hero right on the boundary of the possible
johan....@comcast.net
boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
I presume no one will step up with a case for Batman. But how about
James Bond, at least in a few of his pictures?
Johan Larson
il...@rcn.com
> James Bond, at least in a few of his pictures?
James Bond is a good athlete, but hardly superhuman. Ethan Hunt from
"Mission: Impossible" is physically far more... impossible. Bond's
gadgets are about 10 years ahead of whenever each movie was made, but
no more than that. What James Bond has is superhuman LUCK - in every
deadly situation, if there is a chance of things coming out his way,
however small, that's exactly what happens. He is also blessed with
supremely overconfident enemies who always give him this tiny chance.
Maybe he is Teela Brown's distant ancestor?
Although the way Bond's suits always remain pressed, pristine and DRY
through all fights and tumbles definitely smacks of magic.
il...@rcn.com
> James Bond, at least in a few of his pictures?
James Bond is a good athlete, but hardly superhuman. Ethan Hunt from
il...@rcn.com
physics, but you have to know what to look for to notice that.
ghostwriter
The Punisher might qualify, I havent followed the series recently so
dont know if they have gotten stupid with him lately. But superhuman
luck is the PRIMARY superpower of all heros I am aware of. The bad guy
always forgets something, the good guy always gets the necessary break,
the bullet misses the heros vital organs etc. The sheer amount of
point blank gunplay that happens in so many stories would leave people
with normal luck looking like swiss cheese.
I have always assumed that the "good guys" being on the right side of
Karma was a major assumtion of most storytellers reguardless of medium.
Stories that dont follow this at least to some degree usally come off
as nilistic. "Cold equations" or something of the like might be an
exception but YMMV.
Ghostwriter
Peter Meilinger
> Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the very
> boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
> it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
>
> I presume no one will step up with a case for Batman.
Hell, I'll make a case for Batman. But only one ability at a time.
His strength might sorta-kinda be possible, and his agility might
sorta-kinda be possible, but almost certainly not in the same person.
I really liked the way Stephen King described Batman in an anniversary
issue quite awhile back. An extremely rough paraphrase boils down to
"He's an olympic gymnast who fights like Bruce Lee and drives like
Richard Petty getting a pregnant woman to the hospital, but he's at
least possible." Note that King was talking about how he felt when he
was a kid reading the comics, and specifically comparing Batman to
Superman. Given those factors, I have no problem agreeing with him.
Otherwise, yeah, you have to squint real hard. Or maybe close your
eyes and plug up your ears and do the "La-la-la-la!" routine.
Captain America, now there's a superhero who's right on the
boundary of human potential in both strength and agility whose
origin helps make it at least slightly feasible. The Super Soldier
Serum (*) presumably changed his muscles in such a way that
he can be both ridiculously strong and ridiculously fast and agile.
But in that sense he's over the line into superhuman, even though
none of his abilities cross that line on their own.
How about Conan? He's ridiculously strong and capable, but
he went up against opponents strong enough to make it clear
he had to work his ass off to survive. That makes him seem
more human, unlike other uber-heroes who can breeze through
the toughest of opponents.
For an example of someone definitely over the line, there's
Reacher, the Lord Of The Just and Sudden Reach, from
Brian Daley's Coramonde books. He was definitely stronger
and faster and tougher than any human could possibly be,
but I don't care because he was cool, dammit.
Pete
* - We've been watching the new show "Who Wants To Be
A Superhero?" off and on. It's fun, usually. There was one
guy on who was a total muscle-head, with a bad attitude and
a rocket launcher. Stan the Man took him to task for his
attitude and lethal weapon, which is fine, but also told him
superheroes don't use steroids. What the hell does he think
the Super Soldier Serum was?
johan....@comcast.net
Peter Meilinger wrote:
> How about Conan? He's ridiculously strong and capable, but
> he went up against opponents strong enough to make it clear
> he had to work his ass off to survive. That makes him seem
> more human, unlike other uber-heroes who can breeze through
> the toughest of opponents.
The fact that he un-crucified himself by pushing his hands forward over
the heads of the spikes that were holding them (owie!) definitely puts
him over the line.
Johan Larson
Mark Atwood
> Now, Xander Cage (Vin Diesel in "XXX") definitely breaks laws of
> physics, but you have to know what to look for to notice that.
Other than his night vision, which can be explained away by either
genetic tinkering or evolution (it *is* in the distant future), Van
Diesel's character "Riddik" seems barely in the realm of humanly
possible.
--
Mark Atwood When you do things right, people won't be sure
m...@mark.atwood.name you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/ http://fallenpegasus.livejournal.com/
No 33 Secretary
news:m2veokz...@amsu.fallenpegasus.com:
> il...@rcn.com writes:
>> Now, Xander Cage (Vin Diesel in "XXX") definitely breaks laws of
>> physics, but you have to know what to look for to notice that.
>
> Other than his night vision, which can be explained away by either
> genetic tinkering or evolution (it *is* in the distant future), Van
> Diesel's character "Riddik" seems barely in the realm of humanly
> possible.
>
Well, in truth, at times, one wonders if Vin Diesel is within the realm of
the humanly possible.
--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin
Mike Schilling
"Peter Meilinger" <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156267279.5...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hell, I'll make a case for Batman. But only one ability at a time.
> His strength might sorta-kinda be possible, and his agility might
> sorta-kinda be possible, but almost certainly not in the same person.
> I really liked the way Stephen King described Batman in an anniversary
> issue quite awhile back. An extremely rough paraphrase boils down to
> "He's an olympic gymnast who fights like Bruce Lee and drives like
> Richard Petty getting a pregnant woman to the hospital, but he's at
> least possible." Note that King was talking about how he felt when he
> was a kid reading the comics, and specifically comparing Batman to
> Superman. Given those factors, I have no problem agreeing with him.
> Otherwise, yeah, you have to squint real hard. Or maybe close your
> eyes and plug up your ears and do the "La-la-la-la!" routine.
In one if William Goldman's books [1], a character reasons that Batman could
always beat Superman, because Batman's a genius who's worked hard to become
a superhero, while Superman got his powers by the accident of coming to
Earth as a baby. On Krypton, he'd probably have been a janitor.
1. Not an SF book, but as far as I'm concerned, Goldman gets a lifetime
on-topic pass.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In one if William Goldman's books [1], a character reasons that Batman could
>always beat Superman, because Batman's a genius who's worked hard to become
>a superhero, while Superman got his powers by the accident of coming to
>Earth as a baby. On Krypton, he'd probably have been a janitor.
Naah. His family had connections. He'd probably have been a minor
bureaucrat, or a mid-level executive somewhere, assuming Krypton had
those.
In one story way back when he got stuck on Krypton before it blew up,
and made a living as an actor -- all those years of pretending to be
Clark Kent paid off. Whether he could have gone that route without
his life on Earth, who knows?
Or he might've been a journalist, or writer of some other sort; that's
what Kent does now, after all, and he's apparently good at it quite
aside from the superpowers.
>1. Not an SF book, but as far as I'm concerned, Goldman gets a lifetime
>on-topic pass.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
The first issue of Helix is at http://www.helixsf.com
Wayne Throop
::: James Bond, at least in a few of his pictures?
:: James Bond is a good athlete, but hardly superhuman.
: The Punisher might qualify
I nominate Brock Samson.
Brock: You get the boys. I'll take care of these guys.
Dr. Venture: Are you sure? There's an awful lot of them.
Brock: <teeth clenched, eye twitching> They hit me with a truck...
--- from "Dia de los Dangerous"
"I don't know, Pop, they won fair and square.
The Impossible Family made a really convincing Fantastic Four."
--- Dean Venture, commenting on "best group costume" prize,
from "Love Bheits"
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Michael S. Schiffer
>...
> How about Conan? He's ridiculously strong and capable, but
> he went up against opponents strong enough to make it clear
> he had to work his ass off to survive. That makes him seem
> more human, unlike other uber-heroes who can breeze through
> the toughest of opponents.
*Are* there any heroes who can breeze through the toughest of
opponents? As far as I can tell, the opponents are generally scaled
up enough to give the hero a fight or else he's given an Achilles
heel or six. Superman got both-- opponents who were physically his
equal or superior (Phantom Zone escapees, Darkseid, Validus, more
recently Doomsday) and an assortment of different ways to end-run
around his powers (kryptonite, magic, red sun radiation, plus
special-case bits like lead being impenetrable to X-ray vision and,
in some periods, immune to his heat vision as well). They could be
overused, but there have certainly been runs where Superman came off
as more vulnerable and in more danger of defeat than Batman.
>...
> * - We've been watching the new show "Who Wants To Be
> A Superhero?" off and on. It's fun, usually. There was one
> guy on who was a total muscle-head, with a bad attitude and
> a rocket launcher. Stan the Man took him to task for his
> attitude and lethal weapon, which is fine, but also told him
> superheroes don't use steroids. What the hell does he think
> the Super Soldier Serum was?
A serum, which is *completely different*. And if Iron Enforcer had
attributed his physique to an exotically named secret formula, maybe
he'd have gotten a pass. (Assuming he wasn't a plant to begin with,
anyway.) But none of these people could roleplay a superhero if
their lives depended on it
Stan also managed to criticize one of the candidates in the same
breath for a) lying, because heroes don't lie and b) failing to
protect her secret identity.
