Spider-Man vs Blade

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
I like Shatterstar. I think he is a cool character. He is a skilled fighter, has superhuman stats across the board, unlimited endurance, a healing factor (which he has actually used), a superhuman learning ability, he can rearrange his organs to avoid injury and turn sonic vibrations into bio-blasts, and his weapons are magic. That said Shatterstar is not a match for top tier fighters no matter how much I'd like him to be. Wolverine has kicked his ass three times with little effort and Deadpool has served him his ass too. Blade is Shatterstar... only with less abilities and inferior feats. He isn't a match for any big name streets. He is Nightthrasher. He is Moonknight. He isn't Captain America or Daredevil or Iron Fist or Black Panther.

Listen, you guys can like Blade as much as you want, hell I like him, and in fact I properly have more Blade art in my portfolio than any other comic character, but you can still be objective about his abilities and honest about what he has and has not done.

😆 Post of the year thumbsup

Wasn't his hf displayed in his fight with Spitfire? Or when Dracula impaled him?

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
mannn STFU we give you one you say hes lying stop trolling

Even if he wasn't wearing kevlar and was actually shot by the Punisher (which I don't think is the case), that still isn't proof of a healing factor. No healing factor was mentioned in the scan. No healing was shown. I could take the same scan and say "Blade is bullet proof." There is just as much evidence to support that asinine theory as the notion that he healed. Or maybe Punisher missed anything vital and Blade just tanked the damage, it's possible, other streets have done it. Nothing in that examples proves conclusively the existence of a healing factor, it is just more sad fairy tales from Blade fanboys.

Originally posted by YFZ 350
Wasn't his hf displayed in his fight with Spitfire? Or when Dracula impaled him?

Allegedly Cornell wanted or intended for Blade to heal in the issue, but he still spent two issues with shallow scratch marks on his face without healing. Dracula purposely missed all Blade's vitals so he wouldn't kill him.

Originally posted by YFZ 350
Wasn't his hf displayed in his fight with Spitfire? Or when Dracula impaled him?

Originally posted by snoopdogg
Yea, when he fought Spitfire she was slashing his face with deep wounds but shortly after the fight was over they were gone and Cornell made notes to the artist to make sure the wounds were gone.

dont even argue with these clowns this thread is troll hotspot

Originally posted by King Castle
what evidence/reference do you have for this statement?

And I do recall the page it was this one but it was black and white.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c379/Doggydogg/Blade%20fights/BladevsPlotka2.jpg

1) H2H... Spiderman

2) standard fight.. Spiderman

3) 1) week prep for battle... Blade

4) foot race 5 miles... Spiderman

Originally posted by Razior
1) H2H... Spiderman

2) standard fight.. Spiderman

3) 1) week prep for battle... Blade

4) foot race 5 miles... Spiderman

2) standard fight.. Blade

3) 1) week prep for battle... Blade

4) foot race 5 miles...Spiderman corrected

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Blade has a few other feats of superhuman senses, so it is more or less the norm. On the other hand he has no feats of healing or being bullet proof, so taking a bullet center mass with no ill effect is not the norm.

He’s taken shots to the leg by hit-tech machine gunfire and kept on moving like nothing happened. He doesn't usually get shot in the first place. He also has vampiric abilities and we know that vampires have healing factors. It's not a stretch to say that it healed or its a combination of his durability and HF.

Hell if we had some Eternal who we have never seen before and he stated that he could fly would we really need on panel evidence, when we know that 90% of Eternals can already fly? If we saw scans of him in mid-air would we then say its a stretch that he was flying or would we start analysing it to death and say maybe he jumped?

