this line undoes everything you've been trying to say. If it happened then it must be true. Spider-Man beat Strange, with no circumstances. He hit him with a pot and knocked him out. So it must be true? What's the difference?

Originally posted by long pig
Sniped by Punisher? Did that happen?
He was once sniped a wraith of Death, but the projectile bounced off his shield.
I'm guessing having a shield up takes his energy reserves bit by bit, so he relies on his sleep protection spells and mansion spells to keep him safe, instead of keeping a shield up.

I'm guessing you just go with what you want to believe, nothing is permanent or infailable, even the PIS argument isn't always correct.

Also, you got to take in the fact that these characters are people, and they sometimes mess up and do the wrong thing the wrong way, or don't go all out.

How much can someone dismiss before it becomes too much?
The majority.

So your overall conclusion is that someone can dismiss MOST feats and victories by a single character and it's ok? Interesting.

I think it's just us on this board right now. I'm curious to hear what other people think.

Most is the majority, I said the majority is too much.

You can dismiss events that seem to go in direct conflict of what you yourself know about a character.
But that is only valid if you know a good bit about said character, if you're just a new reader, you can't dismiss anything without possibly being wrong.

Originally posted by demigawd
Fair point, except Spider-Man beat a lot of those same guys. Doesn't that put him in that same league? Match Gladiator's greatest victories compared to Spider-Man's greatest victories. I'd argue that the edge actually goes to Spider-Man.

Again, under what circumstances. In order for those to be counted, I'd need you to say, they met on an eqaul playing field, there were no outside factors, and Spiderman just handed those guys there asses. No help, no gadgets (except usual ones like webbing), No interference, no holding back on either party.

Originally posted by demigawd
I was just reminded. Spider-Man also beaten Rachel Summers - Phoenix.

I think you know how I feel about that comment.

Originally posted by demigawd
Oh, well, that doesn't mean they're auto-shields that protected him unconsciously, when he's, for example, sleeping. Or being sniped by the Punisher. It could just be like Magneto's or Doom's shield...they just will it up without any production.

You might be right.

Originally posted by demigawd
What is Flash's excuse for being inconsistent? He has an excuse for being fast...he's the Flash. But what's his excuse for having to run around explosives and run into a sword one comic and evacuating a city of millions in less than a second the next? Are neither PIS? Both PIS? Where's the truth? And how is that different from Spider-Man's NUMEROUS victories against herald level opponents? It's not a one time thing...what I wrote establishes a track record. Is it PIS? How much can someone credibly dismiss of a character's history before it becomes too much?

You bringing up Slade does not help you point, Slade has consistently shown to be able to keep up with speedsters. Flash, Wonder Woman, and a few times against Impulse.

Oh, sorry, misunderstood. ok, last question, Long Pig. If we were to do a count of the times he's been hit and the times he's been protected by his auto-shield and it came out to 26 times sneak attack successful and 20 times unsuccessful, would someone be fair in dismissing the auto-shield?

Originally posted by demigawd
I know that when people think of Plot Induced Stupidity, this is the textbook example. It's the legendary, prototypical fight that proves that sometimes...writers just get it completely wrong.

But is it?

Firelord isn't actually the first or only herald-level being Spider-Man has gotten the best of, or who have proven unable to defeat him. Let's look at some other victims:

Gravitron
Titania
Hulk
Magneto
Juggernaut
Silver Surfer
Adam Warlock
The X-Men
The Fantastic Four
Thanos
Eric Masterson Thor
Beta Ray Bill
Loki

So...what is it about Spider-Man? And if a character's power is best measured by his victories...does a victims list like this make Spider-Man one of the most effective heroes in comicdom?

Let's cast a blind eye to this being Spider-Man. Look at the victory list above. Based on that list alone, could this mystery character beat Firelord?

I agree with you some what...SM as a character is always portrayed as being an underdog..the guy who everyone underestimates, and somehow manages to overcome overwhelming odds..if nothing else..in a debate context, stories like these can be used to prove his resourcefulness and tactical skill, rather than his physical prowess/abilities.

If these scenarios are used to portray his physical abilities however, they should only be used to support "logical arguments" that are consistant with what we know of the characters abilities.

For example..Marvel states that SM is several times faster than a human, as well as has reflexes 15 to 40 times faster than that of a human, and in addition to this he has precognitive abilities...

So I could use the Titania, Hulk, Eric Masterson, FF, and X-men fights as a examples supporting the "logical argument" that it would be very difficult for anyone to hit SM, unless they possessed some form of superhuman speed, agility, precog, etc..etc..that could match SM's..or at the very least..some ability that would negate his advantage in these areas.

All "historical information" should be used in a debate, as long as it supports "logical argumentation."

