Order of... the watchmen? [possible spoilers]

[derfenrirwolv]

I'm not posting any major spoilers here, no guarantee that someone else wont though. If you don't know what the watchmen comic is, or were confused when you saw the big blue guy in front of the trailer for the dark knight, go read it now. Seriously, what are you still doing here? Scoot



With that said, which Order of the stick member would be which watchmen character?


Rorschach :belkar: Belkar hand flippers claws and other appendages down. Ruthless, psycotic, and willing to rack up the body count. Although :miko: has the whole "IIII know what is right and will kill anyone that doesn't agree with it!" thing.

Dr Manhattan: :vaarsuvius: All brains, all ultimate power, all the time. Coldly logical, to the point of having trouble understanding the mere mortals they work with, not to mention

and the ability to disintegrate people

biggest difference is a VERY defined gender.


Silk Specter II: :haley: The girl. Kick ass, take names, are stuck in their predicament thanks to their parents, and the thing that keeps the walking nuclear bomb grounded in reality.

Ozymandias: :roy: Think about it. All around abilities, a fighter with brains as well as brawn. Not nearly as good a fit as the others two, but workable.

Owl Man II :durkon: More by process of elimination than anything else. Both tend to sit in the background cautioning others and providing a moral compass, but can be quite powerfull when they need to step into the forefront.

[Laurentio II]

Didn't see the movie, but reed the comic. So, I suppose that, at last, we know what is under the pink Hello Monster umbrella? It's somehow more ugly that I imaginated...
I means the fake big monster, that was kept hidden until the end.

[T-O-E]

Rorschach definitely isn't Belkar. Remember, despite his psychotic tendencies, he wishes to do good in his world. Belkar kills for the sake of killing.

[Mauve Shirt]

I think Miko fits Rorschach better. Kills whenever he thinks it's needed, but still for "the greater good", and his black-and-white morality.

[derfenrirwolv]

Oh.. and i hate to do it but...


:elan: as Dollar Bill Nice guy, living up to genre conventions with the cape. Lets hope it goes better for elan.

[Mauve Shirt]

And for Belkar I'd go with The Comedian.

[Om]

And for Belkar I'd go with The Comedian.Except that the Comedian is aware that the world is a big joke while Belkar just likes stabbing things. Which is perhaps why its best to avoid comparing such a one dimensional character (and frankly the others aren't much better) to the multi-layered and ultra-deep personalities of the Watchmen universe

[LuisDantas]

Except that the Comedian is aware that the world is a big joke while Belkar just likes stabbing things. Which is perhaps why its best to avoid comparing such a one dimensional character (and frankly the others aren't much better) to the multi-layered and ultra-deep personalities of the Watchmen universe

Actually, Comedian is if anything even more one-dimensional than Belkar.

[kpenguin]

Except that the Comedian is aware that the world is a big joke while Belkar just likes stabbing things. Which is perhaps why its best to avoid comparing such a one dimensional character (and frankly the others aren't much better) to the multi-layered and ultra-deep personalities of the Watchmen universe

Indeed. Watchmen is simply too deep of a graphic novel to be treated with such comparisons.

Which is not to say OotS doesn't have deep characters. Its just Watchmen's characters are far deeper.

[Om]

Actually, Comedian is if anything even more one-dimensional than Belkar.How do you figure that? Really, compare the Comedian's visit to Moloch (when he realises that his world is disintegrating) to... well I can't think of a single insistence that conveys a similar depth of character for Belkar. Not surprising given that I've seen coats of paint with more dimensions than Belkar

Now I'd be coming off overly harsh if I were to suggest that all OotS characters are similarly one-dimensional (although I maintain that they can hardly be compared to a work noted for its multi-faceted characters) but there's absolutely nothing to Belkar aside from his love of stabbity-death. Maybe the prequel books give him some weighty backstory but in the comic strip proper he's had no character development and nothing to suggest that he's any deeper than a puddle

[kpenguin]

Now I'd be coming off overly harsh if I were to suggest that all OotS characters are similarly one-dimensional (although I maintain that they can hardly be compared to a work noted for its multi-faceted characters) but there's absolutely nothing to Belkar aside from his love of stabbity-death. Maybe the prequel books give him some weighty backstory but in the comic strip proper he's had no character development and nothing to suggest that he's any deeper than a puddle

Part of the reason from this, from my understanding, is that Belkar's type of comedy becomes less funny if we add character development to the mix. We laugh at his mindless violence because we don't really know the motivation behind it.

