| Re: The best of each type of character... [message #95674 is a reply to message #95673] |
Fri, 28 October 2011 00:06   |
Duggy
Messages: 316
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Oct 28, 9:59 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Punisher
>> "Weapon user (Guns)." He uses other weapons, sure, but his gimmick is
>> guns. Plus I'd say "Urban Vigilante" sums him up enough.
> Guns may be the first thing you think of but, if you actually read the
> books, he uses blades, explosives, etc. almost as much.
But is that his gimmick?
> As for urban vigilante, it fits...but, as you've been saying all
> along, some will fit more than one category and you certainly can't
> put Punisher and Batman in the same category without differentiating
> between them somehow.
Why? The point between the categories isn't to differentiate between
them.
>>> Deadpool
>
>> "Mercenary/Assassin" cat sums him up better.
>
>>> Deathstroke
>
>> "Mercenary/Assassin" cat sums him up better.
>
> These two vary greatly depending on who is writing them and whether or
> not they are the featured character...but, in their own stories, they
> are most often depicted as heroes or at least anti-heroes...and they
> are known for using many different weapons (most notably blades and
> guns).
True.
But do they have the gimmick "can use any weapons"?
>>> Ultimate Hawkeye
>> I'll take your word.
> He's a Bullseye type...he still leans toward the bow but is shown as a
> master pretty much any weapon...even things most people wouldn't think
> to use as weapons.
>>> Batman (who sadly even uses guns since Morrison got ahold of him)
>> Has used guns isn't "Weapon User (Guns)". Superman has used guns.
>> To be in a cat, that cat has to be a defining feature of the
>> character.
> Using a gun is a betrayal of a defining feature of the character...I'd
> say that's just as important...but, even taking guns out of the
> equation, he uses pretty much every type of weapon imaginable.
Agreed, but is he known for it?
> Batman *can* use any weapon. But the use of any weapon
>> isn't what defines him. His use of the Batarang as "Weapon User
>> (Thrown)" sure. It's like Martial Arts. Batman knows them. Batman
>> is always near the top of "best Martial Artists in the DCU" but he
>> isn't defined by his Martial Arts.
Yeah. This bit.
>> Used most other weapons or was known for being able to use any weapon?
> The entire bat-family has been shown repeatedly to be masters of all
> types of weapons...
Master of... isn't the same as "known for"
Batman can use a bow. I wouldn't put him in the Archer category.
> ...and, as a cop, he actually
> regularly carried a gun (unlike any of the others besides Jason Todd).
What he does as a cop isn't what he does as Nightwing.
>>> All use a wide range of weapons...most will use whatever is on hand.
>>> And that's just off the top of my head.
>> That's not the same thing as a character who's gimmick is using any
>> weapon.
> Then we need to be clear here...because, up until now, most of
> categorization has been according to ability (either powers or
> skills)...not gimmick...
Examples.
===
= DUG.
===
|
|
|
|
| Re: The best of each type of character... [message #95675 is a reply to message #95674] |
Fri, 28 October 2011 01:21 |
grinningdemon
Messages: 80
Registered: January 2011
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 21:06:12 -0700 (PDT), Duggy
<Paul.Duggan@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
> On Oct 28, 9:59 am, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> Punisher
>
>>> "Weapon user (Guns)." He uses other weapons, sure, but his gimmick is
>>> guns. Plus I'd say "Urban Vigilante" sums him up enough.
>
>> Guns may be the first thing you think of but, if you actually read the
>> books, he uses blades, explosives, etc. almost as much.
>
> But is that his gimmick?
You haven't been addressing "gimmicks" until your previous post.
>> As for urban vigilante, it fits...but, as you've been saying all
>> along, some will fit more than one category and you certainly can't
>> put Punisher and Batman in the same category without differentiating
>> between them somehow.
>
> Why? The point between the categories isn't to differentiate between
> them.
Any true categorization of these characters would illustrate the
differences as well as the similarities...certainly if characters
appear on multiple lists.
>>>> Deadpool
>>
>>> "Mercenary/Assassin" cat sums him up better.
>>
>>>> Deathstroke
>>
>>> "Mercenary/Assassin" cat sums him up better.
>>
>> These two vary greatly depending on who is writing them and whether or
>> not they are the featured character...but, in their own stories, they
>> are most often depicted as heroes or at least anti-heroes...and they
>> are known for using many different weapons (most notably blades and
>> guns).
>
> True.
>
> But do they have the gimmick "can use any weapons"?
I wouldn't say their "gimmick" has anything to do with weapons at
all...but they always use them.
>>>> Ultimate Hawkeye
>>> I'll take your word.
>> He's a Bullseye type...he still leans toward the bow but is shown as a
>> master pretty much any weapon...even things most people wouldn't think
>> to use as weapons.
