Superhero setting

Superhero settings aren't about 'realism' you blithering idiot.

They're romanticised, idealised world where virtue and villainy are exaggerated by the existence of supernaturally potent individuals, and that's the point. To view real life issues and conflicts through the lens of over the top drama and superhuman conflict.

All that being said, I can see there being some interesting ground to cover with 'realistic' superhero settings, but the classic style of things isn't invalid just because it doesn't conform to some arbitrary degree of 'realism'.

>Now imagine if the king is fucking superman
Then he gets a drink

If a fantasy setting did this Veeky Forums would be saying it's shit world building when it only concerns itself with drama and not any actual consequences of the premise itself. Sci-fi fags do it too whenever the fictional science is sufficiently unexplored.

So why does capeshit get a pass when they don't?

Sounds to me like you're making a whole bunch of assumptions about a setting, and that they wouldn't even play out the way you think they would. You fatally undermine yourself with this line:

>It's like saying rich have the same rights as the poor. Even in the cases it's legally true it's clearly not in practice.

I wonder if you can figure out how this holes your argument beneath the waterline? :)

>DnD settings played more than any other settings
>"hurr durr Veeky Forums hates unrealistic inconsistent shit"

Top kek, kid.

Except pulp fantasy and space opera are, y'know, things? That people like? That have an audience who don't give a fuck about dragging things down with 'realism' arguments and just want to enjoy a fun and engaging story set in one fantastical world or another?

Having preferences is fine, you do you, but trying to argue that it's somehow objectively bad is literally a badwrongfun argument.

so what if a normie is born with immortal superman powers, and sees everything wrong with the way immortal superman king is ruling? wouldn't he kill the old king, impose himself as the new ruler, and then try to fix equality issues? alternatively, what if thousands of moderately-to-very powerful people get together to kill immortal superman god-king and impose a democratic republic? people relate to people in a similar situation to them, and if a bunch of people decide something isn't right they try to fix it.

>Depends on the setting
Is not an argument in the case of talking about human nature itself.

>so what if a normie is born with immortal superman powers
Sure
> and sees everything wrong with the way immortal superman king is ruling?
And what do you mean 'everything wrong'? It depends on if the guy sees it as personally wrong or morally wrong ( unlikely, might makes right is incredibly powerful only more pronounced by the existence of supers )
>wouldn't he kill the old king, impose himself as the new ruler, and then try to fix equality issues?
How often does a rebellion turn into a bastion of civil rights? It's usually more of the same, with a different face.
>alternatively, what if thousands of moderately-to-very powerful people get together to kill immortal superman god-king and impose a democratic republic?
I can see this, but democratic for -whom-? Just because lesser powered people seize the government doesn't mean they are going to give the same rights to non-powered people. Probably a caste system in which like an aristocracy on steroids.
>and if a bunch of people decide something isn't right they try to fix it.
My argument is that what people see is "not right" depends on their culture, and humans who developed along with superpowers would have an entirely different branch of evolution for their culture than modern humans to the point something like "equal rights" would seem even more absurd than in the world where "equal rights" was only accepted as mainstream a few decades ago.

>since ancient times, people have had the X mutation gene
>some catalysts such as lightning storms and plagues have activated this gene
>superheroes are all mutants who are born with different powers depending on what activated their catalyst
>history sees these people the same way modern day looks at wizards
>secular, immensely powerful, and generally uncaring of most people's desires
>nations and kingdoms made by these people are generally dismantled by war and economic problems fueled by "I'm better than everyone" mentality
>lasting empires are formed by supers who have a little bit of a heart and look for the common wellbeing of the kingdom, mostly their nobles
>modern era
>supers are seen as wells of power and potential
>when it's found out a person is considered super, they're spirited away by their government
>either for military or diplomatic training, depending on the nature of their superpower
>a new adminsitrative class is formed made purely of superpowered people
>it varies from nation to nation, but most of these people work for the government
>thus the interests of nobles and "the people"
>many supers are kept secret by their parents because they don't want diplomatic or dictatorial governments from stealing their children
>vigilantism exists among super communities, but these vigilantes may or may not be hunted by the government super organizations
>corporations are still largely controlled by regular people due to the rarity of the X gene
>still, private and foreign interests contract off-grid supers for use of their powers
>thus brings us to our heroes
>fighting for the greater good is often impossible, as the intel for what the greater good even IS is inaccessible
>fighting small crime and crime organizations is still easy enough
>the hard part is covering your tracks from the anti-vigilantes in the government (who may turn a blind eye to your action if they don't hold interests in illegal activities, which the government does IRL)
good?