If we knew "why isn't he jolly", then he's either be horrifying or tragic. Either way, it would detract from the humor.

Watchmen, not being a humor comic in the slightest aside from a few quips from Rorschach, doesn't have that limitation.

[Warren Dew]

I'd agree with the Belkar/Comedian comparison. They act the same, and we don't know that Belkar doesn't have a lack of morality supporting his lack of discipline that's similar to the Comedian's.

Rorschach and Miko might be a good fit except that Miko works with the establishment instead of against it. Also, Miko is among the most powerful characters, and Rorschach is quite possibly the weakest of Watchmen characters.

Rorschach also manages to get people working together, which makes him like Roy in one way. In other ways, though, Roy is very different; his leadership style is more like Night Owl II's. He seems to have become an adventurer just because his father was, which makes him like Laurie in a way.

While Dr. Manhattan has some attitude similarities to Vaarsuvius, there are a number of major differences. First, Dr. Manhattan is incredibly powerful - he's more like one of the gods in the Ootsiverse than like any of the mortal characters. Second, he doesn't have Vaarsuvius' ambition; he got his power through luck. Third and perhaps most importantly, Vaarsuvius is highly intelligent and driven; Dr. Manhattan goes along with others and is likely the least intelligent of the Watchmen protagonists.

As for Ozymandias, I'd say Redcloak is the closest cognate. He has a huge Machiavellian plan that involves, loosely speaking, destroying the world to save it. He believes what he's doing is justified. The main difference is that what Redcloak is doing is clearly evil, while Watchmen leaves that question open in the case of Ozymandias.

I agree that the two are not really comparable, but I don't really agree with the reasons people are giving. It's true that Watchmen focuses on depth and complexity within a strictly defined length, while the Order of the Stick is more open ended. However, there's more to it than that.

The Comedian and Rorschach only make sense in a world without gods; with a real afterlife and real judgement, as in the Ootsiverse, Belkar can't correctly believe that his actions have no consequences. Likewise, the Order of the Stick has a traditional setup of protagonists which we're intended to take as "good guys", with their enemies being "bad guys"; Watchmen derives much of its depth from the fact that it has neither real good guys nor real bad guys.

Ultimately I think they're difficult to compare because the stories are so different; each tells its own story, and each has its own characters to tell that story.

[factotum]

Also, Miko is among the most powerful characters, and Rorschach is quite possibly the weakest of Watchmen characters.


Not sure how you figure that out...Rorschach managed to take out several police officers while attempting to escape them in Moloch's house, and later in the prison defeated the crime boss and the two thugs who came after him without much effort. Considering everyone in Watchmen (apart from Dr. Manhattan, obviously) is just a normal human being with some training and/or gadgetry, that's pretty impressive!

[snafu]

Third and perhaps most importantly, Vaarsuvius is highly intelligent and driven; Dr. Manhattan goes along with others and is likely the least intelligent of the Watchmen protagonists.

Er, what? Dr Manhattan's incredibly intelligent. He does chemistry experiments while having sex with his girlfriend.

The problem is that his background as a research scientist, plus his new identity as a godlike energy being, has left him with a rather abstract worldview. His priorities are different. So different that he's happy enough to sit on Mars forever meditating on the nature of quantum mechanics while the Earth burns.

[NerfTW]

Didn't see the movie,

I hope you haven't seen the movie, it's not even finished filming yet.

[derfenrirwolv]

Dr. Manhattan goes along with others and is likely the least intelligent of the Watchmen protagonists.


Definitely not. He was a research partical physicist BEFORE he became a god. That certainly puts him ahead of Rorshach, Night owl, the comedian and we don't know if ozzy is even that intelligent. Also remember at the end...


Ozzy asks MANHATTEN if he did the right thing or not. Ozzy looks to the one being on the planet smarter than he is for validation

[Neko Toast]

Vaarsuvius is highly intelligent and driven; Dr. Manhattan goes along with others and is likely the least intelligent of the Watchmen protagonists.

That's a poorly-worded contrast. Dr. Manhattan is extremely intelligent. The only other Watchmen character that he is easily compared to as far as brains go is Ozymandias. He just becomes so logical that he can no longer relate to or understand human emotions and idealism. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's stupid.

Though, I agree that Manhattan doesn't have a lot of motivation. If you compare him to V, he has next to nothing. But being unmotivated isn't due to a lack of intelligence, really.

Back to the main topic, does anyone else feel :nale: = Comedian? It does seem a little far-fetched, but their personalities seem to match somewhat.