>
>>>> Batman (who sadly even uses guns since Morrison got ahold of him)
>>> Has used guns isn't "Weapon User (Guns)". Superman has used guns.
>>> To be in a cat, that cat has to be a defining feature of the
>>> character.
>
>> Using a gun is a betrayal of a defining feature of the character...I'd
>> say that's just as important...but, even taking guns out of the
>> equation, he uses pretty much every type of weapon imaginable.
>
> Agreed, but is he known for it?
Other than guns, I would say he is known for using all types of
weapons...the batarang might be the most recognizable but that doesn't
mean it's all he's known for...and, as I've said, I thought we were
categrorizing based on skills and powers...I didn't think this was
based on public perception.
>> Batman *can* use any weapon. But the use of any weapon
>>> isn't what defines him. His use of the Batarang as "Weapon User
>>> (Thrown)" sure. It's like Martial Arts. Batman knows them. Batman
>>> is always near the top of "best Martial Artists in the DCU" but he
>>> isn't defined by his Martial Arts.
>
> Yeah. This bit.
>
>>> Used most other weapons or was known for being able to use any weapon?
>> The entire bat-family has been shown repeatedly to be masters of all
>> types of weapons...
>
> Master of... isn't the same as "known for"
>
> Batman can use a bow. I wouldn't put him in the Archer category.
He probably can use a bow...but it's not something he does regularly
and he certainly wouldn't be an expert on par with Green Arrow...the
difference is the archers actually have a specialized skill set that
they mostly stick to...Batman and the others I mentioned have a much
more general skill set that needs to be taken into account.
>> ...and, as a cop, he actually
>> regularly carried a gun (unlike any of the others besides Jason Todd).
>
> What he does as a cop isn't what he does as Nightwing.
Again, I'm judging by skills...not perception.
>>>> All use a wide range of weapons...most will use whatever is on hand.
>>>> And that's just off the top of my head.
>>> That's not the same thing as a character who's gimmick is using any
>>> weapon.
>
>> Then we need to be clear here...because, up until now, most of
>> categorization has been according to ability (either powers or
>> skills)...not gimmick...
>
> Examples.
For the Superman archetype, it's not just a gimmick...it's a set of
powers...as is super strength, universal power, stretching, growing,
shrinking, etc.
Martial arts is a skill set...as is inventing, using weapons, even
peak human in a way.
Even peak human is more of a skill of sorts...unless the character got
there artificially like Cap, then it's more like a power.
I suppose any of these could actually be a "gimmick" too for certain
characters (like with the archers)...but that is not the case for most
of the characters we've listed in these characters...and certainly not
for those like Batman that land in multiple categories.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The best of each type of character... [message #95676 is a reply to message #95675] |
Fri, 28 October 2011 03:40 |
Duggy
Messages: 316
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Oct 28, 3:21 pm, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> But is that his gimmick?
> You haven't been addressing "gimmicks" until your previous post.
Short hand for thing that defines him.
Batman - Urban vigilante, Detective, Peak Human.
Not
Batman - Urban vigilante, Detective, Peak Human, Weapon User (all
types).
>>> As for urban vigilante, it fits...but, as you've been saying all
>>> along, some will fit more than one category and you certainly can't
>>> put Punisher and Batman in the same category without differentiating
>>> between them somehow.
>> Why? The point between the categories isn't to differentiate between
>> them.
> Any true categorization of these characters would illustrate the
> differences as well as the similarities...certainly if characters
> appear on multiple lists.
True. But it doesn't have to.
>> But do they have the gimmick "can use any weapons"?
> I wouldn't say their "gimmick" has anything to do with weapons at
> all...but they always use them.
Arsenal's gimmick was he can use any weapon.
Green Arrow's gimmick is he uses a bow.
>>> Using a gun is a betrayal of a defining feature of the character...I'd
>>> say that's just as important...but, even taking guns out of the
>>> equation, he uses pretty much every type of weapon imaginable.
>> Agreed, but is he known for it?
> Other than guns, I would say he is known for using all types of
> weapons...
Known for it? If you asked someone what Batman was known for it would
be "using a wide range of weapons"?
>> Batman can use a bow. I wouldn't put him in the Archer category.
> He probably can use a bow...but it's not something he does regularly
> and he certainly wouldn't be an expert on par with Green Arrow...the
> difference is the archers actually have a specialized skill set that
> they mostly stick to...Batman and the others I mentioned have a much
> more general skill set that needs to be taken into account.
So a character who was known for using all types of weapons at expert
level
>> What he does as a cop isn't what he does as Nightwing.
> Again, I'm judging by skills...not perception.
Then you're missing the point I think.
>>> Then we need to be clear here...because, up until now, most of
>>> categorization has been according to ability (either powers or
>>> skills)...not gimmick...
>> Examples.
> For the Superman archetype, it's not just a gimmick...it's a set of
> powers...