(Granted, that contradiction lies square at the heart of the
superhero concept, and has since Superman became a poster boy for
honesty while lying barefaced to his friends and romantic interests.
Still, every time Stan makes his pronouncements on what heroes do
and don't do, my wife and I tend to start listing the Marvel heroes
who violate them.)
I do find it interesting that their "supervillain" is basically
playing Satan from the book of Job, rather than actually opposing
the heroes. Obviously, they're not going to do a fistfight, but I'd
have expected the show to attribute the various plights of the
"victims" the heroes are supposed to rescue to the Dark Enforcer,
have him "set up traps", etc. Instead, he's basically the show's
prosecuting attorney.
Mike
--
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS
msch...@condor.depaul.edu
mark...@earthlink.net
> Captain America, now there's a superhero who's right on the
> boundary of human potential in both strength and agility whose
> origin helps make it at least slightly feasible. The Super Soldier
> Serum (*) presumably changed his muscles in such a way that
> he can be both ridiculously strong and ridiculously fast and agile.
> But in that sense he's over the line into superhuman, even though
> none of his abilities cross that line on their own.
I read somewhere that lactic acid isn't supposed to build up in his
muscles, giving him phenomenal endurance as well. Yes, I know we've
found out that lactic acid is a fuel since then, but just insert
whatever device would give him phenomenal endurance instead.
Juho Julkunen
johan....@comcast.net says...
He did no such thing. Not in any of Howard's stories at least.
Oh, he tried that, but the heads wouldn't fit between his bones.
--
Juho Julkunen
To reach me with email add "GT39" to the subject line.
johan....@comcast.net
Juho Julkunen wrote:
> In article <1156268373.8...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> johan....@comcast.net says...
> > the heads of the spikes that were holding them (owie!) definitely puts
> > him over the line.
>
> He did no such thing. Not in any of Howard's stories at least.
>
> Oh, he tried that, but the heads wouldn't fit between his bones.
Here's the message I based my comment on. I haven't read "A Witch Shall
Be Born" myself.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.written/msg/ef759c60facd59e8
Johan Larson
Mark Atwood
> >
> > Other than his night vision, which can be explained away by either
> > genetic tinkering or evolution (it *is* in the distant future), Van
> > Diesel's character "Riddik" seems barely in the realm of humanly
> > possible.
> >
> Well, in truth, at times, one wonders if Vin Diesel is within the realm of
> the humanly possible.
Van Diesel takes advantage of the same unfair advantage that Jackie
Chan does.
Everything that either of them do on film, is actually humanly
possible. Just not in the long continuous flows that the movies
imply. Do a barely possible stunt, then rest, then do another, then
rest, then do another, then rest...
Anything they do is actually possible. Doing all of them together in
one really long day (as shown in one of their movies), is not.
There is another character that is just barely in the realm of the
humanly possible. Any one of Jackie Chan's roles. I don't recall him
ever doing any impossible mystical chi-driven moves in his movies, but
then, I havn't seen all of his early Hong Kong movies.
Mark Atwood
>
> In one if William Goldman's books [1], a character reasons that Batman could
> always beat Superman, because Batman's a genius who's worked hard to become
> a superhero, while Superman got his powers by the accident of coming to
> Earth as a baby. On Krypton, he'd probably have been a janitor.
More likely, a farmer. At least, it's been shown by more than one
writer as his dream job.
Actually, even more likely, he would have been either a hobby
scientist like his father, or just spent his time contemplating his
navel, like most Kryptonians did in the final age.
Mark Atwood
>
> Or he might've been a journalist, or writer of some other sort; that's
> what Kent does now, after all, and he's apparently good at it quite
> aside from the superpowers.
His mother was a librarian, and Kryptonians seem to have the "family
is destiny" thing much more strongly than Terran H.Saps do.
Wayne Throop
: There is another character that is just barely in the realm of the
: humanly possible. Any one of Jackie Chan's roles. I don't recall him
: ever doing any impossible mystical chi-driven moves in his movies, but
: then, I havn't seen all of his early Hong Kong movies.
"Drunken Master", for example.
Jet Li very often does rilly-rilly impossible stuff,
but I was fond of "Kiss of the Dragon". Of course... I'm sure
some of the sequences there are impossible, including the
move in the title, but it mostly skirts the edge. Actually,
physically performing it isn't the problem, it's the efficacy
of the acupuncture that's the credulity-buster there.
There's also Frank Martin (from "The Transporter", Jason Stratham).
A flawed movie, in several regards, but interesting, and especially
(I thought, inexpertly) the fight choreography. I was especially
fond of the grease fight in bike pedals half way through. Heh.
Michael S. Schiffer
>...
> There is another character that is just barely in the realm of
> the humanly possible. Any one of Jackie Chan's roles. I don't
> recall him ever doing any impossible mystical chi-driven moves
> in his movies, but then, I havn't seen all of his early Hong
> Kong movies.
My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
seriously injured on a few occasions.) This suggests to me that
improvising them in uncontrolled environments, against
unchoreographed opponents actually bent on doing him harm, would be
impossible.
Michael S. Schiffer
> "Mike Schilling" <mscotts...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> In one if William Goldman's books [1], a character reasons that
>> Batman could always beat Superman, because Batman's a genius
>> who's worked hard to become a superhero, while Superman got his
>> powers by the accident of coming to Earth as a baby. On
>> Krypton, he'd probably have been a janitor.
> More likely, a farmer. At least, it's been shown by more than
> one writer as his dream job.
I only know of one version that had him as a farmer on Krypton (the
animated adaptation of "For the Man Who Has Everything"), and that
also incorporated other aspects of his terrestrial life. (Like his
wife.) In Moore's original version of the story, IIRC, he was a
scientist. Other versions I know of had him as a space dispatcher
(later space patrolman and superhero), and as head of the Green
Lantern Corps (not shown, but the pre-Crisis Guardians' plan if
Tomar-Re had saved Krypton).
> Actually, even more likely, he would have been either a hobby
> scientist like his father, or just spent his time contemplating
> his navel, like most Kryptonians did in the final age.
Though the post-Crisis Kal-El was uniquely genetically engineered to
be able to survive off-planet (unlike other Kryptonians in that
version), and would have had his father trying to influence him to
take an interest in space travel and other planets.
Michael S. Schiffer
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> writes:
>> Or he might've been a journalist, or writer of some other sort;
>> that's what Kent does now, after all, and he's apparently good
>> at it quite aside from the superpowers.
> His mother was a librarian, and Kryptonians seem to have the
> "family is destiny" thing much more strongly than Terran H.Saps
> do.
I take it that was the post-Crisis version. (Though since they just
went through yet another revision, I don't know if it still holds.)
During the 70s and early 80s, Lara was an astronaut. (If family is
destiny, that version of Kal-El would most likely have wound up
involved in space travel-- not unlike his foster brother, come to
think of it.) I'm not sure if she had any profession before that,
though in the 50s she at least got caught up in Jor-El's counter-
subversion work for the Kryptonian Bureau of Investigation.
Dr Hermes
Has no one mentioned the greatest of all pulp heroes, Doc Savage? He was
raised from the cradle by a board of scientists and various experts of
esoteric arts. Doc has gone through a two hour set of intense exercises
every day since childhood to develop his senses, strength, agility and
whatever else.
It's an appealing conceit, the idea of a modern Renaissance man who is
expert in every field, has every needed skill from lip-reading to savate
to ventriloquism, and who is everything from the world's most skilled
brain surgeon to a skilled clarinet player to a jiu-jitsu expert.
Any one of Doc's abilities is just plausible, but the sheer range and
depth of them puts him at the upper limit of human capability. Or,
actually, a bit beyond.
And about James Bond... The literary version by Ian Fleming worked hard
for his success. By the last page, he was usually badly injured,
crawling through the mud in rags or being rushed to the hospital for
everything from gunshot wounds to curare poisoning. By the time of YOU
ONLY LIVE TWICE, he's had a genuine breakdown and is about to be
discharged from the Service unless he comes through in Japan. He's not
much like the sleek unruffled character in the movies (except for the
first two Connery films).
johan....@comcast.net
Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
> My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> seriously injured on a few occasions.) This suggests to me that
> improvising them in uncontrolled environments, against
> unchoreographed opponents actually bent on doing him harm, would be
> impossible.
That sounds like just the thing we're looking for.
Johan Larson
Mark Atwood
>
> My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> seriously injured on a few occasions.)
ISTR reading of Mr Chan talking in an interview once about how when he
first started making movies with USian studios, he and his crew were
originally amused by the (by their standards) paranoid safety
precautions that the Amerians and their insurance companies were
insisting on.
Until the day came during shooting where there was an accident
that would have killed him, if the USian safety protocols weren't
in place.
After that, they figured that the Americans were onto something wise.
I wonder how many other insanely great "chop-sockey" actors got
killed, who we today dont even realize that we are missing, who if
they had lived, would have made the jump to big international markets.
(Citing either Bruce or Brandon Lee are too easy, and thus
disqualified.)
lclough
> Has no one mentioned the greatest of all pulp heroes, Doc Savage?
