Why don't super-heroes make more use of their villains' technology? For example, Spider-Man is a canonical genius; he could easily reverse-engineer the Shocker's suit and gauntlets, learn how they function and add them to his crime-fighting arsenal. Why not take some nonlethal pumpkin-bombs, or figure out Vulture's wings or Doc Ock's tentacles? Why doesn't Batman go on patrol with Mr. Freeze's cold-gun, or incorporate Firefly's jetpack into the Batsuit?I'm not asking this question from the story perspective. I know that these things don't happen because the characters have a theme that they need to observe. But if you look at it from the perspective of, say, someone IN the story, it doesn't work. If Spider-Man could add something to his costume that would make him better at fighting crime, if Batman could do the same, why don't they?
GET EQUIPPED WITHPUNKIN BOM
>>92735Precisely. There's no reason why a hero wouldn't work to consistently increase their crime-fighting effectiveness.
The problem with your Spidey example is that he lacks the means to actually maintain such tech. Peter Parker, despite having a mind worthy of Stark, Richards, Pym, and Banner, tends to have such poor luck he'd rather get the rent in on time rather than mess around with his Rogues' tech. Not to mention how the general public and his peers would take it. He already has a ridiculously murky relationship with them, how'd you think they'd feel if they saw him toking around technology normally associated with the bad guys he faces?Of course, the less complicated reason would be that the villians equipment would qualify as "evidence" for the police, SHIELD, etc. So Spidey wouldn't really be in a position to tinker around even if he wanted to.For Batman? He can develop his own shit, why ride off the inventions of others?
>The problem with your Spidey example is that he lacks the means to actually maintain such tech. Peter Parker, despite having a mind worthy of Stark, Richards, Pym, and Banner, tends to have such poor luck he'd rather get the rent in on time rather than mess around with his Rogues' tech. Not to mention how the general public and his peers would take it. He already has a ridiculously murky relationship with them, how'd you think they'd feel if they saw him toking around technology normally associated with the bad guys he faces?Of course, the less complicated reason would be that the villains' equipment would qualify as "evidence" for the police, SHIELD, etc. So Spidey wouldn't really be in a position to tinker around even if he wanted to.Is it wrong that I want to see this story written?
All I'm saying is, heroes should attempt to maximize their effectiveness. It's a hero's duty to defend the innocent. If Spider-Man could save more lives with villain tech than without, shouldn't he use it?
>>92748The closest to him having such an arsenal was when he briefly partnered up with Tony while living with him and got that advanced suit, but that was only because Tony gave it to him on the condition he'd be on his side, and we all know how that went down. Reverse-engineering stuff like Shocker's gauntlets or Doc Ock's tentacles is pretty hard to do without calling in some favors, and both are advanced enough to only be properly operational by their inventors. Then there's the question of why Spidey would even consider using such thingsIncreasing your "crime-fighting effectiveness" isn't as simple as just upping your arsenal. Stuff like Spider-mobile wound up being pretty unnecessary in the long run.
Batman has no life; can afford to devote every available minute of his preposterous eighty-hour-day-with-no-sleep to arming his outfit with gadgetry that he will use ONCE and never again, from explosive balls in his boot heel to flares in his bat-ear, and memorizing, practicing, and maintaining it all. One of these days, he's going to scratch his ass, or just fall down at the wrong angle when he gets clobbered in the skull for the 8,428th time--and blow up Gotham.Everyone else has other shit to do, especially as for most, superheroing is their free time activity.DC's last version of Manhunter cobbled together a get-up on the fly from devices stolen from police evidence storage, and it took quite a while to get the hang of it all, during which she almost blew herself and her kid to shreds.
Why do you think Spidey has the cash to develop such tech?Hell, why do you think just because he's something of a Genius that he's a master of omni-science?
I'll add this to my list of superhero plot elements that really don't hold up.Another one that I find interesting is that there are always super heroes and villains who get their powers from some kind of accident; cosmic radiation, weird chemicals exploding, struck by lighting, whatever. But it's usually one person alone who experiences the effects, and when it is multiple people they all react differently. Wouldn't it make more sense for everyone who experiences the accident to come out of it with the exact same powers? Imagine a bus of random people experiencing such an event. You now have 20 Joes and Janes off the street, all of them with electrical powers/super-speed/spider-like strength and reflexes.That would actually be a pretty cool min-series in an established universe. Would any of them try and become villains? Would any of them try and become heroes? What happens to a normal person when you thrust them into abnormality?
>>92768... dibs.
>>92768I don't have any sources in front of me to double-check with, but I read Marvel's official explanation is that the accidents actually cause latent mutations to surface. If you fall in radioactive waste and gain the power to shapeshift, it's because your otherwise useless genes reacted to the radiation. People like that are called mutates rather than mutants.
>>92770So Peter Parker is a human mutate whose latent mutant powers were activated by the radiation in the spider's bite? And said radiation merged the spider's DNA with Parker's, resulting in spider-powers?
>>92772Something like that, unless the continuity still supports that whole "there have been Spider-Men throughout history and there's some sort of supernatural legacy" retcon thing.Or maybe the spider was the mutate.
>>92776 There were several sets of genes involved in the bite. And for that matter he didn't get infected with spider DNA he was injected with radioactive spider venom that may or may not be lethal depending on what kind of spider it originally was or later became in its mutation. I'm surprised he hasn't suffered blood poisoning or necrosis in all this time besides the whole RADIOACTIVE BLOOD thing. For all we know Pete could be dying from the slowest acting toxin ever.
>>92797No, that was Mary Jane, remember?
>>92799 Yeah but I'm talking about Pete or anyone else that spider bit as well. All things considered someone probably ate it in their sleep as well.
>>92812It died right after biting him.
There was some Deadpool trade I read recently where the Punisher was flying around with the hardware of random super villains like Unicorn's helmet, Klaw's hand thingy, a bat glider, etc. Seemed to work pretty well for him but he looked ridiculous.
>>92734>>92748Do you ever draw in any other poses? I've seen this same base template all over the place.
>>92868Frank using the Ant-Man helmet is one of the best moments of this current series (pre-FrankenCastle).
>>92776spider men around the world was a great Idea.
It's been mentioned that Stark steals his enemies tech like nobody's business