Printable View
[QUOTE=Ascended;3568112]
Diana claims to have fought Damage for almost an hour. Bitch, if he really was stronger than Clark, you'd have been dead in fifteen minutes.
[/QUOTE]
She's still here, so clearly he's not stronger than Clark.
And I'll take Diana's word over DC editorial's any day of the week... ;)
[QUOTE=SJNeal;3571957]She's still here, so clearly he's not stronger than Clark.
And I'll take Diana's word over DC editorial's any day of the week... ;)[/QUOTE]
Exactly! Does anyone *actually* believe that Damage, or any new character, will really be written as more capable/better than the big names? They can say it but no one ever buys it, and DC itself doesn't enforce it. It rings hollow because it is hollow. The endgame of any major threat, and any major feat that needs to be accomplished, will fall on the big names. The new characters will get their moment to shine, especially early on when DC is still pushing them (re: Damage/Zero Hour), but they'll never out-shine the core 5 Leaguers.
You want to get across how strong Damage is? He's not "stronger than Superman" what you say is he's "Doom-class" or a "Sanction level threat" or a "Rank Kr Physical enhancement" and if you think that's not ominous enough to get the point across, Clark's silence in the follow panel should be.
Actually, DC should have some kind of consistent classification in-universe for power scale. It'd make sense that, after decades of superhumanity, a metric would've risen to prominence. If nothing else, you'd think the League would have one.
Anyway, sorry if I derailed the thread with this. I was just having a fun fan-rant. :p
If Damage gains more uber feats like beating the suicide squad in 3 minutes or future stuff like fighting Swamp thing and even stalemating him, then damage will be above superman.
Superman got owned by swamp thing, btw.
[QUOTE=Ascended;3573324]
Actually, DC should have some kind of consistent classification in-universe for power scale. It'd make sense that, after decades of superhumanity, a metric would've risen to prominence. If nothing else, you'd think the League would have one.
[/QUOTE]
If only they'd give us trading cards again! Like, the good ones from the 90's with real power rankings so there's no question! :D
So what i get from these posts is that new characters aren't allowed to be stronger than established characters, or become on par with them. Sounds absurd to me. I feel like the same people who are outraged over this would have no problem with Batman being a better archer than Ollie or having more will than a GL.
Well, I really liked the first issue of The Curse of Brimstone. The villains look ominous, Joe is a very compelling character, with his struggles and his obvious pain and suffering, even before the Curse, and his town really give you this feeling of lost grandeur. So far so good, I'll wait for the second issue's preview and if it's good, I'll pick the whole series.
[QUOTE=dan12456;3568862]Really unsure on this one. The pitch sounds interesting, but kind of more like a 6-12 issue series to me (unless they move beyond the small town setting, I just don't see how many stories can come up in a small dying town).
And same mixed feelings with the art. On the one hand the big full page of Brimstone is gorgeous, as is page 2 with the scenery of the town (at this point I was really on board with picking it up). But then the human drawings on pages 3-4 just really aren't doing it for me.
Think I'll wait and see what the reviews/word of mouth is like before deciding if i will sample.[/QUOTE]
For me, I like the way the characters look with that artstyle. Joe especially, since it really adds to his character, yet still makes him look youthful and sympathetic in spite all his troubles.
An interview of Justin jordan, writer of Curse of Brimstone,on what the book is about. Warning:[URL="http://comicbook.com/dc/2018/04/05/justin-jordan-superheroes-trump-country-curse-brimstone/"] not apt for politically sensitive people.[/URL]
[QUOTE=golgi;3573570]If Damage gains more uber feats like beating the suicide squad in 3 minutes or future stuff like fighting Swamp thing and even stalemating him, then damage will be above superman.
Superman got owned by swamp thing, btw.[/QUOTE]
Basically everything that isn't an immortal manifestation of universal concepts should get owned by Swamp Thing. I got no issue with Holland taking down Clark, since the only way to actually defeat Swamp Thing is to fireball the earth. Swamp Thing is on a whole different level than most superheroes.
If Damage builds up the feats to support the claim he's stronger than Superman, fine. But that's a very tall order. And making the claim when there's no evidence to support it at all isn't helping anyone, especially Damage.
[QUOTE=SJNeal;3573684]If only they'd give us trading cards again! Like, the good ones from the 90's with real power rankings so there's no question! :D[/QUOTE]
I don't even need a ranking like a "Strength 10, Agility 9, Intellect 8" kind of thing. I'd be perfectly happy with it being broken down into relatively vague rankings like how Marvel has "Omega class" threats. That's all I need.