Or Modesty Blaise.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
Recent short fiction:
FUTURE WASHINGTON (WSFA Press, October '05)
http://www.futurewashington.com
FIRST HEROES (TOR, May '04)
http://members.aol.com/wenamun/firstheroes.html
Dr Hermes
Re: hero right on the boundary of the possible
Group: rec.arts.sf.written Date: Wed, Aug 23, 2006, 1:46am (EDT+4) From:
clo...@erols.com (lclough)
Brenda wrote:
>Or Modesty Blaise.
Yes, I think you nailed it. Modesty (and Willie) are perfect examples of
characters right on the upper limits. They have a variety of useful
skills and colorful hobbies, but because they are retired criminals with
plenty of money and free time, it's believable that they can develop
themselves that way. They are much better examples than Doc (who has
been known to run up a flight a stairs with a grown man under each arm,
that sort of thing).
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Actually I think Modesty & Willie go over the edge sometimes with mystic
Eastern stuff, at least in the novels. I don't have it to hand right now
but I recall an incident where they were drugged on a ship when the way
the got out of it was not really (imho) possible. Certainly in their
universe dowsing really works, and Niles Pennyfeather has mystic healing
powers of which he is totally unaware.
Ted
David Mitchell
...
> My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> seriously injured on a few occasions.)
Yep; legend has it that he's broken almost every bone in his body.
At least once.
Still brilliant though.
--
=======================================================================
= David --- No, not that one.
= Mitchell ---
=======================================================================
Robert A. Woodward
<1156286680.6...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
johan....@comcast.net wrote:
In the version I read of "A Witch Shall be Born", Conan had help
(some people came by, and after some discussion, they chopped the
cross down and pulled the spikes in his wrists - Conan then grabbed
the pliers and finished the job).
--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw>
Aaron Denney
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> writes:
>>
>> Or he might've been a journalist, or writer of some other sort; that's
>> what Kent does now, after all, and he's apparently good at it quite
>> aside from the superpowers.
>
> His mother was a librarian, and Kryptonians seem to have the "family
> is destiny" thing much more strongly than Terran H.Saps do.
Than modern day humans in the particular U.S. subcultures, you mean.
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
johan....@comcast.net
David Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:03:57 +0000, Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> > merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> > movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> > industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> > seriously injured on a few occasions.)
>
> Yep; legend has it that he's broken almost every bone in his body.
> At least once.
I'm sceptical. Given his line of work, I don't doubt he has had more
than his share of fractures. He may well have cracked all 24 ribs, and
I suppose I could believe he has broken all three bones in each of his
limbs (24 more). Throw in his clavicles, and that's an even 50.
But that's still well short of 206, and many of the rest, such as the
vertebra and wrist bones should be really hard to break. They are
short, squat little bones in places where it's hard to get the leverage
needed to break them.
Johan Larson
(Interestingly, the hands and feet, including the wrists and ankles,
together contain more than half the bones in the human body: 108 out of
206.)
johan....@comcast.net
johan....@comcast.net wrote:
> David Mitchell wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:03:57 +0000, Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> > > merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> > > movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> > > industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> > > seriously injured on a few occasions.)
> >
> > Yep; legend has it that he's broken almost every bone in his body.
> > At least once.
>
> I'm sceptical. Given his line of work, I don't doubt he has had more
> than his share of fractures. He may well have cracked all 24 ribs, and
> I suppose I could believe he has broken all three bones in each of his
> limbs (24 more). Throw in his clavicles, and that's an even 50.
Gaah. Make those numbers 24, 12, and 38. Need coffee.
David Mitchell
>
> David Mitchell wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:03:57 +0000, Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
>> > merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
>> > movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
>> > industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
>> > seriously injured on a few occasions.)
>>
>> Yep; legend has it that he's broken almost every bone in his body.
>> At least once.
>
> I'm sceptical.
So you should be: further research says
"he has broken his nose three times, his ankle once, most of the fingers
in his hand, both cheekbones, and his skull."
Although the great and mighty wiki says that:
"He has also broken his left ankle so many times, he can no longer rely on
it while pushing for a jump and must use his right foot instead"
Robert Sneddon
johan....@comcast.net writes
>
>David Mitchell wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:03:57 +0000, Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
>> > merely very dangerous
>>
>> At least once.
>But that's still well short of 206, and many of the rest, such as the
>vertebra and wrist bones should be really hard to break.
There's also those teeny little bones in the inner ear. Breaking them
must have been really difficult.
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
Dr Hermes
Re: hero right on the boundary of the possible
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
>Actually I think Modesty & Willie go over the edge sometimes with
mystic Eastern stuff
Hmmm, yeah I had forgotten some of those paranormal things going on in
the books. It's been many years but I think it was in I, LUCIFER that
Modesty was fighting a guy with split-second precognition. Just before
she threw a punch or kick, he knew it and was already in position to
dodge or block. It was a very cool scene but it does goes beyond
everyday reality.
And Doc Savage did kill a polar bear with his bare hands in an early
story when he was shown at his peak. That's going way beyond realistic
human ability in my opinion, too.
Okay, how about Cabot Cain from the series of mid-1970s books by Alain
Caillou (if I'm remembering the author right)? He was a six foot seven
freelance agent for Interpol with a wide range of expertise but I recall
him as being just within the realm of the possible.
Mike Schilling
>
> There's also those teeny little bones in the inner ear. Breaking them
> must have been really difficult.
Eh?
John H
"David Mitchell" <da...@edenroad.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.08.23....@edenroad.demon.co.uk...
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:38:20 -0700, johan.larson wrote:
>
>>
>> David Mitchell wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:03:57 +0000, Michael S. Schiffer wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> > My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
>>> > merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
>>> > movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
>>> > industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
>>> > seriously injured on a few occasions.)
>>>
>>> Yep; legend has it that he's broken almost every bone in his body.
>>> At least once.
>>
>> I'm sceptical.
>
> So you should be: further research says
> "he has broken his nose three times, his ankle once, most of the fingers
> in his hand, both cheekbones, and his skull."
>
> Although the great and mighty wiki says that:
> "He has also broken his left ankle so many times, he can no longer rely on
> it while pushing for a jump and must use his right foot instead"
Don't forget his knees. He has no cartilage or something there, so the
bones in his knees are rubbing against each other. That's why he waddles
when he runs.
http://www.randomhouse.com/features/iamjackiechan/excerpt_aches.html
john
J Moreno
> Ted Nolan wrote:
>
> > Actually I think Modesty & Willie go over the edge sometimes with mystic
> > Eastern stuff
>
> Hmmm, yeah I had forgotten some of those paranormal things going on in
> the books. It's been many years but I think it was in I, LUCIFER that
> Modesty was fighting a guy with split-second precognition.
He can see further than that, just not as reliably.
> Just before she threw a punch or kick, he knew it and was already in
> position to dodge or block. It was a very cool scene but it does goes
> beyond everyday reality.
I don't think the universe the hero is in has to be entirely possible to
meet the OP's requirement. And it's not Modesty being psychic there,
and in a later fight she kicks his ass, since he doesn't know how to
fight at all.
Of course while Modesty might qualify, Willie definitely doesn't (his
ears tingle when there's something dangerous about to happen).
On a slightly different note, you snipped a comment where Modesty is
supposed to have done something impossible, but the previous poster (Ted
Nolan), didn't really say /what/ it was that was impossible...
--
JM
"Everything is futile." -- Marvin of Borg
Michael Hellwig
> : Mark Atwood <m...@mark.atwood.name>
> : There is another character that is just barely in the realm of the
> : humanly possible. Any one of Jackie Chan's roles. I don't recall him
> : ever doing any impossible mystical chi-driven moves in his movies, but
> : then, I havn't seen all of his early Hong Kong movies.
>
> "Drunken Master", for example.
>
> Jet Li very often does rilly-rilly impossible stuff,
> but I was fond of "Kiss of the Dragon". Of course... I'm sure
> some of the sequences there are impossible, including the
> move in the title, but it mostly skirts the edge. Actually,
> physically performing it isn't the problem, it's the efficacy
> of the acupuncture that's the credulity-buster there.
>
let's not forget the third guy, Sammo Hung. Plus of course Michelle
Yeoh, who is equally badass to the three.
> There's also Frank Martin (from "The Transporter", Jason Stratham).
> A flawed movie, in several regards, but interesting, and especially
> (I thought, inexpertly) the fight choreography. I was especially
> fond of the grease fight in bike pedals half way through. Heh.
>
Jason Statham, IIRC. Transporter 2 was worse in many ways, but still
funny to watch.
--
Michael Hellwig aka The Eye olymp.idle.at admin
to contact me via email, use michael...@uni-ulm.de
don't hesitate to look at http://laerm.or.at
Mark Atwood
>
> Hmmm, yeah I had forgotten some of those paranormal things going on in
> the books. It's been many years but I think it was in I, LUCIFER that
> Modesty was fighting a guy with split-second precognition. Just before
> she threw a punch or kick, he knew it and was already in position to
> dodge or block.
So basically she was fighting Spider-Man or a Jedi.
