..simply the fact that every other character I can think of who is at Wonder Woman's strength level is bullet proof...so surely someone with WW's strength and durability really shouldn't be bothered about trying to deflect bullets from some measly gun!!

It's been her other Achilles heel for quite some time; a pronounced vulnerability to piercing weapons.

Also Superman is bullet proof because he is physically has so dense tissue you need something extremely pointy in order to get through his hide. Diana on the other hand is (or was) magically empowered by Gaea, which means her strength is 'aided' by the deity's blessing, kinda like an exoskeleton.

Good answer, but it still puzzles me that she can be hit by a big gun fired from a warship (Superman/Wonderwoman #1) and shrug it off and be smacked through tower blocks and get up without a scratch, but a small piece of lead fired at 700 MPH causes her harm....

I never got it either. A punch from a character with super strength inflicts way more damage than a bullet. I know it's piercing damage but it still doesn't add up. Injustice's Wonder Woman is bullet proof.

@bezza: Well the physical mechanics of the two are different, but hey, it's comics :)

Hopefully she is bulletproof in the nu52. Injustice and Smallville realized how stupid that is, and she is bulletproof in both of those universes.

With her being a demi goddess now, it doesn't really make sense to wear them at all now, seeing as now only beings on her level or greater are a threat.

@bezza: lack of consistency in the portrayals of WW. I think they should all sit down and take a vote: either allow WW to be invulnerable or not.

and how are "piercing weapons" classified as a weakness?..........i mean people don't walk around saying batman, aquaman, green arrow, flash, ect have a weakness to piercing weapons they're just classified as NOT invulnerable.

kryptonite is a weakness for kryptonians, water is a weakness for the human torch, betty banner is weakness to the hulk, water was a weakness to the wicked witch of the west (in the wizard of OZ).................yes people can be killed by piercing weapons, but it's not a weakness. that is what i'm confused about.

I like to think of her bracelets not as a defense, something she needs to have in order to protect herself from firearms, but as another of her weapons, like her sword or lasso. So I think she could take bullets, she's bulletproof, but her bracelets allow her to take those bullets and turn them back on her attackers via rebound, whereas if the bullets just bounce off her normally she has no control over where they go.

@oscars94 said:

I never got it either. A punch from a character with super strength inflicts way more damage than a bullet. I know it's piercing damage but it still doesn't add up. Injustice's Wonder Woman is bullet proof.

That's because they got it WRONG in Injustice. If she's so bulletproof why is the shield on her back, what's that for?

I get that invulnerability would be easier for some guys to understand, but that's not Wonder Woman. She's always been vulnerable to piercing weapons, but not blunt force trauma.

Making her invulnerable completely invalidates Bullets & Bracelets and that's a hallmark of her character. Batman typically uses grappling guns or a line attached to Bat-a-rangs to get around Gotham. I'm sure he could easily access a jet-pack instead, but that wouldn't be Batman, it'd be Adam Strange.

Those are her powers parameters, you either except it or you don't and read something else.

@scorpio_cassadine: Fair enough.

@oscars94: Sorry if I came off like an @sshole, I can be overly protective sometimes.

@scorpio_cassadine: It's okay, She's worth it ;)

I kinda like how in the current comic they hold her back from reaching her full power level. Kinda brings them back to the "Bracelets of Submission" that they used to be.

@scorpio_cassadine said:

No, Injustice got it right. And so did Smallville. And like the bracelets, the shield is meant for things more dangerous than bullets. And there a lot of those in the DC universe.

Just because something is traditional doesn't mean it shouldn't go. Wonder Woman being vulnerable to piercing weapons is stupid beyond belief.

I have often had a problem with this "weakness" as well. In my mind in order to keep her amazon bracelets useful I would let her be harmed by bullets and related weapons, but not so much that they would pierce right through her like a normal human. It would be more of a sting. An example that comes to mind is in the episode "The late Mr. Kent" from Superman TAS. That corrupt cop that Superman tries to take down fires on him with the helicopter he tried escape in. The bullets hurt, but they didn't really stop Supes. Now while they dumbed down Superman's invulnerability for show I don't see why that couldn't be a new showing for Wonder Woman's durability as she is shown being extremely powerful physically, but not as much as Supes.

The difference in a piercing weapon and a blunt force weapon is quite enormous.

You can't even compare it to a punch, even by Superman. The area the bullet is trying to pierce is TINY compared to the area the fist is hitting.

Its even more for arrows. I've seen an arrow go through Kevlar like butter.

Piercing damage simply cannot be compared to blunt force. The amount of pressure it takes to pierce something in a point is minuscule compared to a wide area like a fist that disperse the power over a large area.

For example. Punch a punching bag. You'll hit it to the end of time and you'll never damage it. But I bet you take a safety pin you can poke a hole in it.

there´s a really good explanation in secret origins comic. when i get time i´ll post it. i had a hard time wrapping my head around it for a while, but it really makes sense to me now.