>A thread died for this.

>so what if a normie is born with immortal superman powers, and sees everything wrong with the way immortal superman king is ruling? wouldn't he kill the old king, impose himself as the new ruler, and then try to fix equality issues?
It could happen, but fixing an oppressive government is never as simple as "kill the dictator". Even a godlike superhuman would have underlings and allies who would try to take his place or capitalize the power vacuum. At that point, it truly does become us versus them, because it's the BBEG+all his superpowered buddies against the rest of humanity.
Plus, a smart ruler would make every effort possible to find superpowered individuals when they're young and turn them into allies to prevent the exact situation you described.

>alternatively, what if thousands of moderately-to-very powerful people get together to kill immortal superman god-king and impose a democratic republic? people relate to people in a similar situation to them, and if a bunch of people decide something isn't right they try to fix it.
This is a more likely example, since it's not the kind of thing one person can do alone. A superhero underground resistance would be cool as fuck to play, actually. However, power corrupts, and at some point they or their successors might start seeing the nornal humans they're protecting as a liability. After all, what are they really providing their rulers?

>setting resembles any social climate
>it isn't filled to the brim with assholes

When will this meme die

It wont. As long as there are edgy social retards that think they have it all figured out, it will keep creeping about.

>Humanity not being ruled by literal god-kings
Maybe some superheroes are idealistic and try to preserve freedom of individuals despite the existence of these powerful godlike men. Using your logic the entire world would be divided into military dictatorships ruled by nuclear weapon owning militaries. After all what would Portugal do if the US invaded?
>there is actual hard evidence people are not equal
This is true today you retard. Nobody except autists assume that they mean all people are capable of the same feats when they say "all men are created equal."
>Thinking "good people and heroes will enforce equality and freedom" will handwave this problem when ancient normal humans in our own history were only relatively good and in many cases not good people at all
Yep that is why Democracy doesn't exist in any form. Every country on earth is a military dictatorship.
>not even mentioning there is little incentive to protecting the powerless but a lot of effort required
Little incentive to help others at all with your own time and money, yet many people still do it.

Are you a sentient dolphin shocked that humans don't all just rape and murder each other for fun?

> IRL if people got superpowers I bet money 90% of folks would play superman

... until their personal politics is triggered and they realize they can use their status and power to force change.

Superman only 'works' because complicated situations like Israel don't exist in the comics, and Superman has super human patience and tolerance,and an inhuman lack of politics

People would be smashing abortion clinics in the space of a month, or oil rigs, or getting involved in latest Rodney King level shit, or Occupy or some NRA thing etc etc etc

>Yeah the fight for equality between normies and supers would go real when when the supers are literally flying over the heads of the normies instead of a minor "we are superior because we have guns"
>Some supers decide not to be assholes
>Hunt down and execute the supers who are assholes
>Hunt down any more supers in the future who try to be assholes
Isn't this the whole point of generic superhero teams like the justice league and shield?

It's not a meme user. People are generally assholes when left to their own devices, as selfishness breeds evil and humans are almost entirely selfish when they have no other things to prevent them from being selfish (like modern religion and morals).

...nigga

Is you retarded?

When you say "superhero setting" a particular image comes to mind.

A modern world full of criminals and scumbags, until one day someone emerges with bizarre powers by accident, destiny, or invention. Usually one or fewer guys with powers. Technology is usually semi realistic (grappling guns, stun grenades, body armor, etc). If two superheroes meet there'll be a retarded fight between them. Villains are typically thugs, organized crooks, terrorists, etc. There will be exactly one villain with superpowers and he's gotten them from the same source as the hero. Normal people consider them urban legends or extremely mysterious. The hero(s) doesn't work with authorities and will likely be handwaved or hunted as a vigilante. He may or may not have a friend on the force. If he collaborates with the government he's probably the result of a shadowy Alex Jones tier super soldier project.

After a while more heroes come out of the woodwork and the normal criminals are mostly suppressed, giving way to all manner of costumed maniac villains. Usually a mix of powers and normals. Technology gets more sci fi tier. Superheroes will collaborate more and there may even be a team or two, the villains are likely still disorganized. Normal people know about the heroes and villains, gaining the status of celebrities. Villains probably won't kill or permanently harm heroes at this point, and if they succeed a new hero or heroes takes their place. The authorities start to work with heroes as equals and offer powers of investigation and arrest.

Eventually we find dozens or hundreds of superheroes, and the technology level goes batshit. A big league of heroes may rise as a peacekeeping &a humanitarian NGO, y'know kinda like if the UN was competent. Supervillains go from being city or state level threats to national and global threats. Super villains at this point will work together to fight superheroes.

>what are they providing their rulers
the same things they do now: food, shelter, convenience of tasks they don't want to do, and most importantly: worship. being the immortal god-king of nothing means you're nothing.

I do like the concept of a nation gradually becoming more and more corrupt though, because that actually DOES mirror the current theme of the real world's politics in a way that makes sense. Imagine a superpowered fight between God-Emperor Trump, the up-and-coming superhero who was commercial but is now going political, the long-thought-heroine Clinton who is implied to actually be an evil mastermind, and a grassroots hero Bernie "Burner" Sanders who has spent decades helping small-time and now wants to move to a global stage. That would be one hell of a matchup.

>t. Nietzsche worshipper

because you are a subhuman, it doesn't mean everybody else also is

Why would humans act different than they usually do when the differences between humans are more pronounced than they are in the reality where those small differences caused war and oppression?

It's not edgy you retard, stop misusing buzzwords.
>Yep that is why Democracy doesn't exist in any form. Every country on earth is a military dictatorship.
How recent is democracy? How long did it take for human culture to accept the premises of democracy? In a world with superhumans, would the premises of democracy still hold in the eyes of the average not-modern person.
You forget that a lot of human civilizations had literal god-kings when we know that superpowers don't exist.
Why do you think human history would follow reality when literal god-kings DO exist?
My argument is that organizations like those wouldn't exist or have any particular power for a similar reason we didn't really have any "nobles for the ethical treatment of commoners, we are actually serious about this and will fight you over it" in any particularly large numbers.

>implying that without religion and fabricated morals the world wouldn't be ruled by evil people doing stupid and evil things
>laughingpagans.jpg

>Acknowledging most of humans for most of human history where selfish cunts only nice to their immediate family must necessarily mean that you yourself are a selfish edgy cunt

Whoa man saying that murderers and sociopaths exist must make me a murderer and sociopath as well. Damn maybe if we ignore they exist they will go away.

Supervillains at this level don't do as much fist shaking, mustache twirling, and "curses! I'll get you next time, superfag!". They will attain worrying victories over the heroes. The heroes may do morally gray shit to stop them.

Battles with alien warlords, superpowered dictators, mutant kaiju, and demonic gods will be yawn worthy for civilians.

>the same things they do now: food, shelter, convenience of tasks they don't want to do, and most importantly: worship. being the immortal god-king of nothing means you're nothing.
Why the fuck should I care if ants worship me? Your logic is retarded, they should have nations for the sake of having nations.

You want to know what I would do if I was superman and wanted to be kind of a dick? Fly to DC, tell the president that if he pays me a billion dollars a year he can call me once a month and tell me to do any task he wants that takes me less than a day to finish. If the US refuses keep offering to heads of state until someone accepts. Spend most of my time in a mansion filled with whores and servants and once a month I have to work for a day. Just as much benefit as ruling a country, a lot less work, and a lot less vested interest in how well I do my job. If they stop paying me I will just retire, if my hypothetical country falls I am left with literally nothing.

...

>How recent is democracy? How long did it take for human culture to accept the premises of democracy? In a world with superhumans, would the premises of democracy still hold in the eyes of the average not-modern person.
Potentially. Not that it matters most super hero settings don't have super heroes in the distant past. Take the most normie example, the Marvel movies. Suddenly out of nowhere the Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, and Spider Man appear within a few years of each other. Before that super heroes didn't exist.