The gimmick is being like Superman. Which is why we separated out
character who were like Superman and ones that had the same power set.
> Even peak human is more of a skill of sorts...unless the character got
> there artificially like Cap, then it's more like a power.
> I suppose any of these could actually be a "gimmick" too for certain
> characters (like with the archers)...but that is not the case for most
> of the characters we've listed in these characters...and certainly not
> for those like Batman that land in multiple categories.
Hm.
===
= DUG.
===
|
|
|
|
| Re: The best of each type of character... [message #95677 is a reply to message #95676] |
Sat, 29 October 2011 01:49 |
grinningdemon
Messages: 80
Registered: January 2011
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:40:34 -0700 (PDT), Duggy
<Paul.Duggan@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
> On Oct 28, 3:21 pm, grinningdemon <grinningde...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>>> But is that his gimmick?
>> You haven't been addressing "gimmicks" until your previous post.
>
> Short hand for thing that defines him.
>
> Batman - Urban vigilante, Detective, Peak Human.
These are not what I would call "gimmicks"...a character's gimmick
would the the one trait, characteristic, or accessory they are BEST
known for...ask the average person (fan or not) what batman's
"gimmick" is and doubt very much anyone is going to say "urban
vigilante" or "Peak Human"...I suppose they might say something about
his being a detective but, most likely, you're going to hear something
like "Dark Knight" or "dresses like a bat."
> Not
> Batman - Urban vigilante, Detective, Peak Human, Weapon User (all
> types).
>
>>>> As for urban vigilante, it fits...but, as you've been saying all
>>>> along, some will fit more than one category and you certainly can't
>>>> put Punisher and Batman in the same category without differentiating
>>>> between them somehow.
>>> Why? The point between the categories isn't to differentiate between
>>> them.
>
>> Any true categorization of these characters would illustrate the
>> differences as well as the similarities...certainly if characters
>> appear on multiple lists.
>
> True. But it doesn't have to.
If it doesn't then there's no point.
>>> But do they have the gimmick "can use any weapons"?
>> I wouldn't say their "gimmick" has anything to do with weapons at
>> all...but they always use them.
>
> Arsenal's gimmick was he can use any weapon.
> Green Arrow's gimmick is he uses a bow.
But most heroes don't have such a clear-cut gimmick...at least not
like you're thinking.
>>>> Using a gun is a betrayal of a defining feature of the character...I'd
>>>> say that's just as important...but, even taking guns out of the
>>>> equation, he uses pretty much every type of weapon imaginable.
>>> Agreed, but is he known for it?
>> Other than guns, I would say he is known for using all types of
>> weapons...
>
> Known for it? If you asked someone what Batman was known for it would
> be "using a wide range of weapons"?
Ask someone what weapons Batman uses and you would likely hear "all
kinds" or "everything but guns."
When we started making these categories, we never said we were
limiting it to "gimmicks" or even to what they are "known for"...based
on what we started with and the genesis of this discussion, I assumed
we were mainly categorizing abilities.
>>> Batman can use a bow. I wouldn't put him in the Archer category.
>> He probably can use a bow...but it's not something he does regularly
>> and he certainly wouldn't be an expert on par with Green Arrow...the
>> difference is the archers actually have a specialized skill set that
>> they mostly stick to...Batman and the others I mentioned have a much
>> more general skill set that needs to be taken into account.
>
> So a character who was known for using all types of weapons at expert
> level
A character who was ABLE to use all types of weapons at expert
level...and, yes, "known for"...at least among people who actually
know the characters in question.
>>> What he does as a cop isn't what he does as Nightwing.
>> Again, I'm judging by skills...not perception.
>
> Then you're missing the point I think.
Missing YOUR point, certainly...because you waited quite a while to
share it with the class.
>>>> Then we need to be clear here...because, up until now, most of
>>>> categorization has been according to ability (either powers or
>>>> skills)...not gimmick...
>>> Examples.
>> For the Superman archetype, it's not just a gimmick...it's a set of
>> powers...
>
> The gimmick is being like Superman. Which is why we separated out
> character who were like Superman and ones that had the same power set.
If that were true, then Captain Marvel wouldn't still be in the
category...he's not really like Superman much at all other than having
hte same power set.
Thor, however, cannot fly on his own and has no heat vision...and
Superman doesn't command lightning...these are the reasons I didn't
think he belonged in the category...he has a different power set.
>> Even peak human is more of a skill of sorts...unless the character got
>> there artificially like Cap, then it's more like a power.
>
>> I suppose any of these could actually be a "gimmick" too for certain
>> characters (like with the archers)...but that is not the case for most
>> of the characters we've listed in these characters...and certainly not
>> for those like Batman that land in multiple categories.
>
> Hm.
>
> ===
> = DUG.
> ===
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