When Wonder Woman being hurt by piercing weapons that should have no affects on her in not the main problem, sure, it's ridiculous beyond any stretch of imagination that she can tank a nuclear explosion but a pointed stick will hurt, but the main problem is that she should be long dead. People already mentioned the ordnance that hit her in SMWW #1. If she had weakness to sharp objetcts, she should be dead right there. The amount of shrapnels there alone would surely suffice to torn her apart. Not to mention when she is throw through buildings or something similar.

For me, you want Wonder Woman to have this weakness? Ok, but make her a close to streetlevel character, not a powerhouse. If she is the powerhouse she is meant to be, she shouldn't have this mind bending weakness.

@outside_85: @bezza: @wonderwomanfan8: @marvel123: @scorpio_cassadine: @fallschirmjager:nascimento: piercing weapons is an stupid weakness,specially because it's not necesary to keep the bracelets,there are much more powerful attacks that can explain the use of the bracelets,attacks that can cause a lot of damage like omega beams,those are the attacks meant for the bracelets,so she doesn't need the weakness against piercing weapons whn there are many other attacks much more powerful that actually make the bracelets useful,she doesn'teven need bracelets to handle bullets with the level of speed she has,so they need to remove that weakness and let the bracelets for attacks like full powered blast from heat vision,omega beams and other attacks as powerful as them.

@gokuwarrior: Why not? Martian Manhunter has fire, Batman has bullets (and everything else that would kill a normal human), Aquaman has dehydration and Superman has a green space rock that's nearly everywhere by the looks of things.

As for Achilles Heels, what would you rather have;

1. Bullets/piercing weapons?
2. Getting tied up by a man=no powers?

This is why I would rather they drop the ambiguity about her level. Just make her durability very low-level and up her strength to equal superman's. Then her armor, shield, bracelets, and other parts of her arsenal have a place to make up for that lack.

SOMEONE'S never heard of Balloon Man….

JK. I agree.

I think anyone who does not understand bullets and bracers has no idea about Wonder Woman or the Superhero/comicbook/movie genre

This is why I have to be over protective, Wonder Woman would be Kryptonian if you had your way. Then we'd lose cool shit like this.

@bezza: Let me put it this way.

A BB gun pellet will not kill a human being but humans would attempt to avoid being hit by one because they hurt, disorient or stun.

1. Same goes for
2. Snowballs
3. Baseballs
4. Footballs
5. Rocks
6. and a million other projectiles that hurt when hit but wont kill.

For Wonder Woman bullets and other projectiles have the capacity to disorient and stun, even if they don't penetrate her skin and she could lose precious seconds in a battle. Deflecting bullets and other objects give her a level of control she would not have it she just let them hit her.

Wonder Woman is not superman she is a warrior she does not simply tank projectiles with her body and she should not do that. It makes more sense that she deflect and redirect the projectiles any where she wants

Besides its cool

Blunt trauma is different from a bullet. But of i am not mistaken thor has trouble with bullets as well

This is dumb, you can accept that a green rock turn Superman into mush, but a bullet piercing Wonder Woman's weakness is too much to accept?

Anyway...

I disagree with your logic, Kryptonite makes superman lose his powers and hence he becomes weak. Its basically poison to him. Wonder Woman is almost as strong as superman, can tank a hit from a battle ship gun without much difficulty, so why should bullets really trouble her? I am only saying that pretty much every character I can think of in her strength league doesn't have to bother deflecting bullets....

I do agree however that her super fast deflection powers are pretty cool, remember that scene from WW Series 1 when they sped up the film and she deflected the machine gun bullets fired by the Nazi lady? That was pretty hilarious!!

@wdw:

You can be a fan of a character and read their comics and still question facets to that character. I think your first reply was a bit unfair (I've been a fan of super-heroes, their comics/the movie genre going way back to the original Wonder Woman series), but good points on your second reply! However I stick by my point, which is that being hurt by bullets is usually a characteristic of street levellers not powerhouses and WW is definitely the latter!

Think it had to be some special kinds of bullets, in JMS' return story, Thor stood ramrock still while some African soldiers poured machinegun fire onto him and he didn't have a scratch afterwards.

I am not so sure it's universally the same with other Asgardians though Volstagg managed to tank somekind of heat blast from some modified Doombots that only managed to burn all his clothes off... apparently revealing to Sif and the other two Warriors that Volstagg also has some volume in the nether regions.

Some writers had Thor have trouble with bullets, because they claimed that in older stories Thor was always swinging his hammer around to block them so they concluded that Thor had reason to be threatened by them. Its not an unreasonable approach but it is also a flawed approach, since Thor is a fictional character and the guys who created him were alive a long time and one still is, and they considered Thor bulletproof as have many others. The official idea as far as Thor is concerned is that he is bulletproof and depictions of him blocking bullets with his hammer were multiple - visually its dynamic, it can help control ricochets and prevent innocent bystanders by being hit, and it can also direct attacks back to the source - and this applies not just for bullets, but beams and lasers and so on.

