The Superman Problem

Let's talk Superman.

And as part of this discussion, let's look at it through the lense of roleplaying as well. Because I think that the issues people have writing for Superman are possibly the same issues game masters have with powerful characters.

A bit over a decade ago, I wrote a piece concerning Superman on io9 (back when it existed), and I think it's still relevant in this day and age -- and especially when it has to do with gaming. Which any number of game masters complain about power gamers and min-maxers, and yeah, it's the same issue.  First, I'll post the article (with a little editing), and then I'll get back to this.

Superman

I think Superman and Captain America are mirrors, but I think that the best stories that involve Superman aren't the ones where he's isolated. I think the best ones are when he is around those he cares about and when he's part of society.  The forever alone Superman just isn't that interesting.

A good Superman story is one where he has Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, his parents, and his job, where you can take a look at the people who support his human side, and who help keep his moral compass strong. He knows these people, he cares for these people, and by extension, he cares about the human race as a whole. They're his touchstones, and it is this interplay between Clark Kent and the people around him which allows us to see how he observes the human race.

You can, of course, put in a contrast - and that's good - as it helps to bring into view the things he simply cannot do - and cannot be a part of. And yes, he can feel a bit of isolation there. The story can show us this - that 'he is one of them ... but not quite'. That's where you introduce a little bit of the alien side of things to show that, in some ways, there is a glass ceiling, and he'll never be able to push through it and be fully 'human'.

But it can also be used to remind us that he's, in essence, a warden of humanity, that he protects the human race, and has that degree of separation from the same people he's protecting, but is still a part of the human race and has empathy for it.

I keep hearing that the story of Superman is hard to write, and I call bull on that. The fact is, the tension in Superman is never will he win -- that's never the issue, and trying to make it an issue makes for a lame story. The point is can he save us, and at what cost to him?

The Story of Superman is about self-sacrifice. He has all these powers, but he has to hold back on using them, because they are a danger to those around him. He has to be careful, he has to always be aware of his environment, and of the damage he might do if he lets his focus slip. When he's battling a threat, he has to measure his powers against that threat, so he doesn't go too far. If the bad guy's too powerful, he has to ensure that he measures what he can do, and what the enemy can do, against the world around him.

2023 Editor's Note:  Include in this the sacrifices he has to make against his role as Clark Kent -- missed meetings, secret identity, having to dart out in the middle of a get-together, interrupting his personal time, and so forth.  He's on-call 24/7.  Now back to the article.

And I think that's the failing in the movie Man of Steel. The Superman of that movie did not measure his powers against his environment, and did not measure the threat of his opponent against that same environment. Nothing in that movie really shows how much he cares for the human race, and it did not show us the sacrifices he has to make to ensure the peace and safety of humanity.

If you look back at the classic Superman films (1, 2), and Superman Returns, it shows explicitly how much he cares about humanity, and how much he's willing to take that extra effort to protect people from harm. Man of Steel failed to do this, and that was, I believe, a failing of that movie.

I mentioned Captain America as a mirror, right?

Captain America tells a different story. In Captain America, we have a character who was born and raised to have always been the 'small guy', but who had the courage and drive to be greater than what he was. The super soldier serum changed him -- it made his body match his will. His story is the 'person out of time' - he has all these abilities, and he holds to these somewhat outdated ideals, but the world around him always falls short. And he has to face this and accept this. Everything around him is a combination of the familiar and the strange, and it is a world where he feels he doesn't quite fit. Every time he gets comfortable, something happens to remind him that this is not the world he remembers.

Marvel Comics has always been about the personal story, and it is at its best when it plays to that strength. Captain America is awesome, no question, but in spite of this he will never be able to fit in - there's too many ghosts of his past there -- his entire history has been swept away and left him unmoored, but it still lingers, and he will remember that always. He remembers a 'simpler time', and this world is just so complex. He remembers a more black and white morality, and this world has so many shades of grey.

Okay, now my 2023 thoughts on this matter:

When dealing with powerful characters, a good thing to do is to see where they fit in the narrative. What makes them interesting, where are they vulnerable, and how do you bring this to the table. In a TTRPG, you can have a Superman. The story is not how well he can beat the villains -- we all know he can -- but we look at what's actually important to the character themselves, and we make the story about that. Who is this person? Why do they do what they do? Where do they feel vulnerable?

Now, a game master may say 'the player doesn't care about any of that' when they talk about power gamers and min/maxers. That's where communication becomes an important step.  You talk with the player.  "So, what's important to the character that's pertinent to the game?"  And you don't accept 'nothing', or 'to be the best' or anything like that. "How is the character connected to society? Who are their friends? Who's important to them? Where are they from?" This is a reason why I give my players a '20 questions' to look at during character creation. It makes them think about who their characters are as people.

And once you've got that, you can build that into the campaign.  My games don't have a lot of combat usually - it's about the characters, the decisions they make along the way, the impact of their decisions, and how the consequences cause them to evolve.  You can go 20 sessions without a single combat - but the characters grow and mature all the same. Going from a dungeon to the town isn't a brief stop over, the characters spend time in town, meet people, interact with the citizenry, and encounter colourful and interesting people. This grounds them and makes the game more than a hack-and-slash fest.

