Herochat

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please note that forum is still under construction.


heroes
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: How do you decide whether a hero gains stock or a villain loses stock when...  (Read 409 times)

Kallor

  • Norbit
  • ******
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile

If a top tier hero beats a previously unbeatable above top tier villain, does this mean the hero is stronger than previously thought or that the villain was weaker than originally imagined?  How do you decide which is which? 

A suggestion, which will likely be ignored but worth a shot, is to try and discuss this without bringing up Superman or Wonder Woman until at least the next page in order to get some real responses before the thread is lost to flaming. 

Alright, what say you herochat?
Logged

Uhtceare

  • Doctor Doolittle
  • **
  • Karma: 1
  • Posts: 454
    • View Profile

Since heroes rarely rise in power permanently, it almost always means that the villain has been retconned down. Even if that wasn't the writers intent when the story was written, that's almost always the result in practice.
Logged

g-train

  • King Jaffe Joffer
  • ********
  • Karma: -6
  • Posts: 10716
    • View Profile

Since heroes rarely rise in power permanently, it almost always means that the villain has been retconned down. Even if that wasn't the writers intent when the story was written, that's almost always the result in practice.

Yeah; or the "Worf Effect" happens and the villain doesn't take a "technical" dip in power but starts losing to everybody and so it doesn't really mean anything anymore.

Kind of what we were talking about in the Sherlock vs Punisher thread, was Net-Pun hiding his gun a good feat for him or a bad day for Daredevil?
Logged

Gree

  • Prince Akeem Joffer
  • *******
  • Karma: 9
  • Posts: 6939
    • View Profile

This is a tough question.
Logged

TURBODERP

  • Doctor Doolittle
  • **
  • Karma: -1
  • Posts: 423
    • View Profile

Since heroes rarely rise in power permanently, it almost always means that the villain has been retconned down. Even if that wasn't the writers intent when the story was written, that's almost always the result in practice.

Yea, this is it. Sometimes the villain is reverted back to previous levels in a different art/under a different writer, but it's more likely that other people in the tier of the hero-who-"rose"-to-beat-that-villain will get portrayed as beating that villain too (without a stated power increase)

Same can happen to heroes too-Black Bolt's voice is probably the most prominent thing I can think of.

MTL76

  • King Jaffe Joffer
  • ********
  • Karma: 5
  • Posts: 8781
    • View Profile

Since heroes rarely rise in power permanently, it almost always means that the villain has been retconned down. Even if that wasn't the writers intent when the story was written, that's almost always the result in practice.

What do you mean? Plenty of heroes rise in power over the years. There's even a term for it, power creep.

However, in the context of the question asked by the OP, in general I'd assume the villain was being jobbed. Power creep happens over the course of months or years, while jobbing is a more acute phenomenon.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 05:42:03 PM by MTL76 »
Logged


Minority Shareholder, Combine Honnete Ober Advancer Mercantiles (CHOAM)

The Create A Team / Power Set Combo Compendium

g-train

  • King Jaffe Joffer
  • ********
  • Karma: -6
  • Posts: 10716
    • View Profile

Since heroes rarely rise in power permanently, it almost always means that the villain has been retconned down. Even if that wasn't the writers intent when the story was written, that's almost always the result in practice.

What do you mean? Plenty of heroes rise in power over the years. There's even a term for it, power creep.

However, in the context of the question asked by the OP, in general I'd assume the villain was being jobbed. Power creep happens over the course of months or years, while jobbing is a more acute phenomenon.

Though sometimes power creep doesn't seem to reflect in the hierarchy for some reason, even when it gets acknowledged.
Logged

LiquidSailor

  • Billy Ray Valentine
  • *******
  • Karma: 7
  • Posts: 5925
    • View Profile

They don't gain or lose stock because heroes and villains aren't publicly traded companies.
Logged
DIGUSTING

Detective AP

  • Global Moderator
  • The Big Mick
  • *****
  • Karma: -1
  • Posts: 13341
    • View Profile

I think it depends on frequency.  Thor beating Galactus one time all those years ago hasn't made him seem any less formidable.  Darkseid continually losing to Superman and people at a similar powerlevel has made him look less formidable, though.
Logged

