Kryptonian powers need to be toned down a bit...

[Masterff]

Comic batman in real world.

DIFFICULT:
1. If you look here: https://www.quora.com/How-much-do-yo...atman-can-lift than this answer shows that Batman lifts weights than a REAL human.
I dont know if its correct, but one post says that the barbell who he benchpresses should weight around 2250lbs.
Eric Spoto holds in REALITY the World Record with 722 lbs.

So unless you reduce his strenght level at a REALITY level he is stronger than ANY human in reality.

2. Do you let him use also Comic or Movie techniques which dont work in Reality?
I think in a real fight there are many MMA Fighters who are as skilled as he is, because like I said in a real Fight you just use the techniques of the Martial Arts which you trained with hard sparring etc.
And these are: Boxing,Kickboxing,Wrestling,Muay Thai,Kyokushin Karate,Submission Wrestling,Luta Livre,BJJ,Judo...

[manwhohaseverything]

DIFFICULT:
1. If you look here: https://www.quora.com/How-much-do-yo...atman-can-lift than this answer shows that Batman lifts weights than a REAL human.
I dont know if its correct, but one post says that the barbell who he benchpresses should weight around 2250lbs.
Eric Spoto holds in REALITY the World Record with 722 lbs.

So unless you reduce his strenght level at a REALITY level he is stronger than ANY human in reality.

2. Do you let him use also Comic or Movie techniques which dont work in Reality?
I think in a real fight there are many MMA Fighters who are as skilled as he is, because like I said in a real Fight you just use the techniques of the Martial Arts which you trained with hard sparring etc.
And these are: Boxing,Kickboxing,Wrestling,Muay Thai,Kyokushin Karate,Submission Wrestling,Luta Livre,BJJ,Judo...

Yes, comic book techniques. You think a guy who can get slammed through a wall by Darkseid can be beaten by real world fighters?

[Masterff]

Yes, comic book techniques. You think a guy who can get slammed through a wall by Darkseid can be beaten by real world fighters?

AGAIN: What are the rules?

I mean if you take a Comic Character who has over-human Strenght and over-human Durability and put him against a human who is limited by reality than yes Comic Character would win.

But if you adapt the Comic Character on REAL world than he would be at the level of a skilled fighter.
(What I mean is if you reduce Batmans Strenght on a Strenght Level which is possible for a guy like him in REAL world)


Batman wins, BUT because of his over-human strenght and over-human durability.
Based on skills he is at the level of a good MMA Fighter (since like I said fancy techniques and one punch lethal techniques dont work on good skilled fighters in reality).

[Jim Kelly]

Somehow every discussion of Superman becomes a discussion of Batman. Maybe because they've traded places--and Batman is now the fantastic, incredible character, while Superman is bounded by logical constraints.

In terms of Batman, the funny thing is, in the 1950s when the stories were supposedly unrealistic and silly, Batman would routinely get beaten by the crooks--after which, he had to compensate for his injuries or weaknesses by devising a clever plot to fool the bad guys.

[manwhohaseverything]

AGAIN: What are the rules?

I mean if you take a Comic Character who has over-human Strenght and over-human Durability and put him against a human who is limited by reality than yes Comic Character would win.

But if you adapt the Comic Character on REAL world than he would be at the level of a skilled fighter.
(What I mean is if you reduce Batmans Strenght on a Strenght Level which is possible for a guy like him in REAL world)


Batman wins, BUT because of his over-human strenght and over-human durability.
Based on skills he is at the level of a good MMA Fighter (since like I said fancy techniques and one punch lethal techniques dont work on good skilled fighters in reality).

Dude, we are of topic. Why are we talking about this again? That was just a casual comment about the absurdity of a guy who has learned 127 martial arts form existing for real. Nothing more.

[Agent Z]

Somehow every discussion of Superman becomes a discussion of Batman. Maybe because they've traded places--and Batman is now the fantastic, incredible character, while Superman is bounded by logical constraints.

In terms of Batman, the funny thing is, in the 1950s when the stories were supposedly unrealistic and silly, Batman would routinely get beaten by the crooks--after which, he had to compensate for his injuries or weaknesses by devising a clever plot to fool the bad guys.

How is Superman bound by logical constraints.

[JAK]

It did happen in all star superman. Quintillion tons thing. He might be talking about that. I think there is an undercurrent of this in silverage stories. But, i don't view it as bad. It is just clark the strong man showing how much he can lift.afterall, What's the point of having huge biceps if you don't get to flex it.