Phillip Thorne
>Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the very
>boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
>it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
Oliver "Green Arrow" Queen, from DC Comics, and one of the major JLU
members in the "Justice League Unlimited" toon. I'm working mostly
from the toon here, not the comics, because I've only read the one
adventure in the _Across the Universe_ collection of Alan Moore-penned
stories.
He was born human. He doesn't execute impossible acrobatics, like
Batman, or "Teen Titans" Robin. He has no eyebrow-quirking powers,
like Black Canary's sonic scream. (Thus, he may not even be
"metahuman" by DC's definition.) His only special talent is
unerringly precise markmanship in archery, including multiple
ricochets. (Like Batman's utility belt, his quiver contains a wide
variety of technological aids to his skill.)
The same limits probably apply to Speedy, his one-time sidekick. (He
appeared several times in "Teen Titans" and once in "JLU.")
(Notice how we keep gravitating to comic-book characters, here? I
suppose that counts as "written." :)
/- Phillip Thorne ----------- The Non-Sequitur Express --------------------\
| org underbase ta thorne www.underbase.org It's the boundary |
| net comcast ta pethorne site, newsletter, blog conditions that |
\------------------------------------------------------- get you ----------/
Taki Kogoma
allegedly declared to rec.arts.sf.written...
>Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the very
>boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
>it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
>
>James Bond, at least in a few of his pictures?
ISTM that Xena is clearly "Just on the other side" of the line; her
abilities seem "just a little more than possible for mere mortals" for
the most part.
(Modula returning from the dead, and the funky Chi powers that
manifest once every 3 seasons or so.)
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Well, the returning from the dead thing didn't work so well the last time!
(OK, granted it was her choice..). Normally just on the other side,
but working at higher levels from time to time. (The power to kill gods
thing, the powers she learned from Loa Ma, the mystic Amazon out of body
thing, the power grant from Krishna and possibly being Ares daughter..)
Ted
Wayne Throop
:: (I thought, inexpertly) the fight choreography. I was especially
:: fond of the grease fight in bike pedals half way through. Heh.
: Michael Hellwig <michael...@uni-ulm.de>
: Jason Statham, IIRC.
I knew that. BAD typing fingers, BAD.
: Transporter 2 was worse in many ways, but still funny to watch.
True. They took all the flaws, and made them flawier. Tsk, tsk.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Michael Hellwig
flaws? FLAWS? you dare proclaim the first one had FLAWS? elaborate,
please! (yeah, I know, there were a lot of things about it that were
stupid. But that's what made it funny, apart from it being what I
consider a "true action movie" ... was it on Transporter or Taxi, where
the tagline said "Hollywood certainly doesn't make 'em like this any
more"?)
Wayne Throop
:: True. They took all the flaws, and made them flawier. Tsk, tsk.
: Michael Hellwig <michael...@uni-ulm.de>
: flaws? FLAWS? you dare proclaim the first one had FLAWS? elaborate,
: please! (yeah, I know, there were a lot of things about it that were
: stupid. But that's what made it funny, apart from it being what I
: consider a "true action movie" ... was it on Transporter or Taxi,
: where the tagline said "Hollywood certainly doesn't make 'em like this
: any more"?)
Well, in the context of "boundary of the possible", I was thinking
of some of the driving stunts, and some of the crawling-around-on-the-
outside-of-a-truck (and doing gymnastics in through the front window)
stunts. And the rocket trajectories and related flight times and
behaviors when they blowed up his house real good.
Now... whether these are cinematic or storytelling flaws is debatable,
but they sure jarred me a bit out of my immersion. Since the rest
was so nifty, they stood out by contrast. In the second one, this
effect was much more distinctly pronounced.
Anyhows, IMO they could have maintained their ... what to call it...
relatively conservative stuntography, been a bit more consistent,
and still made it funny/actionadventurey/whatnoty. Or is that whatnaugty?
David McMillan
> Dr Hermes <drhe...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>
>> Ted Nolan wrote:
>>
>>> Actually I think Modesty & Willie go over the edge sometimes with mystic
>>> Eastern stuff
>> Hmmm, yeah I had forgotten some of those paranormal things going on in
>> the books. It's been many years but I think it was in I, LUCIFER that
>> Modesty was fighting a guy with split-second precognition.
>
> He can see further than that, just not as reliably.
>
>> Just before she threw a punch or kick, he knew it and was already in
>> position to dodge or block. It was a very cool scene but it does goes
>> beyond everyday reality.
Oddly apropos, I just finished watching my Tivo of National Geographic
Channel's "Fight Science," where specialists who do automotive crash
testing were hired to bring their dummies and help test out various
martial arts and artists. One of the tests they rigged up was for
reaction time, and found that the test subject (an international Tae
Kwon Do champ) had reaction times less than half that of a 'civilian' --
he seemed to have a direct connection from his eyeballs to his hands.
This was presented as probably part of the explanation for the legends
of martial arts masters who seemed to precog their enemy's attacks --
they were reading and reacting to their opponent's body language faster
than said enemy could move.
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
<p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Captain America, now there's a superhero who's right on the
>boundary of human potential in both strength and agility whose
>origin helps make it at least slightly feasible.
In his physical attributes, maybe.
In his ability to throw a large discus accurately, not a chance.
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
>
>I'm sceptical. Given his line of work, I don't doubt he has had more
>than his share of fractures. He may well have cracked all 24 ribs, and
>I suppose I could believe he has broken all three bones in each of his
>limbs (24 more). Throw in his clavicles, and that's an even 50.
IIRC, he had a fractured skull and subsequent brain surgery during the
filming of "Armor of God I".
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
<msch...@condor.depaul.edu> wrote:
>that contradiction lies square at the heart of the
>superhero concept, and has since Superman became a poster boy for
>honesty while lying barefaced to his friends and romantic interests.
See http://superdickery.com/dick/1.html and subsequent for some great
examples.
lclough
>
> On a slightly different note, you snipped a comment where Modesty is
> supposed to have done something impossible, but the previous poster (Ted
> Nolan), didn't really say /what/ it was that was impossible...
>
Oh, I think I recall. The statement is made in NIGHT OF THE
MORNINGSTAR that Modesty has amazing muscle control. (As a
structural note, O'Donnell always works it so that Modesty
demonstrates a superb talent in a minor or casual way early on,
before having to use it at the moment of crisis later on in the
book. Very rarely, as with the blowgun, it is a flashback.)
She is able to make it look as if there is a mouse running
around her body, under her skin, presumably by tightening
selected muscle groups.
Of course you know this is going to come in real handy later on,
and sure enough the villains inject both Modesty and Willie with
an intramuscular soporific. By using muscle control she is able
to squeeze out a portion of the injection, thus shortening the
time she is unconscious and allowing her to pull a fast one on
the villains.
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
Recent short fiction:
FUTURE WASHINGTON (WSFA Press, October '05)
http://www.futurewashington.com
FIRST HEROES (TOR, May '04)
http://members.aol.com/wenamun/firstheroes.html
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
>
>
>J Moreno wrote:
>
>>
>> On a slightly different note, you snipped a comment where Modesty is
>> supposed to have done something impossible, but the previous poster (Ted
>> Nolan), didn't really say /what/ it was that was impossible...
>>
>
>
>Oh, I think I recall. The statement is made in NIGHT OF THE
>MORNINGSTAR that Modesty has amazing muscle control. (As a
>structural note, O'Donnell always works it so that Modesty
>demonstrates a superb talent in a minor or casual way early on,
>before having to use it at the moment of crisis later on in the
>book. Very rarely, as with the blowgun, it is a flashback.)
>She is able to make it look as if there is a mouse running
>around her body, under her skin, presumably by tightening
>selected muscle groups.
>
>Of course you know this is going to come in real handy later on,
>and sure enough the villains inject both Modesty and Willie with
>an intramuscular soporific. By using muscle control she is able
>to squeeze out a portion of the injection, thus shortening the
>time she is unconscious and allowing her to pull a fast one on
>the villains.
>
>
Yes, that's it. I couldn't remember it well enough to explain it in
my post. I know some people can learn to do amazing things with even
autonomic muscles with bio-feedback and practice, but I really
don't think what Modesty does is possible. Great books though.
There was a "recent" MB film, "My Name is Modesty" that sneaked out
just before the company lost the rights, I think. Low budget and
a prequel, so no Willy, but pretty decent. Titan seems to be
reprinting a lot of the strip run, and I see in Previews that the
novels and story collections are starting to come back into print
as well.
Ted
Peter Meilinger
What, like throwing his shield so it bounces off of the heads
of three bad guys, intercepts an energy blast, then ricochets
off of three flat surfaces, and then catching it without even
looking? How hard could that possibly be? Plus, the shield
is a weird, unique alloy that can resist a nuclear explosion.
For all we know, it's also intelligent and self-guiding. Or
there could be a little alien guy inside of it, flying it via
telekinesis or something. Perfectly realistic.
Pete
Michael S. Schiffer
news:3sfre2tmnrvl080oo...@4ax.com:
> On 21 Aug 2006, johan....@comcast.net challenged:
>>Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the
>>very boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like
>>this* and it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's
>>real.
