intelligent debate about feats and character statements

When comic book writers write stories, the last thing on their minds are feats. They are interested in writing good stories,not pandering to comic book nerds. No one wants to read a comic where the villains destroys earth every Tuesday just to prove how powerful they are. This leads to character statements, writers use character statements to let the readers know how powerful a character is, and what abilities the characters have. Character statements should not be confused with hyperboles.character statements should as much weight as actual feats.

Examples

1. Batman has been claimed to master 127 different martial arts,however he has never shown this in comics, he hasn't even show 1/4 of it.yet this is recited daily as fact on forums. It could easily be seen as a hyperbole since he doesn't have the feats to back up the 127 claim.

2.Cell claimed to be able to destroy a solar system. This is often dismissed as a hyperbole since he doesn't have anything to back it up besides his statement.

The truth is batman does know 127 different martial arts, and cell can destroy a solar system.why? Because at the end of the day its all fiction,the writer says a character can do something,so that character can do it.

Saying something is hyperbole is the equivalent of saying something is PIS.

It's all about what the user wants or doesn't want to accept do to how they feel about the character.

It's pretty much the same thing as "PIS". "Hey, i didn't like that feat, i'll call it PIS".

@dbvse7: it is really nothing alike to PIS... and there is PIS, since it doesnt include only characters... IF for instance Superman tripped on the stairs and broke his leg that would be PIS in every possible way and should be ignored, while you should keep in mind that Hyperbole also exists in comics as it is used as a stylistic figure. Not when it comes to most feats, but it is used.

Hyperbole would be when a character states that Batman knows ALL the martial arts, while in fact he knows "only" 127 styles of combat.

@chimeroid: "It's really nothing alike PIS" that's a lie.

You gave two extreme examples of each one. One is just stupidity and the other can obviously be disproved without even going into detail. Some still think the 127 is hyperbole.

@dbvse7: Psssssst I'm not the good one who answered you that.

@realitywarper: oh my bad LOL

Fun. ^^

@dbvse7: no its not,hyperbole is an actual rhetorical device used in writing.

@midnightdragon18: ?

@dbvse7: hyperbole does not equal pis. Hyperbole is an actual rhetorical device used is in literally,pis is a fan term used to describe inconsistencies.hyperbole doesn't equal inconsistencies.hyperbole is just an exaggeration used make a point.

If the writer say's someone can do something than it doesn't matter what we think. The character can do it

@midnightdragon18: Oh.. you misunderstand. I'm not saying they're the same thing.

I don't think comparing hyperbole and PIS is really a sound argument. Hyperbole is used to show how strong someone is or how good something is with the use of exaggeration.

The example I always saw in English class was "Jake was as fast as lighting." Now if the story is about kids playing soccer during recess, then its probably safe to assume Jake was not really as fast as lighting, now what happens if we say Jake is a superhero? Then all of a sudden the statement isn't taken as hyperbole, even if it was meant to be.

The question is simply, Can hyperbole exist in a universe where characters can do hyperbolic things? And if so, how do we know what is and is not hyperbole? Well to answer those questions we simply have to face the fact that these are fictional characters designed to tell a story and not worry so much about feats of imaginary creatures :P

Statements mean little if the character can't back it up with something, unless that statement is all that character has.

For example, we've never seen the Ultimate Nullilfier used on a mass scale, but we know it's got the ability to wipe out entire universes and timelines from existence because of everything stated about it by many people and the fact it was fully intended to be used to do just that.

On the other hand, Feats>Statements, if someone has many feats and none of them measure up to that statement-for example, if someone has only ever busted buildings and they are stated to be able to destroy a planet-then you take it with a grain of salt.

In other words, statements should only be used when there's nothing else to go off of, and if there's a feat that's the equivalent of that statement, then the feat trumps the statement.

The problem is not only that some writer said Batman knows 127 fighting styles without backing it up. The problem is, that its impossible.

Honestly I believe both Cell and batmans statements.

Intelligent discussion?

On the internet?

Where people are practically anonymous and free to spew their opinions without a true consequence?