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

Blade [b]does wear kevlar, [/B]

Did you see what I posted? I said there are lots of examples of him NOT wearing kevlar, so why are you assuming he was? Would I be right in assuming that the reason why you think hes wearing kevlar is due to his last series? If thats the case then he most likely wasn't wearing kevlar. Prior to his series I don't remember him ever wearing kevlar.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

he has [b]never healed on panel and he had already lied once about his ability to take bullets already in that encounter. Looking at the facts you need to take a far bigger leap to take the allusion at face value than you do to write it off as a bluff. The notion that bluffing makes him "look like a pussy" isn't really a compelling counter argument.[/B]

No you assume that he’s never healed on panel because you analyse everything to death and think the only legit proof is something as clear cut as a slap in the face, there are varying degrees of proof. He’s half-vampire and vampires have HF therefore when he gots shot in the leg or slashed and recovers quickly we can assume that it has something to do with it. There is also nothing wrong with using bios, most bios get general powersets correct, they just get strength levels wrong.

Well why don't you explain it to me then, instead of just stating its not a compelling argument?. I already gave you an example of a showing that indicated he can take gunfire with no problem.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

Like I said, it is an ambiguous feat at best and by no means a conclusive example of a healing factor. We don't know if he healed. We don't know if he was wearing kevlar. We don't know if the writer was trying to suggest he was bullet proof. Hell it is totally conviable that the bullet wound was open and he was just toughing it. We don't know. Citing it as an example of a healing factor is disingenous. The most likely answer that fits with the rest of Blade's appearances is that he was infact wearing kevlar as he is known to do.

This is the whole problem with your debating style, your double standards. Anything that doesn't agree with your view you analyse to death but you make no effort in analysing your own arguments. There are lots of examples of him NOT wearing kevlar. Do you realise what that means? That means if you were really being objective it means that its a matter of opinion wether he was wearing kevlar or not. However looking at other facts we can deduce that he was most likely wearing it. You haven’t given a credible argument for him lying and we weve seen him take worse gunfire.

Hell we know Blade is a vampire we know vampires have HFs but somehow him stating that he wears kevlar means theres more proof than him having a HF, hell I'm pretty sure hes stated that he has a HF as well. You didn't see him wearing kevlar either, but you're assuming he was.

Not everything in comics is 100% clear cut we can deduce by analysing the facts is that at the very least it was a combination of HF and durability. We don't need a god damn scan of the bullet hole appearing then disappearing in the next scan.

This probably won't make a difference.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c379/Doggydogg/Blade1ton-1.jpg

Just wondering how does Blade win with prep, is he known as a prepper?

Originally posted by Deadline
He’s taken shots to the leg by hit-tech machine gunfire and kept on moving like nothing happened. He doesn't usually get shot in the first place. He also has vampiric abilities and we know that vampires have healing factors. It's not a stretch to say that it healed or its a combination of his durability and HF.

And Kingpin has been shot five times in the chest and then fell of a bridge, and was he fine. Does he have a healing factor too? Does Punisher? Frank has taken FAR worse than three slugs to the leg and kept fighting. Does anyone who has taken a bullet and kept fighting have a healing factor? I don't know what you were hoping for? Did you think that waiting a few days to post would mean everyone had forgotten all the previously arguments in this thread? This has all been addressed several times now. Getting shot and continuing to fight regardless of the bullet wounds is a street level staple, everyone has done, it is not a healing factor feat.

Blade v2 01 - where this "feat" occurred - was the first comic that established that Morbius' bite in Peter Parker Spider-man had changed 616 into "Day Walker." Prior to that issue he was a human vampire hunter. If that was really supposed to be representative a previously on mentioned ability, don't you think it would have been mentioned and played up in the narrative? You really thing that something as ambiguous as fighting after getting shot - again something virtually every single street has done in their career - is supposed to be the first every occurrence of previously non existent ability? You don't think that the author would have provided some clarification for Blade fans who knew his past?

