The feats of yester-year.

Here's a question that I've been pondering for a little while.

Should we accept/use/spam the feats of our characters that happened ten, twenty, or even fourty years ago?

The writing at the time was notoriously bad, there have been thousands upon thousands of upgrades since, and much of those feats were the definition of PIS - that is;

If something needed to be done, all of the sudden, the character of choice was more than capable - even if they have never replicated a feat throughout continuity past or future.

What does everyone think? If a character, in some obscure comic, was once able to do something thirty years ago, and they've never replicated anything like it since, should we accept this feat? Should we use it? Should the character in question be capable of it again?

Discuss, argue, tell me I'm a douche.

🙂.

'Sall good.

Ok.

ermm

You're a douche.

Originally posted by SpunkySmurph
Ok.

ermm

You're a douche.

I knew that would be the first post.

Somehow.

I knew.

Originally posted by SpunkySmurph
Ok.

ermm

You're a douche.

They have never had the same circumstances to replicate the feat.
If Thor had to save the universe by absorbing a blast... has he ever had to do the same thing?
No.

Could he? Sure. (some idiots will think I am saying Thor can absorb a universe destroying blast, well... I'm not, just giving a fake situation in which something happened)

The only way I see them as not acceptable, is if it were pis.
Or if a character was really weak back then, and got several upgrades on-panel.

Originally posted by Soljer
I knew that would be the first post.

Somehow.

I knew.

Just contributing my opinion to the thread.

...

ermm (I think I'm addicted to this smilie)

Originally posted by bigbran

The only way I see them as not acceptable, is if it were pis.
Or if a character was really weak back then, and got several upgrades on-panel.

Or downgrades.

Or it wasn't the same version of the character.

Or there was a retcon affecting this later on.

...

Anyways, I'm inclined to say if it was a whole 'nother power (i.e. Mjolnir being able to put people to sleep... fact.) then it SHOULD be acceptable.

If it's a level of durability or energy absorption or whatever that the character has never reached at any other point in their career... it's PIS.

I like cake.

Some characters get upgraded and downgraded over the years, except there isn't always a "Crisis" moment to signify it. If there are more recent and numerous showings that contradict fewer older showings in terms of the level of an ability, whether it be higher or lower, it's probably more prudent to take the more recent, or alternatively to try and take all the showings as a whole and find a sensible middle ground.

Unless there's been a specified upgrade or downgrade of a character on panel.

In terms of the one shot powers a lot of it happens because the character has a plot device weapon/tool e.g. a GL ring or Mjolnir.

But, if we're aware that something is a one-shot power due to a PLOT device....should that one shot power be admissible in the versus forum? Should they be 'capable' of it? If they've NEVER displayed that power again (even at times when it would have been VERY condusive to their health to do so)?

I'm relatively ambivalent about it.

E.g. I'm not sure why it makes more sense to me for GL feats to be valid even if scarce or archaic than one-off "exotic" Mjolnir powers

GL ring it's inherently and explicitly a plot device, specifically stated as being able to do anything the imaginable and willed. So past one-shot feats that have been displayed by a user should be valid, since they're within the very liberal limitations of the weapon.
And afaik now GLs were unaffected by COIE, which technically further negates scans being outdated.

Conversely I'm not sure if the same argument could be used for the often archaic deus ex machina abilities of Mjolnir. I suppose one can argue that it's magic, so anything goes. But it doesn't sit as well with me personally.

Unless there is a huge change in the abilities of the character stated, then don't assume that it's not there.

Does that mean the character is going to use that power all the time? Nope. Most of the more exotic and abstract feats lack context when shown in debates, and there may be reasoning behind them.

I doubt Thor would drain Superman's soul out of him if they fought, but draining solar energy isn't outside the realm of possibility, etc. It's the same with many characters.

That Sentry feat was just bad, aweful writing. Marvel has no business having characters perform feats like that, in the middle of a city skyline, without explanation, or harm coming to the surroundings. Bad writing imo

I'm all for this. For the most part, high end and low end feats are pretty rare, and can be argued out of most debates. To be honest, I don't see the random PIS one shot feats show up too much... Maybe I am in the wrong threads?

As far as the specific cases of Thor's Hammer or a GL ring, I'd put them there with the power cosmic or other "magics". However, like Xmarks above, ridiculous feats from mjolnir seem less credible imho than those of the GLs, but that may just me more due to the fact that we are all very used to seeing Lantern's use their ring's as plot devices, whereas Thor normally hits people with his, rather than doing crazy magic mumbo jumbo... I can't say its any less valid though.

I'd be interested in hearing about the process of validating feats with continuity... It'd be a long, drawn out process. But hell, I'm totally up for tooth and comb semantics of entertainment literature 😛

You mean like Hulk smashing that giant asteroid?

Originally posted by Soljer
Here's a question that I've been pondering for a little while.

Should we accept/use/spam the feats of our characters that happened ten, twenty, or even fourty years ago?

The writing at the time was notoriously bad, there have been thousands upon thousands of upgrades since, and much of those feats were the definition of PIS - that is;

If something needed to be done, all of the sudden, the character of choice was more than capable - even if they have never replicated a feat throughout continuity past or future.

What does everyone think? If a character, in some obscure comic, was once able to do something thirty years ago, and they've never replicated anything like it since, should we accept this feat? Should we use it? Should the character in question be capable of it again?

Discuss, argue, tell me I'm a douche.

🙂.

'Sall good.

The way I see it is that we should try to use the most current feats possible especially if that character has been upgraded or down graded since a feat being used occurred. The reason i say this is because powers are always changing, and just b/c a character did something incredible 10-30 yrs ago, and hasn't shown anything to that level of power since, doesn't mean it should count now. For example I am alot stronger now than i was 2 yrs ago. Two years ago i could not lift some of the weight i do now. So b/c i could not lift 250lbs two years ago, but i can now your going to use my past inability to lift 250 against me even though currently i can. On the other hand i have friends who use to be monsters presing over 350 lbs 10x, but recently have gotten lazy and weak not being able to lift anywhere near 250 lbs. i can't use the fact they use to lift 350lbs in argument of whether they could kick someone else's ass, b/c that fact is no longer valid. The point is power levels change and we should try to use the most recent showings possible as proof of feats.