Good luck :)

Well, one has to take in consideration who made a statement. If Lois Lane says nobody can defeat Superman, it's a worthless statement, as she is both biased and incapable of knowing this and it has been disproven countless times.

If Batman fought another martial artist and claimed he was as fast as lightning, but able to keep up with him it is hyperbole. If Flash says someone is as fast as lightning than catches the person saying, but I'm faster than that. That someone might very well be as fast as lightning as Flash has proven already that he is faster before. If Flash said someone was as fast as lightning and then continued to say even running as fast as he can he cannot catch him, said someone is probably faster than lightning.

If Batman says he mastered 127 martial arts it is probably fact, he would know, he does not tend to exagerrate his own abilities and it is logically not a hyperbole.To elaborate on the last point, if Batman said he mastered a thousand or million martial arts the first two points would still be true, but the statement way more likely to be hyperbole.

The most common hyperboles are omnipotence and invulnerability. Silver Surfer, Odin, Living Tribunal and The one above all are all stated to be omnipotent, none has proven this, but for one it is a character statement and for the rest it is hyperbole. Superman being invulnerable is wrong, but it is listed as one of his superpowers.

THIS. Nothing alike.

@sodamyat: Not what I mean, and again not true.

dont know what youre talking. im saying PIS and character statements arent the same thing. PIS is plot induced stupidity. Its an acronym used to describe events that are not consistent with what is usually portrayed. I'll use the example that was already given: Superman falls down stairs and breaks his leg. That is one thing. Character statements are a whole other issue. There are character statements that can and cannot be trusted. Usually if its something that has never been backed up, its not a reliable statement.

This just seems like a dbz justification thread. It was hyberbole dude get over it. You need to take in consideration the characters personality as well, cell was a known liar, arrogant and full of himself. His statements hold less weight than say someone like superman, who doesnt lie or brag

I believe character statements, because I feel the writer has them say it for a reason not just because it makes them feel good. There is no real proper way to actually compare characters.

Here are 9 huge reasons feats is the worst way to compare characters for numerous reasons:

1) Every character has high end and low end showings, so you can make any character look as good or as bad as you want them to.

2) Feats contradict each all the time.

3) What is "PIS" and what isn't is completely subjective.

4) There is no way to actually no what the character would actually do in the fight since they're fictional characters and cannot think for themselves.

5) A lot of feats get taken out of context

6) When you have to sit there and do some fan calculation that the writer probably didn't care enough to do you should probably just forget about that feat.

7) Just because a character doesn't have a feat for something doesn't mean they cannot do it. (Thanos isn't resistant to pepper spray since he doesn't have pepper spray resistance feats)

8) Each writer has a different perspective of each character so what one writer feels he can do another writer might not.

9) They are so inconsistent.

But it is the only way you guys know how to compare character so.

When did Cell lie?

Why would Cell exaggerate about his powers when everyone could clearly sense his energy?

Why would Cell, a supercomputer made by people who have created infinite energy generator androids and MFTL spaceships, not even accurately describe his own powers?

Character statements should be considered seriously, and the only reason why someone wouldn't take them seriously is either because: A) they are inconsistent with established power levels or B) bias.

@welldone: what did cell lie about?

You put this very well. Thanks, I'll be sure to come back to this thread when I need to for a debate.

He can destroy the Earth with just one Kamehameha.

It is easy to destroy the solar system.

This PISses me off so much.

@thetruebarryallen: seems to be going well so far

@conner_wolf: but writers don't care about feats, they care about writing stories,i mean how cliche would it be if every writer made every villan destroy a random planet that just so happens to be the same size as earth just to prove they can destroy earth, after a while it become redundant.

@midnightdragon18: Yes they care more about story, I should know, I write stories all the time and I just sort of write stuff down that sounds the coolest for that situation, but at the same time if they write it down, that's what a character is capable of unless it's just clearly waaaaaaay above par.

@realitywarper: @etheral_dreams: @midnightdragon18: @conner_wolf: Feats don't matter.All they are just fanboy bias.I debunked many superman feats. All of the feats are just exaggerated and out of context. I personally read the silver age as well. Superman sneezed a solar system due to The Imp's magical sneezing powder.In the same issue superman can't move a moon, which turned into cheese.Writers don't care about feats. Fans made them as much as words like ripoff,overpowered,and depowered.

