Why no Tim Drake? Is it due to sales numbers?

[oasis1313]

Didio is supposed to be a Tim Drake fan right? However I'm sure I saw on reddit an interview where he said Tim was bland and didn't serve a purpose. In the same interview he admitted he still wanted Dick dead.

I don't know what to believe anymore.
One would hope business decisions are being made without bias or malice

People who work in comics often seem to be big fanboys themselves. When did Didio say he STILL wants Dick dead? But I do agree with that assessment of Tim Dreck; I wish he wanted Tim dead instead of Dick.

[Ascended]

People who work in comics often seem to be big fanboys themselves.

I think that sometimes that's half the problem. Creators approach a book with too much skin in the game, and it gets in the way of them telling a good story.

Just look at Tynion; he's a self-professed big Tim Drake fan. And I do think he took steps to bring Tim back towards a more recognizable form. But "Timgod" was crazy overboard, overpowered, and missed the mark for a lot of readers, and in the end didn't really resemble the classic Tim that we miss. Tynion's fandom and love for the character got the better of him and that Everyman element of Tim's got lost.

[dietrich]

People who work in comics often seem to be big fanboys themselves. When did Didio say he STILL wants Dick dead? But I do agree with that assessment of Tim Dreck; I wish he wanted Tim dead instead of Dick.

He said it at a recent Con though i got the impression he was joking.

[Onthetrapeze]

People who work in comics often seem to be big fanboys themselves. When did Didio say he STILL wants Dick dead? But I do agree with that assessment of Tim Dreck; I wish he wanted Tim dead instead of Dick.

Dan Didio shouldn't kill any character based on his personal bias.
I don't like his attitude towards Dick，and certainly don't want someone die just because they are Didio's newest least favorite.

[Ascended]

Dan Didio shouldn't kill any character based on his personal bias.

So how should editors and writers decide who ends up dying in a story? (not being snarky, just curious about your opinion) I'm sure market research and sales data play a major, significant role. DC isn't going to kill off a big name seller (unless they plan on using that death as a way to tell a story with the character, like when they killed Superman). But the B- and lower list characters who don't really pull huge sales or have a high profile.....they're in that dangerous zone where they have the recognition factor for their deaths to affect readers (and other characters), but not enough franchise cred to keep them safe.

There's a lot of those B-, C- list characters out there and a lot of them barely get any attention from DC but could impact the larger narrative by dying. When they're all in that vague "they've got fans but not enough to make them crazy profitable" area what other options are there to decide who dies, except for asking your writers and editors "who has plans for who?" and then deciding who among the rest of the C-listers would pull on reader's emotions the most by dying.

[millernumber1]

So how should editors and writers decide who ends up dying in a story? (not being snarky, just curious about your opinion) I'm sure market research and sales data play a major, significant role. DC isn't going to kill off a big name seller (unless they plan on using that death as a way to tell a story with the character, like when they killed Superman). But the B- and lower list characters who don't really pull huge sales or have a high profile.....they're in that dangerous zone where they have the recognition factor for their deaths to affect readers (and other characters), but not enough franchise cred to keep them safe.

There's a lot of those B-, C- list characters out there and a lot of them barely get any attention from DC but could impact the larger narrative by dying. When they're all in that vague "they've got fans but not enough to make them crazy profitable" area what other options are there to decide who dies, except for asking your writers and editors "who has plans for who?" and then deciding who among the rest of the C-listers would pull on reader's emotions the most by dying.

I do not think they should kill characters. Killing characters closes off stories, and cuts off fans. I may not like a character, but I know someone else loves them as much as I love my favorite.

[Onthetrapeze]

So how should editors and writers decide who ends up dying in a story? (not being snarky, just curious about your opinion) I'm sure market research and sales data play a major, significant role. DC isn't going to kill off a big name seller (unless they plan on using that death as a way to tell a story with the character, like when they killed Superman). But the B- and lower list characters who don't really pull huge sales or have a high profile.....they're in that dangerous zone where they have the recognition factor for their deaths to affect readers (and other characters), but not enough franchise cred to keep them safe.

There's a lot of those B-, C- list characters out there and a lot of them barely get any attention from DC but could impact the larger narrative by dying. When they're all in that vague "they've got fans but not enough to make them crazy profitable" area what other options are there to decide who dies, except for asking your writers and editors "who has plans for who?" and then deciding who among the rest of the C-listers would pull on reader's emotions the most by dying.

