Captain America Vs. Prometheus

Started by darthgoober8 pages

Originally posted by Caps Conscience
Yes I would you little ****. Now shut the **** up and go play with your transformers or something.

Originally posted by thadarknite84
There isn't nothing little about me. and if you did, you'll get f***ed up quick. I don't have time for little f***ing kids. Getting mad over f***ing comic book characters. Shut the f*** up, and stop wasting my time. Your wrong, just get over it, you Captain America ass licking son of a B****. And get a life, these characters are not real.

Both of you chill out or I'll get the Mods involved. If you dislike each other that much then learn to use the ignore button.

Originally posted by Caps Conscience
Kill yourself.

Originally posted by Caps Conscience
Yes I would you little ****. Now shut the **** up and go play with your transformers or something.
Cap, I don't want to see you flaming, bashing, name calling or swearing again. The next time it will be a warning.
Originally posted by thadarknite84
There isn't nothing little about me. and if you did, you'll get f***ed up quick. I don't have time for little f***ing kids. Getting mad over f***ing comic book characters. Shut the f*** up, and stop wasting my time. Your wrong, just get over it, you Captain America ass licking son of a B****. And get a life, these characters are not real.
Darknite, don't let yourself get goaded into an argument which may get you a warning also. Please report anybody breaking the rules or harassing you. Even though it was in retaliation, I don't want to see that kind of language again. Thanks.

To everybody else. durfist

Originally posted by h1a8
I disagree. Comics lie and are inconsistent more than handbooks. But I will agree that sometimes Comics>>>>handbooks and sometimes handbooks>>>>comics.

A handbook is only wrong if the comics prove it to be.
And a comic is wrong if other comics prove it to be (not the handbook).

Note:
This doesn't mean that comics>handbooks in general.
It just means that if there is a contradiction somewhere then comics take precedent over handbooks. Otherwise, if there is no contradiction then handbooks are fair game. And if comics contradict comics (in stats) then an average should be taken. And if the handbook shows that average then it has precedent over any one comic.

W 😱 W.
[considering the source material], thats... er... very Mature.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The first handbooks weren't made until 1982, the comics by that point were decades old.

It doesn't matter. The original authors were consulted when the handbooks were made.

What doesn't matter is who was consulted as that doesn't change the fact that handbooks are a secondary source.

Originally posted by Silent Master
What doesn't matter is who was consulted as that doesn't change the fact that handbooks are a secondary source.

Prehaps. But comics are sometimes a thirded source. Thus sometimes handbooks>>>comics.

Incorrect, comics are always the primary source.

Originally posted by h1a8
Prehaps. But comics are sometimes a thirded source. Thus sometimes handbooks>>>comics.

...

If there were no comics... nevermind... doh

Originally posted by Silent Master
Incorrect, comics are always the primary source.

False, comics many times referenced both handbooks and original writers knowledge and opinions.

Comics referencing handbooks doesn't make the handbooks a primary source, it's just a way of validating the info.

Do you know how it validates the info, because it's putting the info into a primary source.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Comics referencing handbooks doesn't make the handbooks a primary source, it's just a way of validating the info.

Do you know how it validates the info, because it's putting the info into a primary source.

But some of the info in the handbook doesn't come from the comic at all.
It comes straight from the writers or original writers. Thus it is the primary source here.

What info?

Originally posted by Silent Master
What info?

Power stats and bios on characters whose story isn't told in the comics.

Like?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Like?

Well for starters some abstracts and cosmic beings are defined in the bios of the handbook and not in the comic. If you don't believe that some handbook info comes first from the writers then say so. Personally, I think this is common sense. I mean how would they know how strong Sinister was in the beginning before he ever showed limits to his physical strength (or even showed any physical strength whatsoever)? That is because the original creator of him already knew how strong he is. This info went straight to the handbook. Why don't you write Marvel for more info (or read their column on how they create handbooks).

Anything specific?

Characters tend to be around a while before they receive an OHOTMU entry, which aren't written by actual comic authors. The comic is pretty much always the primary source, at least on KMC.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Characters tend to be around a while before they receive an OHOTMU entry, which aren't written by actual comic authors. The comic is pretty much always the primary source, at least on KMC.

The key world is 'tend' as this isn't always the case.
You must know that some handbook writers are indeed comic writers (or were) and that the original writers of a character is sometimes consulted (over the comic). Meaning, the original writers give a lot of input to the handbooks.

There are character's that had absolutely no strength feats prior to their entry in OHOTMU. But the handbook gave them a specific strength (I'm referring to under class 100 characters) for that character. This info on that character's strength had to come from the original writers (not the comic). Thus that stat is the primary source.

Comics are wrong sometimes. They have errors, contradictions, and other things. Handbooks sometimes even average the feats (trying to negotiate the contradictions) which in itself is sound.

Let's not get off track now. I'm in no way am arguing that handbooks>>comics.

My point is that there exist instances when handbooks are just as valid as or overrule comics.

These instances are:

1. A Handbook piece of info is valid if it doesn't contradict the same info in the comics and the comics doesn't contradict themselves on that info. Meaning, the handbook is wrong only if it contradicts the non-contradicting evidence in comics.

2. If the comic contains an error or contradiction then the handbook is
the deciding judge of what's what. Meaning, since the comic can't be right and we need a deciding factor to continue the debate the handbook is that factor since it is the closest (and only) thing we have
to the truth.

3. If the comic fails to explain a character in completion (or at all) or fails to show all the powers and limits (if they exist) of that character then if the handbook list those things then the handbook info is valid. As doing this doesn't really contradict the comic (but adds on to it).

With that said,
1. says that handbook info can be used
if it doesn't disagree with the soundness of the comics. So I guess you would translate that to comics>>> or equal to handbooks.

2. shows the only way that handbooks>comics

3. shows that handbooks can add to comics and thus the added info wasn't secondary from the comic but from the writers.

If you disagree with any of the numbers state which one and why.

Stength listings in handbooks are almost never accurate.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Stength listings in handbooks are almost never accurate.
False, they're more accurate than not. I can even prove
it.