Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

He's a power...so's she.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
He's a power...so's she.

I like the Stranger. Death touches him, he dies

Death wins.

death is a jobber, he pawns her like the inbetweener and even grandmaster did

Stranger got punked by Iceman.

STRANGER DANGER. He'd scare the power out of Death.

Death for the win.

Fourth face on the Living Tribunal and everyone's gonna go for Death?

death lost to dr strange

Originally posted by Wonder Man
Fourth face on the Living Tribunal and everyone's gonna go for Death?

The Stranger was never the fourth face of the LT.

The LT once offered the Stranger that exalted position, and the Stranger refused.

Originally posted by Mider999
death lost to dr strange

dontgetit

Well an offer is an offer to from them.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
Well an offer is an offer to from them.

Had the Stranger accepted the offer, he would have become extra significant in the Hierarchy,

but as of now, he's in the Universal Cosmic hierarchy, but as a small time player.

Originally posted by Mr Master
dontgetit

Mider's not kidding. Dr. Strange actually did beat death. To paraphrase Great_dane, 'he dropped a planet on Death's domepiece'

I'd say Death

Death>Stranger

Originally posted by Mr Master
The Stranger was never the fourth face of the LT.

The LT once offered the Stranger that exalted position, and the Stranger refused.
Actually the Marvel.com bio states that Stranger was LT's former face.

Marvel.com can suck a dick

The on-panel said as much but combined with the bio the case is closed.

Originally posted by Mindset
Marvel.com can suck a dick that would give you more free time, at least. evillaugh

Originally posted by Galan007
that would give you more free time, at least. evillaugh
Reported for spam, trolling, and flaming.

Originally posted by King Kandy

Actually the Marvel.com bio states that Stranger was LT's former face.
Good thing we have actual comic books to compare bio info,
and this is one of those instances where the bio is wrong.
Originally posted by King Kandy

The on-panel said as much but combined with the bio the case is closed.

Not true.

LT has never said that the Stranger was his fourth face,
he clearly stated that he could've been:

http://s2d2.turboimagehost.com/t/526042_LT2.jpg

"There could have been the face of the Stranger"


On Panel > Handbooks/Marvel.com

Originally posted by Mr Master
Good thing we have actual comic books to compare bio info,
and this is one of those instances where the bio is wrong.

Not true.

LT has never said that the Stranger was his fourth face,
he clearly stated that he could've been:

http://s2d2.turboimagehost.com/t/526042_LT2.jpg

"There could have been the face of the Stranger"


On Panel > Handbooks/Marvel.com
You already admitted it was not clear-cut in earlier debates. I'd like you to reconsider the wording on this one with the following sentence. This is supposed to be someone breaking up with their lover or something similar.

"We could have been together."

Note that this clearly does not mean that they were never together, rather it is commonly used in the sense of "It was so good, it didn't have to end." The LT certainly has a formal quality to his speech and it seems to me that he was using the wording in the later case. But we both admitted it was somewhat ambiguous, so I never brought it up again. That is, until it was confirmed by the bio that in fact my interpretation was correct.

Originally posted by Mr Master
Good thing we have actual comic books to compare bio info,
and this is one of those instances where the bio is wrong.

Not true.

LT has never said that the Stranger was his fourth face,
he clearly stated that he could've been:

http://s2d2.turboimagehost.com/t/526042_LT2.jpg

"There could have been the face of the Stranger"


On Panel > Handbooks/Marvel.com
LT had a certain limitation; he does not have free-will.
Perhaps this is the reason why he offered Stranger his 4th face, so that he could be ALL.
But Stranger refused, thus he had to be A PART.

Originally posted by King Kandy

You already admitted it was not clear-cut in earlier debates.
I don't recall.
Originally posted by King Kandy

I'd like you to reconsider the wording on this one with the following sentence. This is supposed to be someone breaking up with their lover or something similar.

"We could have been together."

Note that this clearly does not mean that they were never together, rather it is commonly used in the sense of "It was so good, it didn't have to end." The LT certainly has a formal quality to his speech and it seems to me that he was using the wording in the later case.
I disagree.

Cause the LT has never said the Stranger was his fourth face,
and,
the LT on panel clearly stated that he could of been, as the proof shows,
there's no indication of any kind to think otherwise,
and your analogy while cool, imo, does not relate to the on panel facts.
Originally posted by King Kandy

But we both admitted it was somewhat ambiguous, so I never brought it up again.
Again, I don't recall.
Originally posted by King Kandy

That is,
until it was confirmed by the bio that in fact my interpretation was correct.
Two wrongs don't make a right.

A few bios have errors, not many, and mostly involving minute details,
but they do, this is one of them, clearly exposed by the on panel evidence.

Originally posted by Galan007
that would give you more free time, at least. evillaugh Heh...

Originally posted by Mr Master
Cause the LT has never said the Stranger was his fourth face,
and,
the LT on panel clearly stated that he could of been, as the proof shows,
there's no indication of any kind to think otherwise,
and your analogy while cool, imo, does not relate to the on panel facts.
My analogy is very relevant since it showed that the wording of the sentence could just as easily be taken to mean that they were together before something went wrong. Other people have sided with my interpretation, which is proof positive that the wording is ambiguous. But there is no longer any ambiguity on the issue. It is in a bio and supported by LT's (somewhat oddly worded) statement.

Originally posted by King Kandy

My analogy is very relevant since it showed that the wording of the sentence could just as easily be taken to mean that they were together before something went wrong. Other people have sided with my interpretation, which is proof positive that the wording is ambiguous. But there is no longer any ambiguity on the issue. It is in a bio and supported by LT's (somewhat oddly worded) statement.
LT never supported anything.

Originally posted by Mr Master

LT has never said that the Stranger was his fourth face,
he clearly stated that he could've been:

http://s2d2.turboimagehost.com/t/526042_LT2.jpg

"There could have been the face of the Stranger"


On Panel > Handbooks/Marvel.com
Originally posted by Mr Master

Two wrongs don't make a right.

A few bios have errors, not many, and mostly involving minute details,
but they do, this is one of them, clearly exposed by the on panel evidence.
When you find on panel depictions that substantiates your opinion,
post it, and we'll move forward.

For now though,
I'll stick to the on panel evidence which contradicts the error in the Handbook,
and likewise the error of your analogy concerning this particular detail.

My analogy uses the exact same wording as LT, I don't know where you get the idea that the meaning of the two sentences is somehow different when in fact they are worded the same way. The very fact that you feel that the analogy has a different meaning then LT's statement proves that the wording is ambiguous.

Originally posted by King Kandy

My analogy uses the exact same wording as LT, I don't know where you get the idea that the meaning of the two sentences is somehow different when in fact they are worded the same way. The very fact that you feel that the analogy has a different meaning then LT's statement proves that the wording is ambiguous.
Originally posted by Mr Master

When you find on panel depictions that substantiates your opinion,
post it, and we'll move forward.

For now though,
I'll stick to the on panel evidence which contradicts the error in the Handbook,
and likewise the error of your analogy concerning this particular detail.
I'm not into analogies, only facts.

Analogies help clear up the facts.

Stranger loses