>My argument is that organizations like those wouldn't exist or have any particular power for a similar reason we didn't really have any "nobles for the ethical treatment of commoners, we are actually serious about this and will fight you over it" in any particularly large numbers.
You are describing a fairly notable part of Roman society that caused a large number of disagreements.

>autist starts thread
>autism spreads all over again

Real life has regards and cripples and we still care about their rights

Don't worry user, everything is okie dokie

Caring about cripples is a modern cultural invention and for most of history they were left to die if the family wasn't well off enough eat the cost of taking care of them.

What is your fucking endgame, asshole?
Like, what kind of point are you trying to make?
This entire thread is like "NO, IT'S MY THING!"
Fuck off, you should be the one left to die in the cold

>Wants a "realistic" grimderp millar setting with gratuitous gore, violence, and corruption.

No.

Nope. Caring for the sick and unwell has always been a thing humans have done, there's evidence of it all the way back to antiquity.

Because regardless of what edgelords like to believe, altruism and selflessness is a key survival advantage that human beings have by and large cultivated. Evolution doesn't care about the individual, it cares about the species, and that innate ability to empathise and the willingness to self-sacrifice are key advantages of humanity.

Basically, Worm handles all of these issues, and it even has it's own tabletop IRC server. It's a lot of fun to read, and to play.

To be fair it only worked like that in Worm because the setting equivalent of the Illuminati was actively working on stabilizing (and sometimes de-stabilizing) parts the world to keep it all from collapsing.

True, and superpowers are relatively new in Worm. However, there's the alternate universe in the story literally ruled by parahumans, so I guess OP is a little right in that regard.

>I'm an asshole for pointing out that a not-insignificant proportion of humanity are assholes enough that superpowers would completely warp the development of culture and morality.
I'm beginning to think that not being able to even contemplate alternative moral codes is a form of autism.
Just because you're thinking about it doesn't mean you're accepting them as a good thing.
>Caring for the sick and unwell has always been a thing humans have done
Caring for the permanently sick and unwell that isn't family is not nearly as common.

>It's a lot of fun to read, and to play.
How finished is the system nowadays?
Last time I checked it out we still had /wdc/ - Weaver Dice general on this board and it was kind of bare bones back then, to the point where people would just recommend to only use the character creation rules and then stat them and play using another system like Mutants and Masterminds.

How easy is it to get a game going on the IRC server?
Does the author still GM on there?

Why do you think VILLAINS exist? They want to have this stupidly edgy world where they're in charge.

And heroes just want to keep the world safe and free. That's its considered evil when Superman wants to be in charge.

We had a super PC with hatred and revenge motivation against the government because her powers were heriditary, and in her backstory the Gmen captured her and took all her eggs over a period of time. Some enemies encountered were technically her kids because of this.

The system is more polished, but I won't say it's entirely finished. The skills haven't been entirely reworked, and equipment beyond costumes, and rudimentary gear isn't exactly solidified, and tends to be more freeform.

However, if you're looking to GM a game, you'll absolutely have no trouble finding players. In terms of being a player, you may have to wait until someone dies, drops out, or otherwise drifts into the ether. However, there's a shit ton of campaigns with queues, so sooner or later it's easy to get into a game.

The author of the story does GM games from time to time, usually for groups of newbies to the channel. The last one he did was a couple weeks ago, as a one-shot, for corporate heroes in a city without the PRT.

People aren't evil

They're people

Of course we all have different capacities for empathy, we generally don't like causing pointless harm to people

In the world of superheroes regular people are the cripples. It's that simple m8

>Why do you think VILLAINS exist? They want to have this stupidly edgy world where they're in charge.
Is reality edgy?
Are king edgy?
Are god-kings edgy?
Is manifest destiny edgy?
Is divine mandate edgy?
For most of human history rulers claimed their legitimacy from a higher power. What if that higher power was literal and REAL? If it was real, what would cause the slide from that to modern moral code and ethics when there is tangible proof the god-king isn't bullshiting about his divine right? That's the entire fucking point of this thread.
>And heroes just want to keep the world safe and free. That's its considered evil when Superman wants to be in charge.
See my previous arguments in this thread. That idea of heroes and villains is a modern one, what if morality never made it to something similar to our views on morality at all? Is the god-king inherently a villain? Even if we think that he is, would the people living around him think the same way?

