Are they necessary for a superhero comic? Do you expect them when you read a super hero comic?
Are feats necessary?
In a way yes, super hero comics are all about putting characters in impossible situations and having them win anyways. A good ongoing will have the protagonist at least partially responsible for some part of the victories and thus feats are born. That is why the best super hero comics keep escalating in danger; read Batman or Earth2 or Injustice.
A good story doesn't need feats and a good story can incorporate feats. Depends on the storyteller's ability and what they want to tell.
That said, they're a hell of a lot of fun to read about and I'd much rather have feats in my comics than go without.
More or less.
Basically what every one else has been saying unless you mean when comes to fighting in which feats are and are not required. For instance characters like Batman and Iron man if they were going to fight they'd kind of need feats. People like superman prime 1million and max faraday don't need feats as supes was once said to be second to the presence himself that alone is a feat and nothing has to show it since DC said it themselves also max faraday is often pit against Richard franklin who and even though he has a lack of feats his power comes from a higher source and for some that's enough said.
I don't care about feats for the sake of feats but with characters like Superman, Lantern, Thor, Hulk and so on, I want to see them use their powers. I want to see Superman doing things no one else can. He's supposed to be the strongest and one of the fastest beings on the planet and I want to see that.
They aren't needed. They come naturally with a lot of stories, but tons of my favorite titles don't pay any attention to that stuff and are excellent. (Hawkeye, Wonder Woman, etc)
I don't think they are needed as much as I know some people think they are.
I ofc like that there are some indicators of how powerful various characters are, but I don't need to be constantly reminded of it or waste huge amount of page space to hammer home a point I already got.
An example of this is the current WW book. There are some readers who thinks she is weak because she doesn't lift very heavy objects every other issue, fly faster than speeding bullets or takes atomic bombs to her forehead with no effort and so on. And they still do this after the 12th issue, where she didn't just beat a god, she humiliated her. Then the criticism became that the deity was feat-less and weaker than Diana because of how easily she was defeated, completely looking past the fact that she is still a god and that alone puts her past most of DC's expansive character sheet in power.
I could be misunderstanding your use of the term, because I have the same understanding that @marco_kidd has. I think the superhero franchise is somewhat built on feats. On the high end: they are a fast way to justify the danger of a villain, power level of a character or just end a story in an extravagant explosion of fan-pleasing climax (i.e. Kitty phasing an earth-sized bullet through the planet, Magneto reversing the earth's polarities). Low end: they show the typical power level and traits of a character (i.e. a telepath hearing another person's thoughts). If there were no feats in the superhero genre, I think they would end up becoming rather bland - not quite sci-fi, not quite adventure, yet there are costumes and tights.
Feats become unnecessary in books that are more story or character driven, though.
Feats are. What heroes and villains produce on the regular....don't really understand what the questionis here...
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment