Durability vs Healing Factor

Started by googol7 pages

Durability vs Healing Factor

say you were at peak human or top athlete level of endurance would you rather have bullet proof skin and unbreakable bones? or healing factor?

Healing factor. With bullet proof skin, any kind of organ/internal damage would be most likely fatal as it would be extremely hard to operate on you.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Healing factor. With bullet proof skin, any kind of organ/internal damage would be most likely fatal as it would be extremely hard to operate on you.
your organs would be as durable

Originally posted by googol
your organs would be as durable

There would still be diseases, organ failure, poisons, etc that can damage organs outside simple impacts. Durable organs also means that you can't get tranplants, get tumors removesd etc.

Healing factor all the way.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Healing factor. With bullet proof skin, any kind of organ/internal damage would be most likely fatal as it would be extremely hard to operate on you.
pretty much this

Durability for me, I don't like pain

Healing factor would also allow you to build up a better tolerance of pain, which is good too.

Is rather just not feel it

Originally posted by pym-ftw
Is rather just not feel it

Life would suck the minute you get any kind of internal damage tho.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Life would suck the minute you get any kind of internal damage tho.
yeah, it would be a lot more painful aswell, instead of having a healing factor and fealing less pain for less amounts of time

Originally posted by pym-ftw
Durability for me, I don't like pain
This.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Healing factor would also allow you to build up a better tolerance of pain, which is good too.
I don't know if that automatically follows. I never got the impression that Wolverine, eg, developed higher and higher pain tolerances. I think, though, one might just get used to hurting, but it still hurts. You just b1tch less about it.

Also, if I jump off a tall building, say, with durability I can just get up and start running. With a HF, you'd have to wait til your broken legs heal, hoping that in the meantime, someone is not inflicting still more damage on you.

The problem with both is that with the durability, you can still get sick, or if injured beyond your power threshold you're screwed.

With the healing factor, you can be hurt past the point of being able to heal, or be killed by something that you might be able to survive if super durable. Wolverine has a frame(adamantium bones) that means his HF gets a free pass of sorts.

But he does have a rather high pain tolerance. He still gets hurt, but he can pretty much ignore/fight through pain at this point no matter how severe it is.

Basically, durability allows you to stay active; no time-out needed for healing.

More people die from something internal like diseases than any kind of external damage. And bullet proof skin/organs won't protect you from these. And these will hurt.

So this is limited durability, ie, limited to macro trauma? Cuz every description of a character's durability I've ever read has always included not just macro toughness, but also greater resistance to diseases, extremes of temperature, etc. Basically, you're just harder to harm, by any means.

That's basically how I'm looking at this: being tougher to harm or damage in any way VS you recover faster from whatever ordinary harm or damage you suffer.

Prevention vs fast recovery, so to speak.

Put it this way

Wolverines Healing factor Vs Supermans Durability

Put them to infornt of a powerful attack powerful enough to harm both, who would survive it with least harm? Well logan would, because he healing factor would bring him back to normal health very quickly, whereas supermans HF is diddly squat compared to logans HF

Healing Factor ftw

Originally posted by LeonBuco666
Put it this way

Wolverines Healing factor Vs Supermans Durability

Put them to infornt of a powerful attack powerful enough to harm both, who would survive it with least harm? Well logan would, because he healing factor would bring him back to normal health very quickly, whereas supermans HF is diddly squat compared to logans HF

Healing Factor ftw

With Superman's durability then there is nothing in the REAL universe that can harm you. He survived the core of stars, black holes, supernovas, etc.

With Logan's HF you can die easily. A nuclear bomb will disintegrate you. The only reason Logan can survive is because his skeleton is still in tact (adamantium).

Durability ftw

Originally posted by LeonBuco666
Put it this way

Wolverines Healing factor Vs Supermans Durability

Put them to infornt of a powerful attack powerful enough to harm both, who would survive it with least harm? Well logan would, because he healing factor would bring him back to normal health very quickly, whereas supermans HF is diddly squat compared to logans HF

Healing Factor ftw

pretty bad comparison tbh, considering what will hurt logan much easier than it will hurt superman.

Sub-mariner level durability?

Originally posted by -Pr-
pretty bad comparison tbh, considering what will hurt logan much easier than it will hurt superman.
I'm not comparing pain, I'm comparing who will come out unscathed from something that could harm both,
I don't mean the characters, I mean wolverines legandary HF vs Supermans Amazing Durability
Same with the bullet bouncing off of supes eye, wolverine would heal of th gunshot instantly, so neither are harmed, but something that could harm both of them, if supermans harmed he's not recovering from it with out outside help, but if wolverine is hit with same attack that harmed supes he'll recover. Under his own power far quicker, it may be a bad comparison, but its the easiest way to explains the aspect of HF>durability