Not him, but my people are literal ooga booga Yorubas and harming, neglecting, or mocking cripples was a severe sin in our culture even before white men came with Christianity or Islam

We say that one of the gods created cripples and deformed people in a drunken stupor, so he felt guilty

But how far does your people go for cripples?
In the case of a famine, do you still feed them even if it means less to eat for people able to work?

Very edgy. In case you haven't noticed, primitive people are typically fucking cunts.

Comes down to the family in question. Typical protocol was to spread out away from starvation central.

That money is worthless without the "ants" who give it value.
I'm sure the philosophy of "do we really need them" can vary from super to super, but it would be interesting to see some sort of immortal super who sees it as his destiny to be the only consciousness in the world or something

Finding its limits doesn't disprove that altruism and selflessness are key parts of human development throughout our entire history. Of course there are times when hard decisions had to be made for the survival of the tribe, but there's also plenty of cases of people voluntarily going without so that others might live.

>ruled by literal god-kings
>having superheroes with that level of power
>in frequencies great enough that nobody is willing to slip them poison or murder them in their sleep
>but not great enough that nobody has actually banded together with the interest of the common non-superhuman person
>not examining the psychological makeup of a superhero in charge who has to constantly fend off attacks on his life

Like almost all other 'realism' arguments, it's just using specific ideas to try and justify why their preference is objectively right, rather than actually taking a holistic view of the situation and going into it without preconceptions.

You don't understand the world as much as you think you do, edgelord-kun. You might want to re-examine things.

>>but not great enough that nobody has actually banded together with the interest of the common non-superhuman person
Not implying this, I'm arguing wether anyone would feel the need to fight for the common-non-superhuman in the first place.
How many wars have been waged over the treatment of commoners being less than the ruling class?
How will this change when the ruler claiming divine mandate has actual divine powers?

I could keep going, too
>not having the superhero snap and murder everyone eventually
>not having human civilization never advance past cavemen level society because of this
>not examining this cyclical exhibition of human nature from the perspective of a separate sentient species that has developed without the extreme disparity of power that holds humanity back in this situation

I need help developing an antagonist who has an "Unconventional" power which he uses to amass wealth/power. Something you wouldn't think of as a useful power at first glance, but something that will make him wealthy and dangerous without bending reality.

>Most of human history is people obeying hierarchy
>Thinking this will become more pronounced when superpowers exist is edgy
Again, divine right to rule was seen as sufficient for commoners in a world where divine doesn't exist. You know damn well what would happen in a world where superpowers do exist using that same reasoning.

This fails under your own logic. If everyone really is a hyper-selfish edgelord cunt, why would they sit there and take it when some asshole lorded it over them?

...

>Every single person is willing to obey a proven divine ruler
>but every single person who does have powers rivaling the divine will use them to lord over everyone else
>nobody who isn't superhuman will be willing to defy the natural order despite the premise that everyone is self-interested
I mean if you want to equate humans to sheep I guess you can do that, but then that doesn't strengthen your case against being an edgelord.

The setting you're describing is called WH40K

You've proven you're an idiot who has zero reading comprehension.
I'm not saying people are hyper-selfish. I'm taking the fact that: commoners acknowledged their rules, often times under the reasoning of divine right and combining it with the idea that superpowers exist.

You're the fucking retard acting like modern moral codes have always existed and that some fucking how when literal superpowers exist humanity would skip that entire stage of cultural development to avoid the issue of how problematic it would be for human development.

> why would they sit there and take it when some asshole lorded it over them?
THE SAME FUCKING REASON THEY SIT THERE AND TOOK IT WHEN PEOPLE DO IT IN REAL LIFE, ONLY MORE PRONOUNCED BECAUSE LITERAL FUCKING SUPER POWERS

Holy fucking shit this is not hard to understand.

A smug anime girl, I have no choice but to concede my argument. Even though most anime settings agree with me. When superpowers exist, in most japanese settings, japan doesn't hesitate to narrate that they seize power and oppress commoners.

I'm saying that people would obey the divine ruler for similar reasons they did in real life. But if you want to pretend monarchies never existed that's okay.

oh hey it's a stealth anti-moral fag thread

been a while since we've had one of these

...