Possibly, but (as others have said) that's done to set up a plot point, and that was quite a while ago Comic: '05-'08, Animated: '11. So at best, 8 years ago. It also happened once in the New '52 iirc, but that's also quite awhile ago now. I'm saying that it doesn't happen often, and when it does happen... it's not generally done how it was framed as.

My point wasn't so much to say that it's bad or good, but to counter the idea that it's some sort of constant thing that happens all the time - when it doesn't. So even if it's seen as bad (which is up for debate) it's not really happening enough to be a problem "in-story" in the way that it was portrayed.

If that makes any sense (I may be a bit sleepy, lol).

[SiegePerilous02]

I don't know about that. I think one of the weaknesses in a lot of Superman stories is the disconnected nature of it. The guy started out fighting real world threats (gangsters, corrupt businessmen, foreign spies). These are things people have some concept of. Lifting cars, planes, even buildings or luxury liners are at least within a reader's frame of reference.

Lifting weight that only exists as a string of zeroes after a number or battling beings that are abstract concepts is doing it wrong. It's turning him into either a vehicle to explore absurd extremes or a giant version of "Mine is bigger than yours" where if I say a Gazillion, someone says a Megazillion or Infinty+1 as if there is any perceptible difference.

The feats in the Golden Age suit that power level and stories being told. There are two settings that should be used: Golden Age or the later Silver/Bronze age, and stories appropriate to each setting. Toning him down to somewhere in the middle (as he was early in post-Crisis) is just completely unsatisfying. The grounded realistic stories and the crazy Sci-Fi/Fantasy stories both speak to different people in their own ways, but I think the middle ground tries to please both but ends up pleasing neither.

This is as much of an inaccuracy as claiming no one wants to read about someone who gets more powerful. Arguably even more so given how much more popular and successful Spider-Man tends to be than Superman.

Spider-Man had been around for a while and become Marvel's mascot character while Superman was still top dog at DC and still the most popular superhero. it's why they were chosen as the first DC/Marvel crossover. They were very different, but both popular for different reasons. In fact, Superman has never been as consistently popular as he used to be when he was crazy powerful, so taking the Marvel cues to tone him down and be more relateable hasn't actually benefited that much. It benefits other characters more than him. What works for Spider-Man should never be automatically applied to another character in an attempt to ape his success, because all these characters and their worlds are different. When I want Spider-Man, I read Spider-Man. I don't want him in my Superman stories.

Spider-Man being more popular currently has everything to do with Clark not having any good movies since Spider-Man started getting some.

[Agent Z]

The feats in the Golden Age suit that power level and stories being told. There are two settings that should be used: Golden Age or the later Silver/Bronze age, and stories appropriate to each setting. Toning him down to somewhere in the middle (as he was early in post-Crisis) is just completely unsatisfying. The grounded realistic stories and the crazy Sci-Fi/Fantasy stories both speak to different people in their own ways, but I think the middle ground tries to please both but ends up pleasing neither.



Spider-Man had been around for a while and become Marvel's mascot character while Superman was still top dog at DC and still the most popular superhero. it's why they were chosen as the first DC/Marvel crossover. They were very different, but both popular for different reasons. In fact, Superman has never been as consistently popular as he used to be when he was crazy powerful, so taking the Marvel cues to tone him down and be more relateable hasn't actually benefited that much. It benefits other characters more than him. What works for Spider-Man should never be automatically applied to another character in an attempt to ape his success, because all these characters and their worlds are different. When I want Spider-Man, I read Spider-Man. I don't want him in my Superman stories.

Spider-Man being more popular currently has everything to do with Clark not having any good movies since Spider-Man started getting some.

Actually the toned down approach did work in early post crisis and was popular. Remember that toned down in this case just means stuff like creating a miniature version of himself and towing an entire galaxy didn't happen. There's a lot you can do with a middle ground for Superman that keeps things interesting.

[marhawkman]

Actually the toned down approach did work in early post crisis and was popular. Remember that toned down in this case just means stuff like creating a miniature version of himself and towing an entire galaxy didn't happen. There's a lot you can do with a middle ground for Superman that keeps things interesting.

I like the idea that Kryptonians aren't THE strongest, and THE toughest, etc.... but that other races just don't have such a long list of powers. Mongul for example, he can't match Superman's speed. Strength, toughness? Yes. But speed? nope.

[SiegePerilous02]

Actually the toned down approach did work in early post crisis and was popular. Remember that toned down in this case just means stuff like creating a miniature version of himself and towing an entire galaxy didn't happen. There's a lot you can do with a middle ground for Superman that keeps things interesting.