And if you're dealing with murder hobos? All the better - you show them that there's consequences to their actions.  You play the rabid dog, you get shot down like the rabid dog. (And, personal advice: just because they're the PCs, don't hold back when it comes to murder hobos. What, realistically, would be sent after them - and then send it.  If it causes a TPK?  So be it.)

Okay.  A little later, I'd written a second article on the subject.  So, let's delve into that as well.

Regarding Pulp Heroes.

Some time ago there was going to be a movie about Doc Savage. He's a paragon of the pulpe era, the 'perfect man'. But, for some reason, Hollywood was deciding he had to have an abusive father who 'drove' him to be this way.

Part of this conversation, of course, turned to Superman. I pointed out that the best Superman stories aren't the ones where he 'falls from grace' or is 'vulnerable'. The best ones are the ones where he's the paragon he's supposed to be, but humanity fails him - and yet, even so, he continues as he is, and allows humanity to grow because of the ideals he presents. He's iconic.

In a movie, or a 'rebooted' comic, Superman should always be Superman. He should be the representation of the best humanity could ever hope to be. He should shoulder the responsibility of being the super man. An excellent example is the original Superman movie.  In that, it was perfect.

The second movie showed the cost of his ideals. Not that he 'falters', but that doing the right thing isn't easy -- there's always a price. Good examples include Superman 2, Superman vs the Elite, and Kingdom Come. All of these were good for different reasons.

In Superman 2, he sacrifices himself to have a normal life, and learns that this is not something he can do. He is needed. We can sympathise with him here, but his duty outweighs his personal desires. Superman vs the Elite, humanity decides that criminals need 'harsh' justice, and the Elite provides it. They consider Superman to be soft, and the public turn away from him. Superman then shows just how terrifying he could be if he went the same route the Elite did -- teaching a valuable lesson while remaining true to who he is.

2023 Editor's Note: Note that the leader of the Elite completely loses it when he thinks Superman's gone cruel. To him, that is not who Superman is nor should it be. Even he recognizes that this is completely and utterly wrong, and it scares him. While he mocks the ideals Superman stands for he doesn't want Superman to change.

In Kingdom Come, this is much the same. Humanity turns to the violent heroes, and when Lois dies, he doesn't become 'hardened'. He retreats, turning inward. And when he comes back later? He's still holding to his ideals.

But it seems Hollywood and DC have forgotten this. Superman is Superman. His strength of conviction, his insistence on doing the right thing, is what defines him. But no, they want him 'gritty' and 'flawed'. They want to show his fall from grace, because to them, that's 'exciting'. They forget that the story of Superman isn't about 'look what he can do!' (even if it's cool to show it from time to time -- the bullet to the eye in Superman Returns was a nice bit there).  It's about the impact he has on the people around him -- how it affects us.

Yes, it is awesome to see Superman throw down. I get that. Just like it's awesome to see a lightsaber duel in Star Wars. But you know what's better? When there's a point to it. The lightsaber duel is not the point in Star Wars -- it's that the duel is part of a larger narrative (missing some in the sequel trilogies, I admit). The duel isn't there because 'oh, it'd be cool to put a duel there'. Superman doesn't throw down because 'fights are cool'.

2023: To give more of an example.  Star Wars: A New Hope.  There's one duel. It is Ben Kenobi making the ultimate sacrifice against his old apprentice to give the heroes the chance to escape.

Empire Strikes Back:  It is Luke being reckless, and the price he pays for it -- he isn't ready for both the physical and emotional cost of that duel. It's the culmination of him rushing ahead blind and putting everyone else at risk because of it.

Return of the Jedi: The battle of Jabba the Hutt isn't really a lightsaber duel, let's talk about the real duel. It is a battle between light and dark, past and present, one's ideals and the price one pays for having them, and ultimately, it's redemption.

Back to the story.

While Hollywood likes using Superman as a Christ figure, they're missing what he truly is. He's a Moses figure. He is the person leading humanity to freedom and to a greater world. It is the people who follow him who falter -- who turn away, then suffer for it. Then they return to him, and he says 'see, I told you', then continues to lead them. Moses isn't the one who goes 'oh, look, I'm going to sin'. He isn't the one who falls - it is the people he's guiding who are the ones who go astray, and he's the one who draws them back onto the path. That's what Superman does. He's the constant in the universe, and he's the one who inspires the people around him to be better than they are. And it isn't about the 'miracles' he does. It is about him being an icon of what humanity can become, just like it isn't about the miracles that Moses does.

This is where Man of Steel failed. This is where the New 52 failed. They forgot who Superman was. They tried to make him something that he isn't. Superman is supposed to represent the best in us, and it seems that there's people who think that's 'boring' and 'cliche'. You know what? Sometimes people need symbols of hope, and not all symbols need to be tarnished. We need something to strive towards, and believe in, and we don't need that symbol to be flawed. Humanity is flawed enough as it is.

Bringing this back to gaming.
The Paladin.
I've heard more than enough GMs try to make the paladin in the party fall. They think it's cool to break the paladin, and that a player who sticks to their paladin's ideals needs to be punished in some fashion in-game.

And that sucks. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a paladin being a paragon, and being able to continue being that paragon - a source of inspiration for the people around them. Stop trying to break the hero - if the player wants to be the big damn hero, let them.  Let them be the paragon they want to play, and stop forcing your cynicism on them.  Sheesh.

Anyway, I've taken more than enough of your time - if you made it this far, awesome.  Take care, happy gaming.

Kit, CEO