In Wolverine lore there is a debate on where the first appearance of his healing factor actually occurred. Uncanny X-Men issue 142 is the first time Wolverine's mutant ability was stated as being a healing factor, but in issue 116 he has a throw away one line about healing fast. Knowing that Wolverine eventually was attributed with a healing factor, one could retroactively say that 116 was the first appearance of it - but if Wolverine mutant power was established as something else in 142 and he never displayed any other healing feats would that one line be enough for someone to say "Wolverine has an enhanced healing factor?" I don't think so. Blade had not displayed a healing factor before that incident or since, and the examples representation of a healing factor is - at best - inconclusive. You aren't even retroactively giving him abilities he didn't have in the past but has now... you are just making things up.

Not to mention that with all recent the retcon's to his origins who knows how or even if that issue fits into Blade's history anyway?

Originally posted by Deadline
Hell if we had some Eternal who we have never seen before and he stated that he could fly would we really need on panel evidence, when we know that 90% of Eternals can already fly? If we saw scans of him in mid-air would we then say its a stretch that he was flying or would we start analysing it to death and say maybe he jumped?

Blade isn't a vampire. He is a half vampire. There are several abilities vampires have that Blade himself lacks, a healing factor would just be another one. If you want to argue that Blade has certain abilities you need to conclusively show that he can use them, not just attribute him the abilities of other characters.

Originally posted by Deadline
Did you see what I posted? I said there are lots of examples of him NOT wearing kevlar, so why are you assuming he was? Would I be right in assuming that the reason why you think hes wearing kevlar is due to his last series? If thats the case then he most likely wasn't wearing kevlar. Prior to his series I don't remember him ever wearing kevlar.

Since the movie release in 1998, Blade has worn kevlar or some sort of body armor / breast plate in the majority of his appearances. He wore armor in his Spider-man and Gambit appearances, the Max series, Tomb of Dracula, the recent Spider-man vs Vampires and possibly his Black Panther appearances (there is ribbing along his chest uniform but it is hard to say conclusively). His most recent costume, being the one he wore in McPv2, Captain Britain and the MI13 and most recently in X-Men appearances and his Curse of the Mutants one-shot is a form fitting body armor with shoulder and side straps.

I don't know what you guys are smoking because Blade's last series - the Guggenheim / Chaykin one - is pretty much the only place since 1998 where Blade didn't wear a kevlar or body armor on a regular basis. In that series he largely wore black cotton t-shirts and turtle necks.

Outside of the last Blade series, Blade wearing kevlar or body armor is the standard. It was before that series, and it has been since.

Originally posted by Deadline
No you assume that he’s never healed on panel because you analyse everything to death and think the only legit proof is something as clear cut as a slap in the face, there are varying degrees of proof. He’s half-vampire and vampires have HF therefore when he gots shot in the leg or slashed and recovers quickly we can assume that it has something to do with it. There is also nothing wrong with using bios, most bios get general powersets correct, they just get strength levels wrong.

I don't "over analyze everything to death," I just don't take ridiculous leaps of faith and project abilities and powers onto feats where they clearly don't exist. If Blade has never healed on panel then he needs to heal before that because a valid ability. That is the reality of the situation.

If Blade had a single valid healing feat it would be apparent without someone needing to go over every single Blade appearance with a fine tooth comb and saying "well maybe this is a healing feat?" on the most inconclusive and ambiguous feats. He was shot in the leg and kept fighting, with no mention of healing in the narration or shown in the sequential art work. Comic characters without healing factors do stuff like that all the freaking time. Maybe if Blade had some other healing factor feats for a precedent, you could make a case for it being a healing factor feat, but he doesn't.

Originally posted by Deadline
Well why don't you explain it to me then, instead of just stating its not a compelling argument?. I already gave you an example of a showing that indicated he can take gunfire with no problem.

And that argument has been addressed several times. Streets take bullets without being any worse for wear all the time. If that is proof of a healing factor then Punisher has a healing factor, Kingpin has a healing factor, Batman has a healing factor, Spider-man has a healing factor. Unless a character get hit in a vital area or they get their legs chewed up with hundreds of bullets like Grifter, getting shot is just a nuisance. Fighting after getting shot is not an example of a healing factor for a character who has never displayed a healing factor before or since unless it is stated as one or made abundantly clear in the art that that is the intention.