Yeah I got what you mean but I think DC barely kills B- or C- list characters these days. They simply send these characters to the limbo with/without some excuses，so they can get rid of them while minimize fans anger.

[dietrich]

Yeah I got what you mean but I think DC barely kills B- or C- list characters these days. They simply send these characters to the limbo with/without some excuses，so they can get rid of them while minimize fans anger.

I feel Limbo is better than killing them off. More than anything else writers should try to use existing characters whenever possible rather than creating and unfairly pushing their own creations.

Although on the flip Damian Wayne is my favourite character and if writers went by that rule he wouldn't be a thing so I'm conflicted.

[Onthetrapeze]

I feel Limbo is better than killing them off. More than anything else writers should try to use existing characters whenever possible rather than creating and unfairly pushing their own creations.

Although on the flip Damian Wayne is my favourite character and if writers went by that rule he wouldn't be a thing so I'm conflicted.

Yeah，I feel limbo is much less offensive and enables fans to hold out hope that soon or later their favorite will be back. Death...is different. Even after so many years of Superman's resurrection，it still feels like the end，especially when you know the character is deliberately removed due to personal hatred from the highup rather than a gimmick.
BTW I think Damian is pretty safe.

[Ascended]

I do not think they should kill characters. Killing characters closes off stories, and cuts off fans. I may not like a character, but I know someone else loves them as much as I love my favorite.

I definitely don't think it should be done often. But the death of a character is a major narrative trope with lots of legs on it. Hell, it can even have legs for the person who dies (see: almost every character who ever died in comics ever, because they all came back eventually). I don't think there should be a mandate that says no character can *ever* be killed. It's just a tool that has to be used carefully, rarely, and judiciously.

[millernumber1]

I definitely don't think it should be done often. But the death of a character is a major narrative trope with lots of legs on it. Hell, it can even have legs for the person who dies (see: almost every character who ever died in comics ever, because they all came back eventually). I don't think there should be a mandate that says no character can *ever* be killed. It's just a tool that has to be used carefully, rarely, and judiciously.

Well. I know they'll do it. But I have almost never liked a story from the big two where I thought the death of the character was worth it. And I know that people will feel the way I felt when Steph died if their favorite dies, and I don't wish that on anyone.

So I know it'll happen. But if anyone asks me, I'll say, "Write another story. Find characters you created and kill them off in your own universe."

[oasis1313]

There's no reason for BIG DEATH ISSUES !!!!!! other than trying to make a quick buck--then losing out on what that character could bring to the table in the future if given the right situation. I don't think any official mandates are in order; it just needs to be a very serious decision. I felt Damian being killed by Heretic--killing a little child--was inappropriate. Many, many decades ago--killing Aquababy? That's just low. Now Marvel's killing Lockjaw???!!!! It ain't right to kill off children and dogs.

[phonogram12]

Well, we at least know for sure it's not due to sales numbers. If it were, lord knows we wouldn't constantly get the soft Titans reboot every three months because for some reason DC thinks Damien could sell it.

[skyvolt2000]

So how should editors and writers decide who ends up dying in a story?

Aside from POC, LGBT & some females-they tend to come back to life in some form.

So when you have folks in charge and it appears they have issues with certain characters-you view what they do carefully.

You think DC would not catch heck on Earth if they killed John Stewart like they WANTED to do.

[Ascended]

Aside from POC, LGBT & some females-they tend to come back to life in some form.

Which is actually sorta the point. Death isn't necessarily a end for characters, it's just another step on the journey.

Who does and doesn't come back to life is, I think, maybe not really on topic, but I know what you mean and that's a whole pile of BS problems in and of itself.

So when you have folks in charge and it appears they have issues with certain characters-you view what they do carefully.

Man, we should watch *everything* they do carefully. But with certain characters? Oh yeah. You don't give them an inch.

You think DC would not catch heck on Earth if they killed John Stewart like they WANTED to do.

They damn well better catch hell for it, should they ever do it.

EDIT: If they did it as just another part of John's story, and he wasn't just written out of the titles but we got to follow him through his death and eventual return to life, that'd be another matter. That could actually be a fun story. Might even get John past Xanshi.

But none of that means that character death isn't a viable narrative tool. I'm just curious how people think it should be employed.