Monarchies existed because there was a person to pass power to afterward.
In your hypothetical setting, is there a transition of power to another superhero? Or does the superhero also conveniently have immortality?
And what about a potential power struggle given two possible candidates for divine right? It happened in monarchies when succession was in dispute.

read worm.

although
said it already it bears repeating.

Worm the most inteligent superhero setting out there. the world is falling apart under the weight of giant monster attacks and rampent super crime.

Powers only happen after trammatic events for people who are already conflict prone because of [Spoiler] reasons.

This alone explains why the good guys heroes are outnumbered and why so many capes are also crazy motherfuckers.

Supervillains havent really fone this since the sixties, mid-seventies at best. You are thinking of bad early cartoon adaptions of comics and HB/WB cartoons in general.

There's a comic about Superman sneaking into a North Korea analogue to feed starving people and the political tensions it causes

explain slavery and serfdom then

explain war

explain the use of harmful chemicals by scientists who knew better since the industrial revolution

explain all of the things that happen when people have ludicrous amounts of power

Hey man, they've decided you're am edgelord, I'm not saying I agree with them but at this point you can't change their minds, especially by doubling down on your arguments, maybe take a moment to respect the validity of their arguments and they might respect you back a bit

Your posts and other posts similar to your are making me into an edge-lord.
If modern people can't even entertain a hypothetical using real human behavior as the basis then why would I listen to you at all?

This is much better.
>In your hypothetical setting, is there a transition of power to another superhero? Or does the superhero also conveniently have immortality?
To keep it as close to reality as possible, superpowers don't make superheroes immortal but they are hereditary.
>And what about a potential power struggle given two possible candidates for divine right? It happened in monarchies when succession was in dispute.
Yes, but did anyone ever say "the emperor has no clothes! if he had a divine mandate why did he lose his position. divine mandate doesn't exist at all!"?
Which is my point. Not only do you have the same excuse of "divine right to rule" still existing, but now you have evidence for it in the form of superpowers.
The question is now whether human rights would feasible develop to modern standards or would that fact create a general caste system of supers and nonsupers having different rights before modern morality can even get it's foot in the door completely fucking up it's development by making questions that need to be answered, with the answers being different than the morality in reality.

Would the idea of woman suffrage exist in a world of superpowers?
Not because women are seen as weaker than men, but because the difference between sex is relatively insignificant and people care more about the difference supers and non-supers and women had the same rights as men all along because superwoman can still kick your ass and women's suffrage was never a necessary cultural movement in the first place.
Would womans suffrage be replaced with commoners suffrage?

>implying slavery, serfdom, and war are evil

lol

...

But that's not real human behavior

Because otherwise good people are capable of awful things in the right situation.

That's the harder truth which most people would prefer to avoid accepting, imagining innately evil people to take the blame, but it isn't true.

Good hearted, well meaning people who find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time, even for the right reasons, can commit absolute atrocities.

The Milgram Experiment is a terrifying example of this. When instructed to by an authority figure, otherwise normal, morally upstanding people will administer what they consider to be harmful or even lethal electrical shocks to a person presumed to exist in another room.

Most atrocities and terrible things throughout human history arise from similar situations. Very few people actively decide to be evil or go out of their way to harm others. But the right situation can make a devil of any saint.

Now we're getting somewhere. If you had opened like this there would be less hostility to this idea.
Personally I believe there will always be some sort of countercultural thinker that emerges from the masses to throw subversive ideas in the face of common thought. From then it's just a question of if the ideas catch on and if the ruling superhumans try to quash them.

Why would I acknowledge their arguments when they are completely ignoring mine?
Most of the edge comments are coming from people completely ignoring the "divine right claim = successful vs divine right claim + divine powers == ???" argument entirely.
Just saying "nuh uh, people aren't like that!" forgetting that people ARE like that in sufficient numbers than entire governments were based on them.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kings
I'm just going to link this whenever you ignore my argument and pretend I'm arguing for something else.
I challenge anyone to quote a single edgy thing I've posted so I can actually respond to it specifically.

You, I like you, you're speaking from a very real place. The place that understands the ways we compromise and falter through what can seem no fault of our own. The place that asks to judge a deed not on a singular code but by its context

Ok, would you consider the Jedi an example of what you're talking about? Because I'm trying to stop and question if I have misinterpreted your wording

Boy OP you would hate the Strong Female Protagonist webcomic.
Its basically Worm, but somehow advocates equality and feminism. Because the primary character forces people into it. Then has the gall to say she's a hero.