SM's history proves that he is resourceful enough defeat powerful opponents if he has a plan and if these powerful opponents underestimate him, however, logic tells me that based on Firelord's history/abilities, he should be able to survive much more than SM could ever dish out in an all out--no holds barred brawl..(The guy freaking survives the rigors of deep space for Cripes Sake!!)..

I understand that these are comic book characters, and that their abilities/origins are "illogical", however, in a debate context, we need to have a set of standards/logic in which we debate these battles from, or else we end up with never-ending debates that use silly-circular agruments. (*note: these types of arguments are usually used by fanboys)

So in conclusion...if we are assuming that this is the normal everday SM fighting with the abilities he is usually portrayed to have in his comics, and if we assume that this is a brawl for all type battle with the formal herald of Galactus...then SM looses this rematch quicker than you can say PIS...🙂

Depends on when/where/how he was hit.

If he's hit 10 times in a wolverine comic where Strange being K.O'd is the main plot, 10 times in a crossover with DC where Strange get's beaten by Batman and 6 times in his own series where he's hit while asleep/under mind control, then no, you wouldn't dismiss the auto-shields.

Originally posted by demigawd
I named a few a post of two ago, and I'm hardly an expert in Strange. When are some times he's been sneak attacked and he was protected by these auto-shields?

It happens so often that's a strange question, Just pick up a Strange book.

Originally posted by demigawd
Is the attempt at an explanation an excuse, though? is the fact that the science is poorly understood an excuse? They don't often explain the science of it. Different writers just portray Flash differently. Most people are ok with that, but up in arms about Spider-Man beating certain people.

Portrayal and results are two different things.

Originally posted by demigawd
As for Juggernaut....if it's cement, it's possible that because it's wet, Juggy never had the leverage necessary to get out. Once Hulk got stuck in quicksand. PIS both times?

Quicksand and Wet cement are not comparable. Struggling in quicksand will make you sink, strugging in wet cement will get you out.

Originally posted by demigawd
Hmm...this line undoes everything you've been trying to say. If it happened then it must be true. Spider-Man beat Strange, with no circumstances. He hit him with a pot and knocked him out. So it must be true? What's the difference?

On accident, like the way Green arrow beat Amazo when the whole of the Justice league reserves and all could do nothing. But at least then there was no auto-shields in question. How something happens is as important as the outcome. This is the point I've been trying to stress.

How many more times should I ask how or why or under what circumstances?

Originally posted by MERCILOUS
Again, under what circumstances. In order for those to be counted, I'd need you to say, they met on an eqaul playing field, there were no outside factors, and Spiderman just handed those guys there asses. No help, no gadgets (except usual ones like webbing), No interference, no holding back on either party.

I find that fights rarely go that way, even in real life. That's why boxers have excuses all the time, lol. Should we dismiss a Spider-Man victory over the Hulk because Spider-Man threw the Hulk into a gamma generator that turned Hulk back into Banner? If that's the case, then shouldn't we also dismiss a Hulk victory over Gladiator because the Hulk kicked Gladiator into a nuclear reactor, which is Gladiator's weakness?

I think you know how I feel about that comment.

You ain't alone. But in Secret Wars, when Spider-Man broke Jean's TK hold on him...it happened, right? No outside tricks or anything. Acceptable? How's it different from the above Doom example

You bringing up Slade does not help you point, Slade has consistently shown to be able to keep up with speedsters. Flash, Wonder Woman, and a few times against Impulse.

I brought up Slade for a reason. There are many (myself included) who don't believe Slade SHOULD keep up with light-speeders, even if he could see them with his special vision, because as fast as Slade is, he's still nowhere CLOSE to lightspeed. But he beat them...more than once. PIS, despite there being a track record?

Originally posted by whobdamandog
I agree with you some what...SM as a character is always portrayed as being an underdog..the guy who everyone underestimates, and somehow manages to overcome overwhelming odds..if nothing else..in a debate context, stories like these can be used to prove his resourcefulness and tactical skill, rather than his physical prowess/abilities.

If these scenarios are used to portray his physical abilities however, they should only be used to support "logical arguments" that are consistant with what we know of the characters abilities.

For example..Marvel states that SM is several times faster than a human, as well as has reflexes 15 to 40 times faster than that of a human, and in addition to this he has precognitive abilities...

So I could use the Titania, Hulk, Eric Masterson, FF, and X-men fights as a examples supporting the "logical argument" that it would be very difficult for anyone to hit SM, unless they possessed some form of superhuman speed, agility, precog, etc..etc..that could match SM's..or at the very least..some ability that would negate his advantage in these areas.

All "historical information" should be used in a debate, as long as it supports "logical argumentation."