> Oliver "Green Arrow" Queen, from DC Comics, and one of the major
> JLU members in the "Justice League Unlimited" toon. I'm working
> mostly from the toon here, not the comics, because I've only
> read the one adventure in the _Across the Universe_ collection
> of Alan Moore-penned stories.
> He was born human. He doesn't execute impossible acrobatics,
> like Batman, or "Teen Titans" Robin. He has no eyebrow-quirking
> powers, like Black Canary's sonic scream.
Even in the cartoon, he's capable of shooting a boxing-glove arrow
(and other nonaerodynamic, point-heavy arrow-mounted devices)
straight, across long distances from a longbow-- that's less
possible than a lot of bat-acrobatics.
(In the 90's, his son-- a more conservative Zen archer, and perhaps
a better candidate for this thread-- found himself in a fight in the
JLA's moonbase, with no weapons to hand but their collection of his
dad's old equipment: "You'd have to be a genius to use this stuff.
Or a madman. Net arrows! *Boxing glove* arrows! How about just
One! Pointed! Arrow! Dad!")
(Thus, he may not
> even be "metahuman" by DC's definition.) His only special
> talent is unerringly precise markmanship in archery, including
> multiple ricochets.
Being able to do that last anything like repeatedly with arrows
strikes me on the far side of possible.
(Like Batman's utility belt, his quiver
> contains a wide variety of technological aids to his skill.)
And as with Batman's utility belt, any specialized device he might
need (including several that are physically or technologically
impossible) is ready to hand in his quiver, without regard to the
fact that he should only be able to carry a limited number of them.
(Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
like the real thing.)
Mike
--
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS
msch...@condor.depaul.edu
Peter Meilinger
> Phillip Thorne <tho...@underbase.org> wrote in
> news:3sfre2tmnrvl080oo...@4ax.com:
> (Like Batman's utility belt, his quiver
> > contains a wide variety of technological aids to his skill.)
>
> And as with Batman's utility belt, any specialized device he might
> need (including several that are physically or technologically
> impossible) is ready to hand in his quiver, without regard to the
> fact that he should only be able to carry a limited number of them.
I like the way various superhero RPGs deal with this idea.
You can buy/build gadgets that your character carries with
him all the time, like a Batarang or a Net Arrow, either
signature stuff or things that get used an awful lot. A
lot of games also allow you to buy an undefined gadget,
though, which doesn't really exist until you decide what
it is. The old DC Heroes game called them Gizmos, I
think. In Champions, you can do this with a properly
designed Variable Power Pool. It generally costs more
than just buying a specific gadget would, but it gives you
tons more flexibility. And that's why when Batman is
hanging off a rope ladder with a rubber shark attached
to his foot, he can reach down to his belt and pull out
his Bat Shark Repellent.
Damn but I loved that movie.
> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
> like the real thing.)
That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
that's really saying something.
The dumbest arrow thingy I remember seeing is the Balloon
Arrow, which could be twisted into any shape and then
fired. It was used so some nosy reporter-girlfriend-whatever
type could see Oliver Queen while at the same time
seeing the Arrow-Plane flying away, so obviously Queen
is not the Green Arrow. What she actually saw was
an Arrow-Plane shaped Balloon Arrow shot by Speedy
so it passed by the Moon and appeared to be the
real Arrow-Plane.
Pete
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>> like the real thing.)
>
>That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>that's really saying something.
>
I think Green Lantern's "infra-yellow" still tops that..
Ted
James Nicoll
Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>> like the real thing.)
>
>That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>that's really saying something.
As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
only used in the direst emergency.
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Daniel Silevitch
> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>>> like the real thing.)
>>
>>That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>>that's really saying something.
>
>
> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
> only used in the direst emergency.
How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance compare
with the blast radius?
-dms
lclough
Obviously one of those Pyrrhic things. There's a reason why he
never used it. And, given that he knows he will never use it,
it is probably not a real nuke. Surely it would not be healthy
to carry such a thing in a quiver on your back for any length of
time.
Brenda
Mike Schilling
"Daniel Silevitch" <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:slrnef0n31....@nsit-dhcp-035-136.uchicago.edu...
There's a *reason* he reserved it for the d.-est. e.
James Nicoll
>Daniel Silevitch wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:10:42 +0000 (UTC), James Nicoll
><jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>>>Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>(Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>>>>>This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>>>>>people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>>>>>fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>>>>>like the real thing.)
>>>>
>>>>That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>>>>that's really saying something.
>>>
>>>
>>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>>>only used in the direst emergency.
>>
>>
>> How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance compare
>> with the blast radius?
>>
>> -dms
>
>
>Obviously one of those Pyrrhic things. There's a reason why he
>never used it. And, given that he knows he will never use it,
>it is probably not a real nuke. Surely it would not be healthy
>to carry such a thing in a quiver on your back for any length of
>time.
>
proved to be ineffective against that particular target.
Ah, I see Absorbacon has commented on it with their
traditional light touch.
http://absorbascon.blogspot.com/2005/08/in-silver-age.html
James Nicoll
About as far as any arrow and I would guess his reluctance to
use it may have been related to the blast radius. As it turned out, the
one time he got to use it, the target ate the arrow.
James Nicoll
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <slrnef0n31....@nsit-dhcp-035-136.uchicago.edu>,
>Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:10:42 +0000 (UTC), James Nicoll
>><jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>>>>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>>>>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>>>>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>>>>> like the real thing.)
>>>>
>>>>That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>>>>that's really saying something.
>>>
>>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>>> only used in the direst emergency.
>>
>>How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance compare
>>with the blast radius?
>
> About as far as any arrow and I would guess his reluctance to
>use it may have been related to the blast radius. As it turned out, the
>one time he got to use it, the target ate the arrow.
I'm reading the ELONGATED MAN collection and I have to say that
I am utterly charmed by how the writers feel the need to explain stuff
but absolutely no need for those explanations to make any sense.
It also raised an issue I've occasionally wondered about, which
is where the durable supers whose powers do not confer invulnerablity
on their clothes and who don't happen to be affiliated with someone like
Reed Richards or Edna Mode get their costumes. I mean, it'd be darned
embarrassing for Cannonfodder* to get his clothes burned off by the
Molten Monk because Cannonfodder can only afford Levis and a T-Shirt.
The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
I may buy him skill with posing in an artfully torn shirt.
I bet Clark Savage, Jr. could give him pointers...
* I'm stuck for a better name for my brick. I was toying with Manslaughter
because he's trying to be better than his parents, who were metahuman spree
killers, and manslaughter _is_ better than murder, but I don't think he's
quite that dim about PR. The name might have been slapped on him by the
press, though. "Can't catch a break from the press" has to be worth some
points.
** This is not reflected in his stats. The costume is just a special effect,
not anything like armour.
Peter Meilinger
> It also raised an issue I've occasionally wondered about, which
> is where the durable supers whose powers do not confer invulnerablity
> on their clothes and who don't happen to be affiliated with someone like
> Reed Richards or Edna Mode get their costumes. I mean, it'd be darned
> embarrassing for Cannonfodder* to get his clothes burned off by the
> Molten Monk because Cannonfodder can only afford Levis and a T-Shirt.
One of the little-known advantages of getting your book approved by
the Comics Code Authority is that they'll provide you with a costume
guaranteed to protect your modesty, free of charge. Or, if you prefer,
they'll provide you with an Emergency Scenery Generator, so if you
ever do end up nude "on-camera" your naughty bits will be blocked
by a wisp of smoke or tree branch or some such. Truly, the CCA
are unsung heroes.
I was going to write twig instead of branch, but I remembered
Burt Reynolds' centerfold in Cosmo back in the 70's. I think
it was Johnny Carson who described it and said that Burt's
hand was concealing his naughty bits. To which Burt replied,
"My forearm! It was my forearm!"
> The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
> that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
> to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
The rest of the costume didn't survive? Or was it sold off piece-meal?
Someone out there has an invulnerable shirt, another guy has the
cape, and one guy bought a pair of invulnerable socks that he's
not sure what to do with, but he knows he got a great deal.
> I may buy him skill with posing in an artfully torn shirt.
I remember buying skill in Mosey for Jonah Hex in a GURPS
Weird West game. Also skill in spitting tobacco, but that
came in handy in close combat on several occasions.
> I bet Clark Savage, Jr. could give him pointers...
If he has a mask, too, I'd ask Spider-Man how to manage to
get it artistically shredded while still barely maintaining your
secret ID.
> * I'm stuck for a better name for my brick. I was toying with Manslaughter
> because he's trying to be better than his parents, who were metahuman spree
> killers, and manslaughter _is_ better than murder, but I don't think he's
> quite that dim about PR.
"It's Man's Laughter, dammit! Two words!"
Sorry.
> The name might have been slapped on him by the
> press, though. "Can't catch a break from the press" has to be worth some
> points.
Either a non-deadly enemy or a bad reputation with those who read
and believe the papers in question are the first things to come to
mind.
> ** This is not reflected in his stats. The costume is just a special effect,
> not anything like armour.
I think you should buy it as armor. You can get it cheap with
activation
limitations to simulate it not covering the whole body, and throw in
Independent too to make it really cheap. That allows for situations
like "We have to protect the Prime Minister's daughter during this
attack! Manslaughter! Take off your pants!"