[QUOTE=Cosmic Black;3573701]So what i get from these posts is that new characters aren't allowed to be stronger than established characters, or become on par with them. Sounds absurd to me. I feel like the same people who are outraged over this would have no problem with Batman being a better archer than Ollie or having more will than a GL.[/QUOTE]
If you're taking that from my posts, you're taking the wrong things from it.
If a character has the feats and the history to make a claim that they're better at something, fine. That's not a problem. But making a claim that a new character surpasses a well known and established leader of the heroic community is simply bad writing. Has Damage pulled himself out of a black hole? Has he pushed a cosmic manifestation and a sentient planet into the Big Bang itself? Has he lifted the weight of the world, literally, for days without a break? Even in the one comparison we can make; his fight against Diana, it looks like Diana walked away from Damage in far better shape than she did with Clark. So a writer can make the claim that Damage is stronger, but nothing on the page supports that. And DC isn't going to have Damage be the guy who stops a Crisis event by lifting the heavy thing, because Superman is far more marketable.
Its just lazy writing.
[QUOTE=Cosmic Black;3573701]So what i get from these posts is that new characters aren't allowed to be stronger than established characters, or become on par with them. Sounds absurd to me. I feel like the same people who are outraged over this would have no problem with Batman being a better archer than Ollie or having more will than a GL.[/QUOTE]
Why do new characters have to be better at anything than older heroes? Can't they just be new on the scene and develop their feats and characters in their own adventures. The DC universe should be a massive and lived in place. Why do they even need to step on each other's toes to begin with?
I think plenty of us would have a problem with Batman being a better archer than GA. Because Batman already has his niche, and they are of comparable age and history. A new character coming out of the blue and being a better archer than Ollie would definitely be the writer trying way too hard to shill their creation, and we would probably react even worse.
Exactly; it's not about a new character stepping on the toes of a personal favorite; its about bad and lazy writing trying to make claims the actual story doesn't support.
I haven't read the issue of Damage in question. Did Diana crawl away from their fight broken and bleeding and inches from death? If she did, then the claim Damage is stronger than Clark might have some teeth to it, since she was at least able to stumble away from her fight with Clark during Sacrifice. If she didn't crawl away broken and bleeding, the claim Damage is stronger than Superman is just a writer trying to make a new character look good with baseless claims at the expense of an established, popular character.
I wouldn't accept the claim that Arrow is a better detective than Batman either, even though I like Arrow more than Bats.
[QUOTE=Thor-Ul;3574678]An interview of Justin jordan, writer of Curse of Brimstone,on what the book is about. Warning:[URL="http://comicbook.com/dc/2018/04/05/justin-jordan-superheroes-trump-country-curse-brimstone/"] not apt for politically sensitive people.[/URL][/QUOTE]
Nice! He seems to have a very clear vision of things. That was really cool read. Still need to read the issue, but I'm hyped as ever now!
Regarding Damage, again, it was never stated in the comics that Damage was stronger than Superman. Diana said that she had never faced a creature/opponent as strong as this one. But since we don't know if Sacrifice is back in continuity or not, she may have never battled Clark to an inch of her life (and she shouldn't, she shold be as strong as Superman, and only beaten by his other powers than his strength). And the way Clark was almost amused by her words makes me think that Sacrifice didn't happen. No way he would be so amused by it.
[QUOTE=Cosmic Black;3573701]So what i get from these posts is that new characters aren't allowed to be stronger than established characters, or become on par with them. Sounds absurd to me. I feel like the same people who are outraged over this would have no problem with Batman being a better archer than Ollie or having more will than a GL.[/QUOTE]
Not sure if my comments are included in "these posts", but no, I've never thought new characters shouldn't/couldn't be on par with established ones. And there's no "outrage", just mild annoyance and amusement when DC damages their own credibility by letting writers imply this guy that's been around for 3 months is stronger than Superman.
I suppose part of it comes from having been there, done that. Hell, there was an entire crossover in 1993 ("Bloodlines") that introduced like 20+ new characters, all hyped as the next big thing. A small handful caught some traction for 5 minutes and then disappeared. The New Age of Heroes has "Bloodlines 2018" written all over it.
And while I am buying and enjoying [I]Damage[/I], I harbor no delusions that he will still be around 25 yrs from now.
I'll check them out when or if they come out