Panthergod

  • Prince Akeem Joffer
  • *******
  • Karma: 3
  • Posts: 6526
    • View Profile

I think it depends on frequency.  Thor beating Galactus one time all those years ago hasn't made him seem any less formidable.
Because that was an early fight by his creators against a Galactus who wasn't fresh anyways our. Galactus also got subsequent retroactive power/ status upgrades.
Quote
Darkseid continually losing to Superman and people at a similar powerlevel has made him look less formidable, though.
Except that was the culmination of a decade long plus continuously upheld power Up subplot as Darkseid did himself noted in story.. So.. No, for those who  literate and don't hate Superman for being powerful.
Logged

Detective AP

  • Global Moderator
  • The Big Mick
  • *****
  • Karma: -1
  • Posts: 13341
    • View Profile

Because that was an early fight by his creators against a Galactus who wasn't fresh anyways our. Galactus also got subsequent retroactive power/ status upgrades.

Exactly my point.

Quote
Darkseid continually losing to Superman and people at a similar powerlevel has made him look less formidable, though.
Except that was the culmination of a decade long plus continuously upheld power Up subplot as Darkseid did himself noted in story.. So.. No, for those who  literate and don't hate Superman for being powerful.
[/quote]

1) I don't hate Superman.

2) I don't hate powerful characters.

3) Notice how I alluded to other characters besides Superman?  Hell, Batman made him bleed with a kick.
Logged

Pillow Biter

  • Axel Foley
  • *****
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 1706
    • View Profile


Though sometimes power creep doesn't seem to reflect in the hierarchy for some reason, even when it gets acknowledged.

Right. This topic is related to the Power-Up Paradox. Heroes often get power-ups that are referenced explicitly and alluded to consistently, at least for a while. They may even allow the hero to beat villains they couldn't before. Yet over any significantly long period of time, the relative rankings of heroes rarely change.

Abhilegend

  • Billy Ray Valentine
  • *******
  • Karma: 14
  • Posts: 5118
    • View Profile

Because that was an early fight by his creators against a Galactus who wasn't fresh anyways our. Galactus also got subsequent retroactive power/ status upgrades.

Exactly my point.

Quote
Darkseid continually losing to Superman and people at a similar powerlevel has made him look less formidable, though.
Except that was the culmination of a decade long plus continuously upheld power Up subplot as Darkseid did himself noted in story.. So.. No, for those who  literate and don't hate Superman for being powerful.

1) I don't hate Superman.

2) I don't hate powerful characters.

3) Notice how I alluded to other characters besides Superman?  Hell, Batman made him bleed with a kick.
[/quote]
Which other character defeated Darkseid?

Batman made Spectre bleed with a kick too.

scourge

  • King Jaffe Joffer
  • ********
  • Karma: 2
  • Posts: 8421
  • Just be pleasant
    • View Profile

Orion in answer to jelly


As to the topic:

A stock of a hero will be raised provided there is generally no major conflicting showings in a following time frame. A one off is to me more grounds for a raise of stock for the hero with the caveat of a bad day for the villain. However, if the pattern of loses for the villain continues, this may be conflicting (to the expected norm) so the stock of the hero won't be raised and more so the villain's stock will be lessened. This can be one hero defeating the villain repeatedly or multiple heroes doing so. More over, if the hero is given loses to lesser characters it may be a break even for the hero with no stock gained, but that villain still may lose a step, however if future showings have them back on form, no step lost.. Of course comics, so often stock won't be too greatly effected due to in story rationale for why the fight went down in a seemingly unexpected manner.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2017, 06:26:55 AM by scourge »
Logged

fangirl101

  • King Jaffe Joffer
  • ********
  • Karma: 11
  • Posts: 10904
    • View Profile

If a top tier hero beats a previously unbeatable above top tier villain, does this mean the hero is stronger than previously thought or that the villain was weaker than originally imagined?  How do you decide which is which? 

A suggestion, which will likely be ignored but worth a shot, is to try and discuss this without bringing up Superman or Wonder Woman until at least the next page in order to get some real responses before the thread is lost to flaming. 

Alright, what say you herochat?
why the fuck is wonder woman even in the topic to begin with. WW fans don't use her wins or fights witj above top tiers to try and makw her above the top tier.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2