To address OP's claims and assertions in a legitimate manner:

It IS likely that early heroes would rule as god-kings, as with the mythological kings of gold - Gilgamesh, Romulus, etc. These figures would most likely be in power by virtue of might and the worship of commoners, yes, but that doesn't mean humanity would be doomed to follow that pattern for all eternity. Supers are human, they can be good or bad, regardless of the circumstances stacked against them. We would still have had King Arthur questing to protect commoners with might for right. We would still have the rise of industry and modern economics casting down a lot of the sacred cows - Superman can destroy anyone who can oppose him, can he create jobs? Can he feed and cloth the nation he rules? No, he needs captains of industry, merchants, investors, creators. And these people can leverage their economic utility for more rights and privileges. Superman cannot kill Lex Luthor, even in the world where he rules as God King, because Lex Corp is too important for the economy, for the stability of his country - if he wants to rule and not have a crumbling ruin predated upon by all the other supers, wracked by revolutions, he has to play ball with the people who have the dollar. In any situation where he outright rejects any concept of ownership or law, people will reject him in turn, and eventually you'll reach the point where threat of violence no longer deters or moves the populace to obey.

I think that is ultimately what my fellow anons have issue with, though they have not articulated it clearly. Your assertions seem to hinge on the idea that threat of violence is the ONLY thing that holds people in check, and that if Superheroes had nothing to fear physically from others, that completely negates their accountability. There are many reasons this isn't true.

God, that comic is so fucked up. And I say that as a progressive lefty. It just completely misses the goddamn point.

This seems pretty reasonable.

humans are innately social creatures, which means that the majority of what we do is dependent on our selfish desires and social upstanding. When you live in a society, you'll likely do a lot in order to fit in with society rather than split off and try to find a new society to live in, and the only way to change this is with violence and upholding that law with violence.

Looking at history, pagan clans were rife with murder and terror practices such as corpse mutilation and murdering/raping women and children. It wasn't until christianity came along and killed a bunch of goons that people decided it was generally not OK to rape, murder, and sacrifice to pagan gods. There may have been nice or peaceful pagan societies, but the vast majority of history recognizes self-served humanity to be selfish, warring assholes.

I'm not throwing this opinion of "people are inherently bad" at you because of nihilism and going "oh the world sucks", I'm saying it because it's historically backed up by the fact that societies without religious content saying "quit being fuckin' douchebags, for THAT guy (God)" were warring, murdering, sacrificing, raping, belligerent fuckwads with no sense of the greater good or niceness.

Now in modern day, I'd say that the majority of people's social standing dictates that they be good people. Religion and government alike seems to reward good people with a good social standing, and thus people will unconsciously want to be good.

The corporate world will have you know that people are the exact OPPOSITE of giving and selfless however, because people will eat you alive. There's no sense of nihilism in what I say when I say that the corporate world will give you NO lee-way for being a good person. Being a good person (high wages, green eco usage, mass donations, etc.) will get you got in the corporate world, and you will ultimately fail. The exception is with the already ludicrously rich (looking at you, Bill Gates) who philanthropize.

>superhero setting
>fly fast punch good heroes ever being leaders over the supergenius omnidisciplinary ultra scientists

Go to bed Tony

Which is sad considering it occasionally brings up incredibly interesting world building asides that are never addressed. Like how that due to demographics most superpowered people are not from Western nations and are poor or that due to legal shenanigans on the part of the MC's not-boyfriend age of consent laws no longer apply to superpowered individuals.

>Looking at history, pagan clans were rife with murder and terror practices such as corpse mutilation and murdering/raping women and children. It wasn't until christianity came along and killed a bunch of goons that people decided it was generally not OK to rape, murder, and sacrifice to pagan gods. There may have been nice or peaceful pagan societies, but the vast majority of history recognizes self-served humanity to be selfish, warring assholes.
>Actually believing early Christian propaganda

Hahahahahaha go fuck yourself

>supergenius omnidisciplinary ultra scientists ever being leaders over the god mages who are ALSO supergenius omnidisciplinary ultra scientists