[Warren Dew]

Not sure how you figure that out...Rorschach managed to take out several police officers while attempting to escape them in Moloch's house, and later in the prison defeated the crime boss and the two thugs who came after him without much effort. Considering everyone in Watchmen (apart from Dr. Manhattan, obviously) is just a normal human being with some training and/or gadgetry, that's pretty impressive!

It's impressive for a normal human being. For a hero, not so much. A character would probably only have to be maybe 6-7th level to manage the same feat in the Ootsiverse; consider how ineffective the Cliffport police are when dealing with the protagonists and antagonists. It's notable that Rorschach is the only protagonist captured. I'll grant that he's individually stronger than Nite Owl, and probably cleverer, but Nite Owl's flying machine more than evens the balance.

Miko, in contrast, took out all six in the Order of the Stick, solo, twice. Even Ozymandias only manages to neutralize three others - the Comedian, Dr. Manhattan, and Rorschach.


Definitely not. He was a research partical physicist BEFORE he became a god. That certainly puts him ahead of Rorshach, Night owl, the comedian and we don't know if ozzy is even that intelligent.

There are two kinds of scientist: theoreticians who figure out how things work, and experimentalists who collect data. Being a good theoretician requires being really intelligent. Being a good experimentalist only requires moderately high intelligence, but it requires a huge amount of persistence. For an example, Johannes Kepler was the theoretician who figured out that planets moved in ellipses; Tycho Brahe was the experimentalist who was satisfied with rejiggering the epicycles, but who also had the persistence to collect the huge volumes of observational data that Kepler needed to make his inferences.

Dr. Manhattan was an experimentalist, not a theoretician. He's got a tremendous amount of persistence - enough to put his own body back together subatomic particle by subatomic particle. However, he doesn't come up with any new theories, and doesn't even bother to try. He likely leaves that to the smarter theoreticians.

Ozymandias is clearly much smarter than Dr. Manhattan. We need only observe that he is able to catch Dr. Manhattan by surprise, despite Dr. Manhattan's ability to see into the future. The Ootsiverse equivalent would be catching the oracle by surprise.

This is not to say Dr. Manhattan is stupid. He's certainly smarter than the average person off the street. He's just not at a genius level.


Also remember at the end...

Ozzy asks MANHATTEN if he did the right thing or not. Ozzy looks to the one being on the planet smarter than he is for validation

No. He asks the one being who can see into the future to tell him whether he was right.

[derfenrirwolv]

Dr. Manhattan was an experimentalist, not a theoretician. He's got a tremendous amount of persistence - enough to put his own body back together subatomic particle by subatomic particle. However, he doesn't come up with any new theories, and doesn't even bother to try. He likely leaves that to the smarter theoreticians.

That seems fairly conjectural. The lab assistant showing him around said "So you're that new guy we heard about from princeton?" so he seems to have had a reputation comming up out of the pipe. Its not like he was there all that long before his transformation to find out if he was going to make any new theories or not.



Ozymandias is clearly much smarter than Dr. Manhattan.

Which is subtly if importantly different from being more INTELLIGENT than dr Manhattan. In terms of raw intelligence a PHD in physics > Degrees in mythology/engineering > "did well in religious studies" > probably less than the comedians "is good at blowing stuff up.

Remember that the Illithid non copyrighted brain eating squid monster prefered Roy to V, even though V is more inteligent, Roy is still smarter.


Ozy isn't advancing the forefront of knowledge and quantum physics. As far as we can tell his business acumen and incredible will give him access to the people who do.

He had geneticists work on the monster for him, he didn't do it himself


We need only observe that he is able to catch Dr. Manhattan by surprise, despite Dr. Manhattan's ability to see into the future. The Ootsiverse equivalent would be catching the oracle by surprise.

Which is wits, guile, dedication, planning, and gumption and a pair of you know whats large enough to leave skid marks. Not neccesarily an 18 inteligence.



This is not to say Dr. Manhattan is stupid. He's certainly smarter than the average person off the street. He's just not at a genius level.

Yeah I think if you're comming out of princeton with a phd in partical physicist you're at or near genius level.





No. He asks the one being who can see into the future to tell him whether he was right.[/QUOTE]


He's asking God for a moral judgement as well. (i don't think Doc walking on water is a coincidence) The tale of the black freighter is Ozzy's tale. Its one of moral decay in persuit of a worthy cause. Ozzy wants to know if he did the RIGHT thing, morally. Also, AFAIK , Ozzy never shuts off the Tachyon emiters, so he was asking Manhattans advice as manhattan, not as someone who can see the future