Comic Book Questions & Discussion

I could go on the Hulk matter more but will leave it for the mod

And again where does it say retcons are to be ignored? And where did they say it only applies to the main HOM storyline? No different when you had the same argument with the “DOS Superman” thread. Your interruption of the threads wasn’t accurate which started this whole chain of events

Originally posted by -K-M-
I could go on the Hulk matter more but will leave it for the mod

And again where does it say retcons are to be ignored? And where did they say it only applies to the main HOM storyline? No different when you had the same argument with the “DOS Superman” thread. Your interruption of the threads wasn’t accurate which started this whole chain of events

edit

Originally posted by darthgoober
If a version is specified to be before a recton, of course it should be ignored. What's wrong with people wanting to discuss things as they stood before? Should we ban any type of "pre recton" thread now?

If they stipulated that in the thread, sure. But the retcon pertained to that specific version. Also the thread starter I don’t believe even made a stipulation to factor in just the main story. The retcon adds context to the main story and is the current canon for wanda

Also if you just go by the main HOM story then we would have had no idea the scope of the wave. That was done in other books and in different stories which some came years after the main book

Originally posted by -K-M-
If they stipulated that in the thread, sure. But the retcon pertained to that specific version. Also the thread starter I don’t believe even made a stipulation to factor in just the main story. The retcon adds context to the main story and is the current canon for wanda

Also if you just go by the main HOM story then we would have had no idea the scope of the wave. That was done in other books and in different stories which some came years after the main book

The recton CHANGED the specific version of the character seemingly. Now we're talking about more than we did then so I should probably clarify something. I've never been interested enough to actually read HOM. How powerful she actually was during that arc is something I've seen debated but I have no first hand knowledge. My contention is that recton's shouldn't apply because they change what the character is. People who are super into current continuity aren't likely to focus on a specific previous version of the character so it makes more sense to me to assume that a specific version means a specific version, not the post recton version. People acknowledge that there's some kind of recton at play, ergo I'm against it. Whether or not there's a case to be made about the character being less powerful even barring the recton then that's a whole different matter and one to which I can't contribute. My point is just that if a recton makes a specific version of a character less powerful then it's not applicable because the recton because once changed it's not longer the same version of the character.

I respectfully disagree and to save time for both of us we can put it to the mods to rule as well as this could go back and forth with zero resolution

Originally posted by -K-M-
I respectfully disagree and to save time for both of us we can put it to the mods to rule as well as this could go back and forth with zero resolution

On another note(and to everybody, no one specific), why do people seem to be getting more and more upset right out of the gate about people seeking clarification about certain issues or disagreeing about how a forum rule or scan should be interpreted? I know many times you hear something and the full implications of what all that means seems obvious, but that's not the case for many people. I myself am somewhat autistic, I frequently have issues with social cues and catching unspoken implications by others. Now it's impossible for me to point to any specific instance of this being the true cause of an issue I'm having with someone or something on the forum, but the fact is that it's a possible reason for EVERY issue I've ever had. By the same token, there are any other number of reasons someone might have a genuine issue understanding something everyone else thinks is obvious. If people can't or don't want to clarify the issue for someone that's fine, but people should stop automatically treating such things as deliberate attempts to screw up everybody else's day.

So true

Originally posted by darthgoober
On another note(and to everybody, no one specific), why do people seem to be getting more and more upset right out of the gate about people seeking clarification about certain issues or disagreeing about how a forum rule or scan should be interpreted? I know many times you hear something and the full implications of what all that means seems obvious, but that's not the case for many people. I myself am somewhat autistic, I frequently have issues with social cues and catching unspoken implications by others. Now it's impossible for me to point to any specific instance of this being the true cause of an issue I'm having with someone or something on the forum, but the fact is that it's a possible reason for EVERY issue I've ever had. By the same token, there are any other number of reasons someone might have a genuine issue understanding something everyone else thinks is obvious. If people can't or don't want to clarify the issue for someone that's fine, but people should stop automatically treating such things as deliberate attempts to screw up everybody else's day.

Carver is a GAMMITE and as you can see Gammites are ALWAYS a source of strife and division.

Does anyone know where these biographies are from? I've been looking for them but no results
https://imgur.com/gallery/osT5TRg

Edit: I'm wrong link:
https://imgur.com/gallery/jhjwPJ6

Originally posted by darthgoober
If a version is specified to be before a recton, of course it should be ignored. What's wrong with people wanting to discuss things as they stood before? Should we ban any type of "pre recton" thread now? How about Pre-Crisis characters? When we talk about them how valid are post crisis showings?

I don't think the HoM thread specified her to be before the retcon.

Originally posted by alekj019
Edit: I'm wrong link:
https://imgur.com/gallery/jhjwPJ6

I can't be sure, but it looks like it's from one of those hardback encyclopedias you see in bookshops.

==

As far as rules go, I'm always willing to answer questions or clarify things, so if you guys have questions, feel free to ask.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I can't be sure, but it looks like it's from one of those hardback encyclopedias you see in bookshops.

==

As far as rules go, I'm always willing to answer questions or clarify things, so if you guys have questions, feel free to ask.

As always, Carver has a question.

Originally posted by carver9
I thought we only use fts from DOS. Kinda like how when WWH is used, we only use showings from that chapter?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
As always, Carver has a question.

Carver either has a memory problem (and real talk, I've been on some weird medications and had some illnesses that can **** with memory, so I sympathise), or he's lying because he should know full well that we make a distinction for Hulk that we don't make for Doomsday.

And last I checked, WWH has access to everything WWH and below, including Savage. It was always WBH that was the issue, unless Bada or Galan made a change that I missed (and I don't think that they did).

Originally posted by -K-M-
Only once. That was snowbird. She was killed and years later appeared and her body was healed...problem with that is currently Sasquatch is using her body when his was destroyed. So marvel most likely ignored the Wanda era of Sasquatch’s history which isn’t a bad thing

All others have been explained

Thanks, I remembered you mentioned something about that before 👆

Originally posted by -Pr-
Carver either has a memory problem (and real talk, I've been on some weird medications and had some illnesses that can **** with memory, so I sympathise), or he's lying because he should know full well that we make a distinction for Hulk that we don't make for Doomsday.

And last I checked, WWH has access to everything WWH and below, including Savage. It was always WBH that was the issue, unless Bada or Galan made a change that I missed (and I don't think that they did).

I guess the question then is, how do we apply it?

So for example, Savage has a certain strength feat.

The madder Hulk gets, the stronger he is.

WWH is or was the strongest Hulk to date.

So....do I extrapolate upwards? Or does that become a no limits thing?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I guess the question then is, how do we apply it?

So for example, Savage has a certain strength feat.

The madder Hulk gets, the stronger he is.

WWH is or was the strongest Hulk to date.

So....do I extrapolate upwards? Or does that become a no limits thing?

Mind being a tad more specific, or at least, giving me an example of what you mean just so I don't misunderstand?

Originally posted by -Pr-
Mind being a tad more specific, or at least, giving me an example of what you mean just so I don't misunderstand?

Oh I didn't have any specific examples; it was more a general rule (Carver can chime in with an example).

If I create a WWH vs....Blue Marvel thread, say.

Now Savage Hulk has some nice strength feats. Can I extrapolate from that, and start posting scans from Savage (IOW, ignoring the stip about it being WWH) Or Fixit and go from there?

Again, Carv probably has better examples of what he's asking for.