Originally posted by Deadline
This is the whole problem with your debating style, your double standards. Anything that doesn't agree with your view you analyse to death but you make no effort in analysing your own arguments. [b]There are lots of examples of him NOT wearing kevlar. Do you realise what that means? That means if you were really being objective it means that its a matter of opinion wether he was wearing kevlar or not. However looking at other facts we can deduce that he was most likely wearing it. You haven’t given a credible argument for him lying and we weve seen him take worse gunfire.
[/B]

So... what's the double standard here? Blade wears kevlar, and has worn it CONSISTENTLY since the turn of the decade. Alternatively he has never been shown to heal on panel. Those are facts. He told Punisher that a bullet to the face would have no effect on him. That was a bluff. Knowing that A) Blade wears kevlar 9/10, B) Blade has never been shown to heal on panel, and C) he had already bluffed once in that encounter, it is much more likely that he was wearing kevlar and was bluffing than it is that he wasn't wearing kevlar and demonstrated a previously on seen ability.

FYI Getting shot thrice in the leg is not "worse gunfire" than getting shot point blank in the back by Punisher.

Originally posted by Deadline
Hell we know Blade is a vampire we know vampires have HFs but somehow him stating that he wears kevlar means theres more proof than him having a HF, hell I'm pretty sure hes stated that he has a HF as well. You didn't see him wearing kevlar either, but you're assuming he was.

Vampires can also shape shift, fly, hypnotize / mind control people and don't need to breath, some can control weather and turn into mist. Blade can't do any of those things. You can't just arbitrarily give him vampire abilities that he has never used.

Blade has never said he has a healing factor. It was mentioned once in Blade Max that he has "mild regenerative abilities" (paraphrasing since I don't have my comics with me at University), but that was the same story arc he needed to get stitches to close shallow scratch marks on his shoulder.

Originally posted by Deadline
Not everything in comics is 100% clear cut we can deduce by analysing the facts is that at the very least it was a combination of HF and durability. We don't need a god damn scan of the bullet hole appearing then disappearing in the next scan.

No but it needs to be conclusive. An ambiguous feat that every single street has replicated is not prove of a healing factor, particularly when it would be the first occurrence of a healing factor for a character who has never demonstrated an on panel healing factor before that occasion or since.

Blade healed deep gashes on his face during his battle with Spitfire in minutes. He also is able to stand in fire without getting burned. He has a healing factor.

iirc

he stood inside a buildin fire doesnt mean he is immune to the fire, just that he wasnt nearby to the fire itself that in itself is not an argument for healing factor a small child once saved by wolverine in a building fire would be subject to a hf by that logic as well as Elsie-Dee in her 1st appearance.

Originally posted by King Castle
iirc

he stood inside a buildin fire doesnt mean he is immune to the fire, just that he wasnt nearby to the fire itself that in itself is not an argument for healing factor a small child once saved by wolverine in a building fire would be subject to a hf by that logic as well as Elsie-Dee in her 1st appearance.

Originally posted by King Castle
iirc

he stood inside a buildin fire doesnt mean he is immune to the fire, just that he wasnt nearby to the fire itself that in itself is not an argument for healing factor a small child once saved by wolverine in a building fire would be subject to a hf by that logic as well as Elsie-Dee in her 1st appearance.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c379/Doggydogg/Blade%20durability/Bladefire.jpg

i am saying he was not on fire and standing inside a fiery building does not mean one has a healing factor nor does the art inducate that at all..

here let me explain the difference:
in a fire w/healing factor.
http://i662.photobucket.com/albums/uu345/jinzin2008/thWolverine_51_011.jpg

see the difference?

like i said the feat you reference as a healing factor has bn displayed by a 3-5 yr old little kid wolverine rescued in a building fire and the kid sure as hell didnt have a healing factor

Wolverine Vol 2 105