Pete
James Nicoll
Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>James Nicoll wrote:
>
>> The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
>> that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
>> to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
>
>The rest of the costume didn't survive? Or was it sold off piece-meal?
Piece-meal, because it's funnier and because this character was
inspired by my explanation as why the Superman in JLAnimate fights the
way he does*, and parcelling out bits of a dead hero's stuff could be
a reference to a 1960s story where crooks buy organs from a dead Superman.
Probably should throw in a Hunted, to represent the guy who is
trying to buy or acquire the entire suit.
* Fairly routinely, the JL Superman starts off a fight getting bounced
around by machine gun bullets and ends it bouncing much larger attacks.
My explanation is that he absorbs all the energy people fire at him,
putting into defenses and strength.
This guy is the child of a brick (stong, hard to hurt, like the
classic Golden Age Superman) and a heat-vampire (like Killer Frost). Fire
any sort of attack at him that involves the transfer of energy into him
and he absorbs it, then uses it himself. He could probably do a lot more
if he experimented but while he isn't stupid, he's never been taught to
think. In fact, at the Metahuman Orphanage, they really try to discourage
their charges from experimenting with their abilities. Insurance, you
know.
>Someone out there has an invulnerable shirt, another guy has the
>cape, and one guy bought a pair of invulnerable socks that he's
>not sure what to do with, but he knows he got a great deal.
>
>> I may buy him skill with posing in an artfully torn shirt.
>
>I remember buying skill in Mosey for Jonah Hex in a GURPS
>Weird West game. Also skill in spitting tobacco, but that
>came in handy in close combat on several occasions.
>
>> I bet Clark Savage, Jr. could give him pointers...
>
>If he has a mask, too, I'd ask Spider-Man how to manage to
>get it artistically shredded while still barely maintaining your
>secret ID.
I've never been a big one for secret IDs and anyway, part of
the brick's problems is that he is a dead ringer for his dad, the most
notorious spree killer of the last 50 years (along with his wife). If
he wears a mask, you lose the fun of him jumping into a situation to
save the day, only to have both sides open up on him.
>> ** This is not reflected in his stats. The costume is just a special effect,
>> not anything like armour.
>
>I think you should buy it as armor. You can get it cheap with
>activation limitations to simulate it not covering the whole body,
>and throw in Independent too to make it really cheap. That allows for
>situations like "We have to protect the Prime Minister's daughter
>during this attack! Manslaughter! Take off your pants!"
>
This is amusing enough to seriously consider.
Del Cotter
lclough <clo...@erols.com> said:
>Daniel Silevitch wrote:
>>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he only
>>>used in the direst emergency.
>> How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance
>>compare with the blast radius?
>
>Obviously one of those Pyrrhic things. There's a reason why he never
>used it. And, given that he knows he will never use it, it is probably
>not a real nuke. Surely it would not be healthy to carry such a thing
>in a quiver on your back for any length of time.
"You know, it just occurred to me, we haven't had a completely
successful test of this equipment. "
"Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on
his back."
--
Del Cotter
NB Personal replies to this post will send email to d...@branta.demon.co.uk,
which goes to a spam folder-- please send your email to del3 instead.
lclough
> James Nicoll wrote:
>
>
>> It also raised an issue I've occasionally wondered about, which
>>is where the durable supers whose powers do not confer invulnerablity
>>on their clothes and who don't happen to be affiliated with someone like
>>Reed Richards or Edna Mode get their costumes. I mean, it'd be darned
>>embarrassing for Cannonfodder* to get his clothes burned off by the
>>Molten Monk because Cannonfodder can only afford Levis and a T-Shirt.
>
>
> One of the little-known advantages of getting your book approved by
> the Comics Code Authority is that they'll provide you with a costume
> guaranteed to protect your modesty, free of charge.
>
>
It's cheaper to have your characters participate in a White
House initiative. The Teen Titans did a gig with an anti-drug
PR effort in their Wolfman/Perez heyday, and Starfire, famous
for the cleavage that goes all the way down to her navel, was
supplied with a dickey.
Mark Atwood
>
> The Teen Titans did a gig with an anti-drug PR effort in
> their Wolfman/Perez heyday, and Starfire, famous for the cleavage that
> goes all the way down to her navel, was supplied with a dickey.
The WB tv version of Starfire was way way hotter than the Perez one, IMO.
Both in attitude and in appearance.
--
Mark Atwood When you do things right, people won't be sure
m...@mark.atwood.name you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/ http://fallenpegasus.livejournal.com/
Michael S. Schiffer
news:%mQHg.21401$T8.1...@bignews3.bellsouth.net:
I'd also nominate the Firestorm issue which had a caption to the
effect of: "Absolute zero is as cold as things can get on Earth.
But Earth is a small, puny planet, and elsewhere things can get
much colder."
Mike
Harry Erwin
> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
> >> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
> >> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
> >> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
> >> like the real thing.)
> >
> >That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
> >that's really saying something.
>
>
> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
> only used in the direst emergency.
Reminds me of the Davy Crockett nuclear mortar, which had a maximum
range less than the blast radius of its warhead. The other problem with
mortars is that they're unstabilized, so that when the round reaches the
peak of its trajectory, it makes like a knuckleball. Sometimes it comes
down in the most unlikely of places.
--
Harry Erwin <http://www.theworld.com/~herwin>
My neuroscience wikiwiki is at
<http://scat-he-g4.sunderland.ac.uk/~harryerw/phpwiki/index.php>
Peter Meilinger
> In article <1156615359.3...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >James Nicoll wrote:
> >
> >> The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
> >> that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
> >> to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
> >
> >The rest of the costume didn't survive? Or was it sold off piece-meal?
>
> Piece-meal, because it's funnier and because this character was
> inspired by my explanation as why the Superman in JLAnimate fights the
> way he does*, and parcelling out bits of a dead hero's stuff could be
> a reference to a 1960s story where crooks buy organs from a dead Superman.
The crooks in the 60's had access to so much more than they do
today. I mean, they could buy kryptonite down at the local five
and dime, and now I learn they could buy Superman's organs, too?
Yeesh.
> Probably should throw in a Hunted, to represent the guy who is
> trying to buy or acquire the entire suit.
How capable is this guy, and to what lengths is he willing to go?
Could be just a quirk level annoyance.
> * Fairly routinely, the JL Superman starts off a fight getting bounced
> around by machine gun bullets and ends it bouncing much larger attacks.
> My explanation is that he absorbs all the energy people fire at him,
> putting into defenses and strength.
Makes as much sense as anything else. Or maybe he likes the
way bullets feel when they impact his skin, so he just relaxes and
goes with the flow.
> This guy is the child of a brick (stong, hard to hurt, like the
> classic Golden Age Superman) and a heat-vampire (like Killer Frost). Fire
> any sort of attack at him that involves the transfer of energy into him
> and he absorbs it, then uses it himself. He could probably do a lot more
> if he experimented but while he isn't stupid, he's never been taught to
> think. In fact, at the Metahuman Orphanage, they really try to discourage
> their charges from experimenting with their abilities. Insurance, you
> know.
I hope the staff is extremely well paid.
> >If he has a mask, too, I'd ask Spider-Man how to manage to
> >get it artistically shredded while still barely maintaining your
> >secret ID.
>
> I've never been a big one for secret IDs and anyway, part of
> the brick's problems is that he is a dead ringer for his dad, the most
> notorious spree killer of the last 50 years (along with his wife). If
> he wears a mask, you lose the fun of him jumping into a situation to
> save the day, only to have both sides open up on him.
Wouldn't he think to wear a mask eventually, though? Or have it
pointed out to him? Of course, he could just be stubborn.
> >> ** This is not reflected in his stats. The costume is just a special effect,
> >> not anything like armour.
> >
> >I think you should buy it as armor. You can get it cheap with
> >activation limitations to simulate it not covering the whole body,
> >and throw in Independent too to make it really cheap. That allows for
> >situations like "We have to protect the Prime Minister's daughter
> >during this attack! Manslaughter! Take off your pants!"
> >
> This is amusing enough to seriously consider.
If you do it without the Independent limitation, you can probably get
it past the GM without any alarms going off, so you can achieve total
surprise when your first action in combat is to disrobe.
I'm trying to think of a way to make the pants protect non-supers
more than your character. The way Superman could wrap his
cape around someone to protect them, but it never seemed to
add all that much protection to him. With pre-Crisis Supes, the
answer is that adding really powerful armor to someone who's
already invulnerable doesn't mean much. For a more fragile
and less ridiculous character like your brick, I can't really think
of a way to make the pants basically be a special effect for
your character but provide real, useful protection when used
by others. But hey, if they end up providing your brick with real
benefits, that's not the end of the world.
Pete
Pete
James Nicoll
Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
(re Metahuman Orphanage)
>I hope the staff is extremely well paid.
Is that generally the case for people who work at orphanages?
A BOTEC suggests to me that if they focus on kids with actual
powers, they are only talking maybe a dozen or two for the whole USA
so it could be a federally run institution with an unusually well
focused budget. Hey, that would make it a nice prize to bribe important
states with!