@antimutant001: I don't think the Silver Age is a good example of that, in modern times writers try to be more consistent with characters.

But overall, feats are all we have, what are we supposed to do? Throw poo at each other like monkeys until one party gives up?

While I agree that writers don't care about feats I wouldn't say that (most) feats are exaggerated and out of context the whole conecpt of anybody flying faster than light without going into hyper space has always bothered me because anything with mass can only go at the speed of light

Feats like making the universe scream (thanos feat) are exaggerated

Feats like shattering reality (superboy prime) are dumb unless you're an abstract entity or a reality warper like Franklin Richards

But perceiving stuff at near light speed I can understand being some of this stuff HAS to be exaggerated

so far so good

the only thing to do is use logic to determine if a writer wants to convey a message or simply make a character tell lies etc

@helicoprion: look at post #22

Usually. Its easy to spot a hyperbole

If Nightwing lifts something and says said wow this weighs a ton, its mostly likely not a ton,just really really heavy.

If deathstroke said it then the object probably weigh a ton.

A characters origin also plays a part.

Nightwing is just human, while slade is enhanced,slade would have no reason to exaggerate about the object's weight

Awesomely said :)

I think character statements are there to bring attention to the fact that the author/writer themselves envision something and know something in regards to what a character can do since they created that character but feats are there to visualize, illustrate and emphasize that further since it will be seeing is believing while the character statement is the believing part the feats done by that same character is the seeing with both in conjunction with one another its 100% unarguable however when there is only a character statement its harder to believe without a feat although the author themselves make it perfectly clear what their own character can do. Feats and character statements are good but having wise judgement is sometimes better because a feat can be debunked, inconsistent with other feats and a character statement can be unreliable, exaggerated, unsupported (if not reinstated by the author) while wise judgement which enables the reader and receiver to judge for themselves based on what is considered correct in respective-perspective to the author allows them to understand what the author intended with their character beyond feats and character statements sometimes there`s more ways to think than there is to look.

Bump

Ill update tomorrow

Update

Some statements should be disregarded because sometimes writers have no idea what they're talking.

If someone claimed to be stronger than an omnipotent

Or the strongest omnipotent

Or flashed that flash can run faster than infinity

Then that statement should be disregarded

Conclusion-fiction is still fiction,but writers still have ro follow rules.

So basically, you want to pick and choose when the writer knows what he/she is talking about? It just seems like a way to cherry pick to me.

@stahlflamme gave the best answer and I still hold that neither character or author statements mean jack if there aren't any feats to support the claim.

lol@DC

@buttersdaman000: i never said that

If a writer wrote flash being faster than infinite speed, then it should be disregarded

Character statements should still be counted,but they still have to make sense

For example

Superman and wonder woman lifted the spectre who has infinite mass

The writer said they both lifted half but that doesn't make sense because half of infinity is still infinity.

The feat should be disregarded regarded because the writer clearly didn't know what he was talking about

There was also a flash fear where wally ran millions of times faster than light,but the writer said he was going just under light speed.so that feat statement should br disregarded since the writer writer didn't know what he talking about.

You did say that. You're cherry picking when the author knows what he/she is talking about when it makes sense to you. How do you know when an author knows what he/she is talking about? As far as you or I know, can you prove Akira Toriyama knew just how big the Solar System was when Cell made his statement?? I agree that the character lifting infinite masses should be disregarded, but that's only because those feats are unquantifiable by definition. I also agree that when an author clarifies a feat, his/her word takes precedence over interpretation (Flash nuke feat). However, I don't agree that you can pick and choose when character statements make sense. In fact, like I said before, no character statement should take precedence if there aren't feats enough to support it.

@welldone: feel free to show me were cell lied. Cell never lied about anything. Matter of fact, he told the z-fighters exactly what his mission was. Never exaggerated his power before his statement of busting the solar system.

You're more than likely the typical DBZ hater. You probably have characters you personally like that it would just hurt your soul if a DBZ character were to thrash them.

Bump