It worked for a time, but while he's never actually stopped being one of the biggest heroes, his brand has taken some big hits and has never been as popular as he used to be before they tried to "normalize" him, so I don't see it as a compelling argument that it's actually beneficial in the long run. It didn't help with the "he's too bland and perfect" complaints and Naive Farm Boy stuff, and actually made them worse. Nor a compelling argument for why Spider-Man enjoys more popularity at times as they were both the most popular heroes in their respective companies despite being very different.

I see a lot you can do with more grounded Golden Age power levels and with the crazy fantastical Supergod levels...however, YMMV, but in between? What is he doing that stands out from being just another generic flying brick? Doesn't help that they tried to "normalize" him to make him more relateable, and actually made him less of an Other and less unique. If he's in more grounded stories the threats he deals with shouldn't be ones he can solve with just his fists anyway at any power level, and the more fantastical ones haven't exactly benefited from lots of limitations put on them. The most popular and critically acclaimed evergreen story, All Star, is outside of the continuity where said limits are periodically being put on him.

[Kuwagaton]

It's easy to see why that idea was dead on arrival: he can work at 66 percent, but then what happens as soon as another Kryptonian shows up? Whether a full powered Kryptonian lifts boats or pyramids, the idea is that Superman is functionally right there at the top of the food chain.

I like the idea that Kryptonians aren't THE strongest, and THE toughest, etc.... but that other races just don't have such a long list of powers. Mongul for example, he can't match Superman's speed. Strength, toughness? Yes. But speed? nope.

Yeah it's kind of a broken game at lower levels too. Even if he's C level in five things, that's way more than being A level and just having two categories.

[Jon Clark]

Somehow every discussion of Superman becomes a discussion of Batman. Maybe because they've traded places--and Batman is now the fantastic, incredible character, while Superman is bounded by logical constraints.

In terms of Batman, the funny thing is, in the 1950s when the stories were supposedly unrealistic and silly, Batman would routinely get beaten by the crooks--after which, he had to compensate for his injuries or weaknesses by devising a clever plot to fool the bad guys.

Batman at DC is the pinnacle human. He is supposed to represent an example of just what feats are "possible". So in this type of discussion he represents a perfect juxtaposition with Superman who is sort of the pinnacle superhuman.

For me the unbeatable Batman is as annoying as the always stronger than the current threat Superman.

[Jon Clark]

It strikes me as a complaint that's in search of a problem. When was the last time Superman "lifted the universe"?

Again, the idea is context. It's not just the hero's ship that travels faster than light, etc. Superman lives in a fantastical world, and does the most fantastical things when he has to use his brain as well as his powers to overcome whatever threat there is. That's not raw power.

How often do you see "stats", anyway? That's a DBZ thing. You *maybe* see Superman gauge his powers once every 5-10 years or so. Other than that, it's subjective, or it's for comparison when all us comic nerds talk about power levels to compare characters. I think you're conflating people (like us) talking about Superman's power level numbers with the comics doing that. They generally don't.

Let's look at every story from Rebirth until now.... how many specific examples of "let's add a 1 to a token stat measurement" are there? I personally doubt there are any, but if there are any then there definitely aren't many.

My points are mostly based on this thread. If this was an ongoing issue with Superman I'd probably have stopped reading him long ago.

I have no problem with Superman having a high upper limit. I'm not even asking for some concrete defined limit. I'm just against the idea that there is no limit, not just on Superman but on any character. I'm not asking for Superman to be limited while Barry hits infinite speed. And I'm not saying I want Barry only able to run at Mach 1 or Superman straining to lift jetliners.

I just don't like the comic approach of "Hero meets limit, hero loses, hero comes back more powerful". I prefer Superman to figure a way to get around the wall of "infinitium" over Superman sundips and now can punch through "the hardest metal in the known universe". I prefer Firestorm has to work around his inability to transmute organic substances than he discovers it was a self-imposed thing. I'm jost not a fan of infinite perfectability where it is assumed that things just keep getting bigger and more powerful with no end in sight,

[marhawkman]

Yeah it's kind of a broken game at lower levels too. Even if he's C level in five things, that's way more than being A level and just having two categories.

So? Part of the problem is that the various characters DON'T have the same power level. Catwoman(or any other street character) vs Faora, Ursa, Livewire, Scorch, Fatality, Mongal, etc... It's like having Carol Ferris vs Star Sapphire. "normal" people fighting high-level superhumans isn't supposed to be fair or balanced.