There was a bit of ambiguity about whether "Super Hero
" even includes these guys or not back when I made this trope. It has as far as I know always included two different definitions: "has superpowers" and "uses stereotypical superhero tropes". So, Superman is both, Batman is only the second, Herakles is only the first, ergo Herakles and Batman have nothing relevant in common. I'm not sure if that TRS discussion about Super Hero
ever went anywhere. But apparently the characters under this trope are still "super heroes" even in trope terms now. (Even Zorro kind of is; at least he's been mentioned as a precursor.) I don't think that's a very sensible way of defining the "single" trope Super Hero
— I'm not a fan of deliberately using family resemblance — but I'm not going to contest it.
Anyway, the actual reason this trope exists? Because people were already using it
, a lot. They just called it Badass Normal
. But that makes no sense at all except that Batman happens to be both. So it's needed with just the definition that it has now.
So... if it's settled superheroes don't need powers, this is actually Sub-Trope
, and I suggest a name change to remove the paradox. Something like "Non-Powered Costumed Hero" was suggested in the YKTTW
. Even something like "Powerless Superhero" could be considered, except that that would muddle the neat definition in case someone happened to somehow manage to be a superhero in someone's mind with no costume or
By the way, the Laconic page contains the exact
intended definition, so anyone confused about it can refer to that. (Although I am tempted to change it very slightly. I just haven't wanted to open a TRS discussion to debate it likely just among myself, nor to just change the core definition unilaterally because that's not technically allowed. Well, now that we're here, I'm going to add "or to save people" in the middle, and I hope no-one objects. Oh, and now I had to tweak it a bit to exclude firemen and police officers too.)
edited 13th Dec '12 2:12:50 AM by VVK