>I'm trying to think of a way to make the pants protect non-supers
>more than your character. The way Superman could wrap his
>cape around someone to protect them, but it never seemed to
>add all that much protection to him. With pre-Crisis Supes, the
>answer is that adding really powerful armor to someone who's
>already invulnerable doesn't mean much. For a more fragile
>and less ridiculous character like your brick, I can't really think
>of a way to make the pants basically be a special effect for
>your character but provide real, useful protection when used
>by others. But hey, if they end up providing your brick with real
>benefits, that's not the end of the world.
In Champions, it's trivial: buy the armour with the limitation
that they confer no benefits to that one specific character.
Daniel Silevitch
> James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1156615359.3...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >James Nicoll wrote:
>> >
>> >> The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
>> >> that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
>> >> to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
>> >
>> >The rest of the costume didn't survive? Or was it sold off piece-meal?
>>
>> Piece-meal, because it's funnier and because this character was
>> inspired by my explanation as why the Superman in JLAnimate fights the
>> way he does*, and parcelling out bits of a dead hero's stuff could be
>> a reference to a 1960s story where crooks buy organs from a dead Superman.
>
> The crooks in the 60's had access to so much more than they do
> today. I mean, they could buy kryptonite down at the local five
> and dime, and now I learn they could buy Superman's organs, too?
> Yeesh.
One word: EBay.
-dms
James Nicoll
enough that I would expect the DCU EBay to refuse to host sales of
Kryptonite* as well. In the DCU, this would lead some enterprising
criminal to set up EvilBay, but such a thing, an electronic market
for illicit goods, is so obviously a profitable idea that it should
exist in the real world as well.
* In the Smallvilleverse, Kryptonite also gives humans superpowers,
so I would imagine it will as closely controlled as U 235 is, as
soon as someone reveals to the public what meteor rocks do.
Robert Sneddon
<jdni...@panix.com> writes
>In article <slrnef3rv1....@bardeen.local>,
>Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>>On 27 Aug 2006 11:56:46 -0700, Peter Meilinger
>><p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> The crooks in the 60's had access to so much more than they do
>>> today.
>>
>>One word: EBay.
>>
> I would expect the DCU EBay to refuse to host sales of
>Kryptonite* as well. In the DCU, this would lead some enterprising
>criminal to set up EvilBay,
The old villainsupply.com is no longer functioning as it used to,
offering cut-price deals on Skull Islands, Lunar bases, orbital lasers
etc. Maybe they got their Paypal account suspended.
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
lclough
In the DCU, this would lead some enterprising
> criminal to set up EvilBay, but such a thing, an electronic market
> for illicit goods, is so obviously a profitable idea that it should
> exist in the real world as well.
>
It is also an obvious site for law enforcement, terrorist
hunters, and super types to keep bookmarked. ("Dang! More
hypervirus ampoules on offer, again! Did someone find another
of Luthor's stashes, or -- wait, it's that faker again. I'll
just let Monsieur Mallah and the Brotherhood of Evil buy a dozen
ampoules and then gut him like a trout, when they find out that
they're filled with pond water.")
Robert Sneddon
<her...@theworld.com> writes
>Reminds me of the Davy Crockett nuclear mortar, which had a maximum
>range less than the blast radius of its warhead.
The Davy Crockett was a rocket fired from a recoilless rifle, not a
mortar. Its range (a bit over two miles) comfortably exceeded its blast
radius as it was a very small nuke, about 20 tonnes yield (equivalent to
a truckload of explosives or the bombload of a couple of WWII heavy
bombers).
John F. Eldredge
>James Nicoll wrote:
>
> In the DCU, this would lead some enterprising
>> criminal to set up EvilBay, but such a thing, an electronic market
>> for illicit goods, is so obviously a profitable idea that it should
>> exist in the real world as well.
>>
>
>
>It is also an obvious site for law enforcement, terrorist
>hunters, and super types to keep bookmarked. ("Dang! More
>hypervirus ampoules on offer, again! Did someone find another
>of Luthor's stashes, or -- wait, it's that faker again. I'll
>just let Monsieur Mallah and the Brotherhood of Evil buy a dozen
>ampoules and then gut him like a trout, when they find out that
>they're filled with pond water.")
That sounds like they are actually buying from Acme, the company that
sells Wile E. Coyote all his roadrunner-hunting equipment.
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
Sea Wasp
> johan....@comcast.net wrote:
>
>>Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the very
>>boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
>>it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
>>
>
>
> Hell, I'll make a case for Batman. But only one ability at a time.
> His strength might sorta-kinda be possible, and his agility might
> sorta-kinda be possible, but almost certainly not in the same person.
> I really liked the way Stephen King described Batman in an anniversary
> issue quite awhile back. An extremely rough paraphrase boils down to
> "He's an olympic gymnast who fights like Bruce Lee and drives like
> Richard Petty getting a pregnant woman to the hospital, but he's at
> least possible." Note that King was talking about how he felt when he
> was a kid reading the comics, and specifically comparing Batman to
> Superman. Given those factors, I have no problem agreeing with him.
> Otherwise, yeah, you have to squint real hard. Or maybe close your
> eyes and plug up your ears and do the "La-la-la-la!" routine.
>
> Captain America, now there's a superhero who's right on the
> boundary of human potential in both strength and agility whose
> origin helps make it at least slightly feasible. The Super Soldier
> Serum (*) presumably changed his muscles in such a way that
> he can be both ridiculously strong and ridiculously fast and agile.
> But in that sense he's over the line into superhuman, even though
> none of his abilities cross that line on their own.
>
> How about Conan? He's ridiculously strong and capable, but
> he went up against opponents strong enough to make it clear
> he had to work his ass off to survive. That makes him seem
> more human, unlike other uber-heroes who can breeze through
> the toughest of opponents.
>
> For an example of someone definitely over the line, there's
> Reacher, the Lord Of The Just and Sudden Reach, from
> Brian Daley's Coramonde books. He was definitely stronger
> and faster and tougher than any human could possibly be,
> but I don't care because he was cool, dammit.
>
Reacher kicks ass. The confrontation on the bridge where ONE MAN
stared down an entire army is indelibly engraved on my brain.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Sea Wasp
> My impression is that Jackie Chan's martial arts acrobatics are
> merely very dangerous when done under the controlled conditions of a
> movie shoot. (Somewhat controlled, anyway-- the Hong Kong film
> industry isn't exactly OSHA approved, and I believe Chan has been
> seriously injured on a few occasions.) This suggests to me that
> improvising them in uncontrolled environments, against
> unchoreographed opponents actually bent on doing him harm, would be
> impossible.
Jackie broke his back filming "Armor of God", IIRC. And in a
relatively few weeks went back to perform the same stunt again.
I have heard it said that he's broken every bone in his body that can
be broken by impacts.
Taki Kogoma
allegedly declared to rec.arts.sf.written...
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>> >> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>> >> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>> >> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>> >> like the real thing.)
>> >
>> >That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>> >that's really saying something.
>>
>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>> only used in the direst emergency.
>
>Reminds me of the Davy Crockett nuclear mortar, which had a maximum
>range less than the blast radius of its warhead. The other problem with
>mortars is that they're unstabilized, so that when the round reaches the
>peak of its trajectory, it makes like a knuckleball. Sometimes it comes
>down in the most unlikely of places.
Most modern mortar projectiles are fin-stabilized. The old US 4.2"
was actually rifled.
As for the Davy Crockett, the idea was to fire from a mortar pit with
a reinforced shelter near at hand.
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
Mike Schilling
"Sea Wasp" <seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
news:44F22E5B...@obvioussgeinc.com...
>
> Jackie broke his back filming "Armor of God", IIRC. And in a relatively
> few weeks went back to perform the same stunt again.
>
> I have heard it said that he's broken every bone in his body that can be
> broken by impacts.
I heard an interview with Michelle Yeoh [1] a while ago in which she
discussed a film she made in Honmg Kong including the stunt "jump a
motorcycle onto the roof of a moving train". Naturally, she did it herself,
since it's a matter of great pride there not to use stunt doubles. She
described her preparation, beginning with step 1: "Learn to ride a
motorcycle".
1. Rado interview, or I doubt anything she *said.* would have registered.
Par
> the bullet misses the heros vital organs etc. The sheer amount of
> point blank gunplay that happens in so many stories would leave people
> with normal luck looking like swiss cheese.
ObSF: Good Omens, the gunplay scene in the resort.
ObMovies: True Lies, when she drops the submachine gun.
/Par
--
Par use...@hunter-gatherer.org
Life is a test. Life is only a test. If this had been a real Life, you would
have been given instructions on where to go and what to do.
Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts.
Peter Meilinger
> In article <1156705005....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> (re Metahuman Orphanage)
>
> >I hope the staff is extremely well paid.
>
> Is that generally the case for people who work at orphanages?
I have no idea, but I would imagine the answer is no. On the
other hand, most orphanage workers don't have access to
walking weapons who are going through their formative, easily
manipulated years. Show 'em a little bit of kindness and you've
got yourself a supervillain team.
> A BOTEC suggests to me that if they focus on kids with actual
> powers, they are only talking maybe a dozen or two for the whole USA
> so it could be a federally run institution with an unusually well
> focused budget. Hey, that would make it a nice prize to bribe important
> states with!
