Okay, but does he find camaraderie among all other super villains or does he have standards? Would he hang out with Bullseye or find him repulsive? Would he work for the Red Skull?
I am not talking about making him more pitiable, I am talking about making more sympathetic by giving him a more defined moral code and one can have a more defined back story, without being a total sad sack. Would giving him a more defined moral code and making deepening his supposed ''rationality'' into something that is more concrete, really ruin the character?
Also if he is supposed to be smart, shouldn't have come with a better way to make money then robbing banks, because that is clearly not working? One last score will never equal a constant flow of cash.
But does his code of conduct mean he would be happy to work with Bullseye and would not care not if he murdered women and children during a job? Would he be fine with working for the Red Skull? What if the Purifiers hired him to blow up a mutant halfway house, that would kill several innocent mutants, including children, would he take the job? It would ruin the character to really define how far his greed would take and decide whether he has no standards or not. If he doesn't, that's fine, then ditch the rationality aspect and make him more slimy and sleazy, that would sell out his own grandmother for cash and make him a real back stabber. If he does have standards, play that up and make his rationality a far more defined moral code then what we have seen from. He has a real moral code, define it, if not, make him a sleaze bag or comic relief villain. If only cares about money, he should sell out other villains, that could make him an interesting wild card, if cares about things, besides money, well then play that up.
Also if he is so greedy, why doesn't he come up with a criminal enterprise then robbing banks, which really only stupid criminals do at this point, bank robbery is way less profitable nowadays:
https://careers.workopolis.com/advic...their-efforts/
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/trad...ry?id=23056521
There is very little money in robbing banks, its high risk, low reward, one ink pack could ruin your whole score. If Shocker was really driven by greed, he should change his tactics. There are far more profitable crimes that yield far better results then bank robbery, so Shocker's greed motive does not make sense if he is picking such an unprofitable criminal career.
Hey man, if you do not like my posts, do you not have to respond to them. I am just posting on topics I think are fun and interesting and I am not breaking any rules in doing so. Also, I am just going to respond to you in one block, rather than multi-quotes. I do not dunk on these characters to be mean, I do it because I think they could be something better, if the writers took more chances with them, rather playing it safe all the time. Heck DC changes their villains and makes those changes stick (will Sinestro ever go back to his Silver Age characterization)?
Also is Shocker just a comic relief , why do they give him serious stories like when he tried to kill 12 jury members, that's not a funny story. I do not complain about White Rabbit, because she is a comic relief character.
Everyone's hypocrite on some level, that doesn't mean Shocker can't try to have a moral compass that is more defined ''I am greedy, therefore I rob banks''. Why not give him a Tony Montana where he refuses to do something for moral reasons. Tony Montana is a bad guy, but he could not directly kill women and children and that is a move that ultimately cost him his life. Bad guy, but had some standards. Would giving Shocker more standards really ruin the character for all time? Is the character that fragile
And if he is greedy, why doesn't he pick a better career, either legal or illegal, that is more profitable then robbing banks?
https://careers.workopolis.com/advic...their-efforts/
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/trad...ry?id=23056521
If he supposed to be smart, smart enough to invent his tech, why is he in a criminal career that is a dead end? There never will be a final score, because some nerd hacker with a laptop can clean the banks out without going near them, that guy can make more money then Shocker ever would.
Also Shocker becoming a Maggia leader does not feel earned (he got lucky and found Silvermane's head, he did not slowly rise through the ranks) and if Shocker is worried about Scrouge or Punisher blowing him away, why is he still acting like an idiot and robbing banks in a colorfully costume, instead of coming up with something more intelligent instead? A dumb criminal aims for one big score, the smart criminals try to create a constant flow of cash. So is Shocker smart or dumb?
If Shocker is supposed to be a comic relief character, then fine, never make him the center of any story and just have Spidey pants him when he tries to rob a bank, I have no problem with that, as long as it is consistent. If he supposed to be a serious villain, would there be any harm into putting more work into the character?