Do you like your favorite characters to be invincible?

[phonogram12]

And if so, why? Just curious.

[Lightning Rider]

Interesting question. There are many ways to lose. A hero that's 100% invulnerable to their enemies isn't much of a character, but I do like to think that my favorite (the Flash) can't lose a fight unless it's under extraordinary circumstances. That's what make the Rogues seem so intelligent and threatening, at least when their schemes and attacks are carefully created.

[phonogram12]

Interesting question. There are many ways to lose.

Ha, I'm just talking about that purely physical way of losing that causes message board meltdowns.

[Mataza]

No, if anything i like my favorite characters to be really vulnerable. Either they struggle or i snooze.

[stargazer01]

It depends on the character, but for a hero character leading his own franchise, I want him to somehow win, but not easily. He should struggle and use his smarts. It's about how he figures out how to overcome the obstacles. So it depends on what kind of character. Sometimes they have to lose but then come back stronger.

[phonogram12]

Superman (at least when written by Grant Morrison) or Shang-Chi I'm generally willing to accept as damn near unbeatable. They can still tell relatively entertaining stories this way. But most others...not so much (at least IMHO).

[Flash Gordon]

I like vulnerability. The victory needs to feel earned.

[married guy]

I'd be surprised if anyone answers yes to this question.
An invincible protagonist 9 times out of 10 makes for a very boring story.
If there's no threat of loss, where does the drama come from?

[phonogram12]

I'd be surprised if anyone answers yes to this question.
An invincible protagonist 9 times out of 10 makes for a very boring story.
If there's no threat of loss, where does the drama come from?

IDK, I guess what prompted this post is that it seems as if so many fans get into such a tizzy whenever anyone even hints that one particular character would lose to another. I'm generally more than happy to admit when I think logically one specific character can beat a favorite of mine, but it seems as if many fans don't share that mindset.

[Mataza]

I'd be surprised if anyone answers yes to this question.
An invincible protagonist 9 times out of 10 makes for a very boring story.
If there's no threat of loss, where does the drama come from?

I mean, One-Punch is a thing. But it takes a lot of skill to pull off.

[married guy]

IDK, I guess what prompted this post is that it seems as if so many fans get into such a tizzy whenever anyone even hints that one particular character would lose to another. I'm generally more than happy to admit when I think logically one specific character can beat a favorite of mine, but it seems as if many fans don't share that mindset.

HA! Yeah mate, us comic book fans can be a strange bunch......

[DrNewGod]

It's for this reason I've always preferred S&S original to any other interpretation of Superman. It took some doing, but he could be slapped silly now and again.

[phonogram12]

It's for this reason I've always preferred S&S original to any other interpretation of Superman. It took some doing, but he could be slapped silly now and again.

This is the same reason I actually found it kind of refreshing that Supes had such a hard time with that Lexo Suit in those first few episodes of STAS. Like, he really had to put an effort in and it was exciting!

[My Two Cents]

I like my favorites to be nearly invincible .............

[BohemiaDrinker]

And if so, why? Just curious.

No, but I do like character power and skill sets to be respected.

Batman can and should have his ass kicked once in a while, yes. Hal Jordan shouldn't be able to do so (sans ring). "Barry is faster now" is ok, "every milestone in Wally's career is meaningless and also a lie" is not.

And so on.