SM's history proves that he is resourceful enough defeat powerful opponents if he has a plan and if these powerful opponents underestimate him, however, logic tells me that based on Firelord's history/abilities, he should be able to survive much more than SM could ever dish out in an all out--no holds barred brawl..(The guy freaking survives the rigors of deep space for Cripes Sake!!)..

I understand that these are comic book characters, and that their abilities/origins are "illogical", however, in a debate context, we need to have a set of standards/logic in which we debate these battles from, or else we end up with never-ending debates that use silly-circular agruments. (*note: these types of arguments are usually used by fanboys)

So in conclusion...if we are assuming that this is the normal everday SM fighting with the abilities he is usually portrayed to have in his comics, and if we assume that this is a brawl for all type battle with the formal herald of Galactus...then SM looses this rematch quicker than you can say PIS...🙂

Well-argued. I think those are some really good points. So then, if I were to create a thread called "Spider-Man vs. Firelord" and said in the stipulations that Spider-Man has three days of prep, the fight takes place in Manhattan and Firelord has no idea who Spider-Man is...would it change your answer? What about for any of the other above fights?

Originally posted by MERCILOUS
]It happens so often that's a strange question, Just pick up a Strange book.

Really? Strange gets ambushed and auto-shielded that often?

Portrayal and results are two different things.

Portrayal often leads to results. That was my point. According to some posters here, writers portray Flash as needing to accelerate. I've read differently. Obviously these portrayed will influence the results. The former portrayal would cause Flash to credibly lose to Slade the way he did in Identity Crisis. The latter would make it impossible.

Quicksand and Wet cement are not comparable. Struggling in quicksand will make you sink, strugging in wet cement will get you out.

Last I checked, you can't swim in wet cement. But I guess that depends on where/when/how you hit the bottom, which I'd imagine there would have to be at some point.

On accident, like the way Green arrow beat Amazo when the whole of the Justice league reserves and all could do nothing. But at least then there was no auto-shields in question. How something happens is as important as the outcome. This is the point I've been trying to stress.

Likewise, Warlock has taken a blast from Galactus, but Doom puts him down in one shot? Is the PIS Warlock surviving the blast from Galactus or Doom putting Warlock down in one shot? Or does Doom hit as hard as Galactus? Or is Galactus that weak?

In the case of Green Arrow, he exploited a specific weakness, which is what Spider-Man did to beat Hulk.

How many more times should I ask how or why or under what circumstances?

For all of them? Damn. That's a lot. I'm sure as the discussion expands more people will talk about specifics. Otherwise, I'll write when I wake up.

Originally posted by demigawd
Expected by whom? Why? Based on what? On his prior successes in blasting people? Like who? Spider-Man's victory list is a lot more impressive than Doom's. And don't mention people like Galactus and Beyonder and Silver Surfer...he didn't beat them in fights with his own armor, he stole their power.

Doom is one of my favorite villains, but he is not God. He makes mistakes - when I think of it, he makes mistakes all the time.

Cool character, great villain, impressive at times, but please, to all the Doom fans, he is not mr. Perfect.

When Doom steels the Beyonders power with his "strong personality" and a half working armor, that's all good. But when Spider-Man, after a very long and hard fight finally surprises Firelord - who is one of the weaker heralds, and is a lame fighter - and fights him with everything he's got, that's suddenly crap writing ?

Bollocks.

Every major character has had his or her share of crap writing, and SM certainly is no exception. But the Firelord fight wasn't that exaggerated...

(I am not saying SM will beat him a second time).

Originally posted by MERCILOUS
What the?

Juggernaut trapped in cement? So much for the foward moving power of Cyttorak.

The Fantastic Four? You mean where they're all like "hey stop we wanna talk to you" and he's running around them?

The X-men? I hope you're not talking secret wars when they were depowered.

Just he fact that you put these in makes me question the rest. He probably had cosmic powers for a couple more.

Poor spidey hater.

The ff were defending themselves. You have to remember that back in those days they talked like that when they fought.

The xmen got owned.

And yes peter has pulled some impressive victories, though he is a mild superhuman, he is very intelligent and pulls shit off, no different than batman.

Originally posted by demigawd
There may or may not be factors for all of these fights. Factors are frequently in the eye of the reader. Hungry Galactus, anybody? Superman holding back, perhaps? Surfer being a pacifist? What makes, for example, Doom KOing Warlock with one hit a huge part of his god-like legend, but Spider-Man doing the same the subject of scorn and ridicule, especially if Spider-Man has shown a better track record for beating beings on that level than Doom?

Its because spiderman is one of the most hated around here...

This whole thread seems to be about how we ALL pick and choose as to what is viable and what is PIS.

We all do it, because we all have personal connections with our respective favorite characters.

LMAO @ Spiderman defeating Firelord being "stupid writing."