I think Wonder Woman should follow a similar path and also believe that some Wonder Woman writers like Gail Simone were of that idea as well. Using bracelets to block bullets doesn't mean that not blocking them will result in any sort of physical damage. Aesthetically it can look cool, and their may be situations where Diana may wish to redirect projectiles with more control to render them less dangerous.

@bezza:

Sorry for my first reply. It was not directed at you it came out immature stupid.

I look at Wonder Woman as a stand alone character her abilities should not depend on the status quo of superheros.

yes Wonder Woman is unique among powerhouses she can be "hindered" by bullets

However,

she is the only powerhouse in the DC universe who's backstory includes formal combat and warrior training and the only powerhouse in the DC universe who can lose all her powerhouse qualities and still be relevant as a superhero based on her combat skills as an amazon alone

Unlike other powerhouses Wonder Woman's primary attribute is "wisdom in battle" not brute strength

I also think like all great warriors Wonder Woman needs the experience of pain and vulnerability to truly be a great warrior. pain and the fear of pain push warriors to fight harder, better and faster.

I don't get it either but it might be used only because it looks cool.

Think about it like this.

What if in a snowball fight you had bracers that gave you the ability and skill to deflect any and all snowballs back in any direction you wanted including back at the origin.

Would you keep it or just let the snow balls hit you in the face because it wont kill you?

If I am invincible to the snowballs then I would get the braces off because I am invincible to the snowballs' effect.

A snowball to the face hurts, I don't care who you are. If you see one coming at you, you should try to block it, that's advice you'll thank me for later.

@bezza said:

I've got that gif somewhere on my computer, but couldn't find it for s#*t! :(

@tdk_1997:

Yeah but the point is you are not invincible to snowballs and the whole deflection thing would make it so you would not have to actually pickup and throw a snowball back at your attacker you just redirect them back to your attacker.

Wonder Woman is not "invincible" to bullets hence bullet and bracers

I understand what you are saying.But earlier you said that if you don't deflect them they won't hurt you and now you are saying she is not invincible to bullets and guns and stuff like that.

Maybe she's just doing it to keep her reflexes sharp.

Ok let me put it another way.

in the 2008 hulk movie Hulk is shot with tons of bullets. None penetrate his skin but they are an annoyance and he actively shielded his face and tried to avoid them I would NOT consider that totally invulnerable to bullets.

In the superman returns movie Superman is shot with very high calibur bullets and does not even flinch. he is even shot in the eye point blank and does not flinch even in the slightest. he is COMPLETELY invulnerable to bullets

Wonder Woman is more like the Hulk she is not complete invulnerable. she feels bullets and maybe being shot hurts her even if they cant kill her. In that situation it makes sense that she would attempt to block and control them rather than taking hits which can distract her more and open her up to other attacks. Same situation in the snowball analogy.

Bullets and bracers makes perfect sense to me.

Been reading her for years and I don't get it either. Whatevs. Just go with it.

I see.Now you explained it in a more understandable way.

@bezza@tdk_1997@pokeysteve

She's a character who is rooted in magic. Her vulnerability is derived from magic (the enchantments placed upon her at birth by Demeter, specifically) grant her invulnerability but that invulnerability does not cover piercing weaponry. The weakness isn't based on physics or force, it's based on magic. It's not a matter of "she can survive nuclear explosions and punches from Superman but can get cut by bullets, that doesn't make sense", it's because it is the loophole in the enchantment upon her.

It's like how in fairytales, a Princess can be asleep for decades and not be awakened by incredibly loud noises or physical force, but one kiss can wake her up. It's not about science or logic, it's about magic.

That's great except when you think Shazam's powers are also derived from magic, his acronym says nothing about durability and he's still bullet proof. It's like someone said up there, she's one of the only people on that level that isn't bullet proof.

It's just the conceit of her powers, Shazam's are derived from a different source than hers. If I remember correctly, he gets his invulnerability from Achilles according to the Trials of Shazam miniseries. It's similar to how werewolves are weak to silver or why vampires are weak to wooden stakes despite being invulnerable to everything else, or how the Fae are able to be damaged by iron. I like to rationalize it with the idea that her endurance is granted by Demeter, who presides over all of the powers of nature such as heat and force, but the tools of man are not in her jurisdiction. Or something like that.

I thought it was "Courage of Achilles". Either way it makes no sense. Rationalize how you want but it doesn't make sense.

Same way that werewolves, vampires and the fae don't make sense, I suppose. Magic! :)

I thought Wonder Woman was immortal. It doesn't make sense that a bullet can cut diana if bullets don't always carry enough kinetic energy to exit a normal man's body.