Poll
23%
77%
Handbooks versus On-panel feats
Which holds more authority and credibility for you?
In my opinion, handbooks are what the company INTENDED the character to be. Handbooks are free of PIS or CIS. Onpanel feats, while GENERALLY useful, are prone to one writer's bias or lack of knowledge taking the character beyond what they were meant to be.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Handbooks don't really mean anything.They're just as prone to allowing PIS events into them. (why the hell would they leave out CIS btw?)
Handbooks also tend to give ratings to characters that don't match with what happens in comics.
1. Handbooks give all relevant stats and powers of a character
2. Handbooks have NO PIS.
3. Handbook ratings don't match with what happens in comics because there are so many different writers of comics who have different ideas of what the characters should be able to do and create PIS events.
Originally posted by Estacado
Handbooks aren't written by comic book writers....
they're produced by the company's highest ups...the editors. They're also not the ideas of one writer or idea, but rather the thoughts of the WHOLE company.
also, notice that handbooks remain pretty consistent over time. Whereas onpanel feats vary wildly from ridiculous low feats to over the top high feats.
Originally posted by masterbruce
1. Handbooks give all relevant stats and powers of a character
But only on scales so you get a very limited idea of what any of it means.
Originally posted by masterbruce
2. Handbooks have NO PIS.
Only through tautology.
Originally posted by masterbruce
3. Handbook ratings don't match with what happens in comics because there are so many different writers of comics who have different ideas of what the characters should be able to do and create PIS events.
Would you place more trust in going to Alaska and looking around or read the Wiki article on Alaska?
this is the way I look at it.
If we are debating 2 characters, we first look to the handbook. If one character has better stats in everything then that character wins.
Now, if both characters have similar stats or each has advantages in certain areas, THEN we look to comics to see who has better showings.
Originally posted by masterbruce
this is the way I look at it.If we are debating 2 characters, we first look to the handbook. If one character has better stats in everything then that character wins.
Now, if both characters have similar stats or each has advantages in certain areas, THEN we look to comics to see who has better showings.
😐
That's debating powersets. By that logic beating Taskmaster H2H would be impossible.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No . . . 😕 CIS (which is part of the character) causes him to lose as does his lack of skill.
yeah, what I mean is that the handbooks don't take CIS into account.
CIS is valid, while PIS is not.
They should have a statline for CIS as well...(ie, Captain America would be a 7 while Rhino would be a 1, and Galactus would be a 3)
I'm not saying that Handbooks should be used for everything but an honest blend between understanding of a character and a blending of comic book feats should be used.
It does help if give you a basic idea.
Because if you solely go by comic book panel feats every single comic character will have the "moment" where they completely go against everything they had been before or feats that go above the norm.
I mean GLs are pretty powerful but when you have them containing Big Bangs I think the writer is an idiot. When you have Thor driving off Galactus by himself then I think the writer should be shot.
When you have Batman killing Doomsdays with an axe teh writer should never breed.
Originally posted by Newjak
I'm not saying that Handbooks should be used for everything but an honest blend between understanding of a character and a blending of comic book feats should be used.It does help if give you a basic idea.
Because if you solely go by comic book panel feats every single comic character will have the "moment" where they completely go against everything they had been before or feats that go above the norm.
I mean GLs are pretty powerful but when you have them containing Big Bangs I think the writer is an idiot. When you have Thor driving off Galactus by himself then I think the writer should be shot.
When you have Batman killing Doomsdays with an axe teh writer should never breed.
I thought the idea behind taking average feats (or mode feats) was that we wouldn't go by nothing but high feats.
Originally posted by NewjakI mean GLs are pretty powerful but when you have them containing Big Bangs I think the writer is an idiot. When you have Thor driving off Galactus by himself then I think the writer should be shot.
When you have Batman killing Doomsdays with an axe teh writer should never breed.
EXACTLY. that's what made me make this post, so many ludicrous feats are used by people as legitimate or cannon simply because they appear ONPANEL.
handbooks can be written by a no name college grad/nooby intern roped into the office at short notice and briefed at short notice and left unattended with the keys to the kingdom
Editor checks in "do over this!" "spelling mistake thur Chronos NOT Chrono!" "paragraphs too long... writing a love letter there bunky?"
Editor signs presentable looking handbook entry and files it.
Nooby intern escapes.