Firelord made the mistake of letting Spiderman get in close where he could work his magic. Big mistake, obviously. How is it "stupid writing" when Spiderman regularly trashes opponents who are much less agile than he is and let their arrogance get the best of him? Do any of you all HAVE that Spiderman comic? Read again and look at the laundry list of mistakes Firelord made. Typical high-and-mighty cosmic who spots earthling and says "oh ho, I'll make mincemeat of him but I'll play with him first." If he just zorched the area (like he COULD do) he could have defeated him with ease, but that makes for a BORING story arc (recall the arc spanned two issues), correct? Ever heard of PLOT DEVICES, gentlemen?

Same mistake Titania made. Do you NOT recall Spiderman saying (paraphrased) "Oh if I were to fight you in a closet it would be fair, but give me some room to operate and I'll bust your ass?" Mcfarlane introduced the drawing style where Spidey started contorting his body at all sorts of odd angles and he was already quick enough to dodge bullets after they are fired (from a certain distance; I think Wonder Woman is one who is quick enough to deflect them at near point-blank range). NOBODY on the Uncanny X-Men is noted for their incredible speed; why is it difficult to imagine Spiderman bouncing around their butts when they were not in ATTACK mode anyway? When you are trying to KILL a frog you are muuuuch more focused as opposed to when you are merely trying to CATCH one, correct?

Sheeeeed up with the Superman vs. Hulk example. Find me an example that is in continuity. Funny how nobody mentions when Hulk was banging on Superman it ALSO said that with each passing second, Hulk grows ever more ferocious and his strength increases geometrically. The outcome of this strange duel IS IN DOUBT.

Learn to distinguish between "bad writing" and "extenuating circumstances." You all act as if Spiderman beating the hell out of Firelord set a precedent. It DIDN'T.

And so odd, Spiderman beating Firelord (let's see, Class 10 strength vs. Class 70ish, super reflexes/agility/spider sense to avoid punches/attacks) is piss poor writing but Wolverine (Class ONE strength vs. Class 75 strength; no increased speed, no increased agility, no increased reflexes) sometimes getting the best of Hulk isn't?

Gotta love the cosistency on these boards (am euphemizing "fanboyism" as "consistency," by the way).

Originally posted by demigawd
ok, so you're saying that "generally accepted" means what DID happen? ok, then what DID happen was that Spider-Man beat Juggernaut by trapping him in cement. You yourself said that you disregard that. Generally accepted or no?

well I guess this settles that things are open to interpretation...I didn't see merc say he disregarded it at all...I did however read that he disagreed with it...

wow, great thread and discussion, gents! one of the better reasoned threads i've seen in my short time here. no flaming, or other stupidity, just good discussion. nice.

what you're forgetting, demi (some GREAT arguments, btw - you've raised several issues i've brought up many times - ie - PIS being in the eyes of the beholder, PIS being able to both make a character look worse that they are generally portrayed, but ALSO better!) is that in this forum extenuating circumstances are disallowed. characters stand against each other with only the powers they have. (unless specifically stated otherwise in the thread opening) and for each of those battles you've listed, i could list times where spidey was clobbered by the same opponent (hulk and juggs barely NOTICE spidey most times, wolvie himself nearly killed spidey, as did masterson. the thanos one has me puzzled - you referring to the 2in1 annual where spidey sort of scored the closing blow? if so, he was so scared in that battle he actually FLED the battle for a time!) or beaten by people well BELOW these guys (daredevil has ko'd him for example).

in a comicbook, there is MUCH, MUCH more leeway than there is on this forum. people frequently say a character will sumarily crush another character on this forum, which (case dependent) may or may not be true, but in a comicbook battle, that almost NEVER happens- regardless of the mismatch. (firelord v spidey, for example) a clever writer can make the underdog win almost everytime. but SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE will still scream PIS or CIS. is it? who knows! different writers view different characters . . . differently. this forum tries to eliminate the sujectivity that comicbooks so often entail.

the problem with that (and a great irony!)? most people on this site use a character's extreme showings as proof. those SAME showings that are likely labelled PIS or CIS!! it's why when i debate, i TRY to look at the character's GENERAL portrayal. it eliminates what might be termed PIS at both extremes. ie - let's say 10 years ago a character (call him A) is shown lifting a 747. now character A is only cl10 strength but let's say he was really po'd and lifted it. but he's NEVER done anything like that before or since. does that one instance make in cl100? no. but would someone argue that he CAN be a cl100? of course. but is that one showing 10 years ago enough to back such an argument? i'd say no, because based on his GENERAL portrayal, he is nowhere NEAR that strong. but still, he did it . . .

anyhow, i've gone on too long. let me sum up: in a comic, with clever (??) writing, spidey can beat firelord. in this forum? no chance.