Or threaten them with, depending on how volatile an institution
it ends up being. It wouldn't be nearly as unpopular as a prison
for superhumans, but NIMBY would probably come into play at
some point.
> >I'm trying to think of a way to make the pants protect non-supers
> >more than your character.
>
> In Champions, it's trivial: buy the armour with the limitation
> that they confer no benefits to that one specific character.
True, but that makes even less sense than most super-powers,
unless there's either some sort of intelligence/will/choice-making
involved, or something along the lines of Green Lantern's yellow
weakness. I was thinking of something that doesn't protect the
character because he's already tough enough. The only thing
to come to mind is something like 20 PD/ED Armor with a
limitation that it doesn't do any good if the wearer already has
equal or better defenses. So it's just tough clothing for a brick
with 30 PD/ED Armor, it's kinda nice for a guy with 15 PD/ED
Armor and it's a life-saver for a normal with no special defenses
at all.
Are the pants Lee jeans, by any chance? Buddy Lee approved?
Pete
Michael Hellwig
> "Sea Wasp" <seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
>> few weeks went back to perform the same stunt again.
>>
>> I have heard it said that he's broken every bone in his body that can be
>> broken by impacts.
>
> I heard an interview with Michelle Yeoh [1] a while ago in which she
> discussed a film she made in Honmg Kong including the stunt "jump a
> motorcycle onto the roof of a moving train". Naturally, she did it herself,
> since it's a matter of great pride there not to use stunt doubles. She
> described her preparation, beginning with step 1: "Learn to ride a
> motorcycle".
>
Police Story 3, great movie. IIRC, the safety precaution for that stunt
was that a pickup-truck with a few mattresses on it's bed was driving
along at roughly the same speed on the other side of the train. Ummm.
Just. totally. fucking. crazy.
> 1. Rado interview, or I doubt anything she *said.* would have registered.
>
ditto that.
--
Michael Hellwig aka The Eye olymp.idle.at admin
to contact me via email, use michael...@uni-ulm.de
don't hesitate to look at http://laerm.or.at
James Nicoll
Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Are the pants Lee jeans, by any chance? Buddy Lee approved?
>
Peter Meilinger
> In article <1156810243.2...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Are the pants Lee jeans, by any chance? Buddy Lee approved?
> >
> ?
Buddy Lee is the kewpie doll mascot of Lee Jeans. His commercials
generally involved him being hurled into some dangerous situation or
other and coming out the worse for wear. One time a tornado threw
him through a telephone pole, for example. No matter how badly
Buddy looked at the end of the commercial, though, his jeans were
always in great shape, giving the message that Lee jeans are tougher
than other clothes. I don't know anyone who actually likes Lee jeans,
and I don't wear jeans at all myself, but Buddy Lee is one of my
personal idols. He just doesn't quit, and I respect that. Plus, I've
always been a sucker for the short, silent type.
I haven't actually seen a Buddy Lee commercial in quite awhile.
I'd love to get copies of all of them, but I've never seen them
online.
Pete
David McMillan
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:10:42 +0000 (UTC), James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>>>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>>>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>>>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>>>> like the real thing.)
>>> That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>>> that's really saying something.
>>
>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>> only used in the direst emergency.
>
> with the blast radius?
"Ollie... I think you need a stronger bow."
Over at Marvel, the guys writing Hawkeye actually came up with a
partial workaround for the problem of Arrow Variety -- all the arrows in
Hawk's quiver were tipless, and Hawk's body harness was studded with
small pockets with lots of small specialty heads (almost all of them
built to be of roughly uniform size, shape, and weight, IIRC). Then
Hawk had practiced insanely long hours until he could seamlessly select
a head with his bow-holding left hand whilst his right hand pulled out a
shaft, and then snap the head onto the shaft while brining it to full
draw. It led to a few interesting tricks when he didn't have his bow,
but tended to get forgotten during "one arm disabled" fights.
David McMillan
>>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>>> only used in the direst emergency.
>> How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance compare
>> with the blast radius?
>
> About as far as any arrow and I would guess his reluctance to
> use it may have been related to the blast radius. As it turned out, the
> one time he got to use it, the target ate the arrow.
Lemme guess: Matter-Eater Lad?
(almost typoed that as Meatter-Eater Lad, which would have been funny,
but not useful).
David McMillan
> James Nicoll wrote:
>> * I'm stuck for a better name for my brick. I was toying with Manslaughter
>> because he's trying to be better than his parents, who were metahuman spree
>> killers, and manslaughter _is_ better than murder, but I don't think he's
>> quite that dim about PR.
>
> "It's Man's Laughter, dammit! Two words!"
See how important it is to *punctuate,* class? Especially on one's
business cards.
David McMillan
PiratEbay, perhaps? Hosted in Sweden, of course. :)
I imagine the various DCU supervillains must have tried to create such
a thing (using encrypted anonymous networks) at one point, but the whole
thing probably fell apart due to everyone trying to hack everyone else's
computers -- imagien malware as written by Lex Luthor. Not to mention,
the teeny tiny problem of enforcing sales....
David McMillan
> James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1156564671....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter Meilinger <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> (Especially fairly bulky ones like, well, boxing glove arrows.)
>>>> This is a man who once made use of a "fake uranium arrow" to keep
>>>> people from discovering the diary of his origin. (I don't know what
>>>> fake uranium is, but it evidently registers on Geiger counters just
>>>> like the real thing.)
>>> That might be the dumbest comic book fact I've ever heard. And
>>> that's really saying something.
>>
>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>> only used in the direst emergency.
>
> Reminds me of the Davy Crockett nuclear mortar, which had a maximum
> range less than the blast radius of its warhead. The other problem with
> mortars is that they're unstabilized, so that when the round reaches the
> peak of its trajectory, it makes like a knuckleball. Sometimes it comes
> down in the most unlikely of places.
Say what? Every mortar round I've ever encountered or researched had
fins. And I know at least a couple people who claimed (credibly) to get
pretty good accuracy out of a bog-standard 81mm.
James Nicoll
David McMillan <spam...@skyefire.org> wrote:
>James Nicoll wrote:
>
>>>> As I recall, he also had a nuclear-weapon arrow, which he
>>>> only used in the direst emergency.
>>> How far could he shoot said arrow, and how did that distance compare
>>> with the blast radius?
>>
>> About as far as any arrow and I would guess his reluctance to
>> use it may have been related to the blast radius. As it turned out, the
>> one time he got to use it, the target ate the arrow.
>
> Lemme guess: Matter-Eater Lad?
>
Sean Case
"Peter Meilinger" <p_mei...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> James Nicoll wrote:
>> The Champions brick I'm designing has invulnerable pants** and
>> that's it, because that's all he could afford (and even there, he had
>> to buy them used from the estate of a slightly less invulnerable brick).
> The rest of the costume didn't survive? Or was it sold off piece-meal?
> Someone out there has an invulnerable shirt, another guy has the
> cape, and one guy bought a pair of invulnerable socks that he's
> not sure what to do with, but he knows he got a great deal.
More likely two guys with a sock each. And of course they know which
body part needs the most protection.
Sean Case
Michael Grosberg
Eric D. Berge wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2006 19:47:01 GMT, "Michael S. Schiffer"
> <msch...@condor.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
> >that contradiction lies square at the heart of the
> >superhero concept, and has since Superman became a poster boy for
> >honesty while lying barefaced to his friends and romantic interests.
>
> See http://superdickery.com/dick/1.html and subsequent for some great
> examples.
Those comicbook covers are outrageous! Are they for real? Were they
playing with the superman concept for laughs back then?
DougL
> Huh. EBay stepped on that (fake) sale of a nuclear device fast
> enough that I would expect the DCU EBay to refuse to host sales of
> Kryptonite* as well. In the DCU, this would lead some enterprising
> criminal to set up EvilBay, but such a thing, an electronic market
> for illicit goods, is so obviously a profitable idea that it should
> exist in the real world as well.
Isn't setting that up (plus the secure, independently backed, purely
electronic currency to make it work) more or less the whole point of
the "heroes" actions in Cryptonomicon?
DougL
Rob St. Amant
> Peter Meilinger wrote:
>
>> How about Conan? He's ridiculously strong and capable, but
>> he went up against opponents strong enough to make it clear
>> he had to work his ass off to survive. That makes him seem
>> more human, unlike other uber-heroes who can breeze through
>> the toughest of opponents.
>
> The fact that he un-crucified himself by pushing his hands forward over
> the heads of the spikes that were holding them (owie!) definitely puts
> him over the line.
I've seen that in a movie, but it was Lee Horsley in The Sword and the
Sorcerer, only a Conan knock-off.
Rob St. Amant
> Let's hear about some heroes whose abilities are right on the very
> boundary of what's actually possible. Squint sort of *like this* and
> it's fantasy; squint sort of _like this_ and it's real.
In a bordering-SF-but-not-quite genre, there's Agent Pendergast, who
is generally arbitrarily strong, smart, knowledgeable, and
indestructible, and seems to be able to learn stuff about past events
and situations he hasn't been involved with by a process of mystical,
effortful imagination.
In the same genre, on the villain side, there's Hannibal Lecter. Too
bad to be true.