namor vs aquaman

[BentonGrey]

Yep, in the DCUG all of Aquaman and his supporting cast have both swimming and walking keys.

[bearded]

what herofile stats would you give him if the writer were to push him to his limits?

[BentonGrey]

Well, how exactly do you mean, Bearded?  If I were telling the story, Aquaman would eventually realize the full potential of his mental powers, and it would become evident that his really was the most powerful mind on the planet, able to pretty much do whatever he wants.  Then he would retire from superheroing to rule Atlantis, so as not to abuse his power.  Physically, pushed to his limits would probably look like his entry in the DCUG, bumped up a bit....:

Strength: 7-8
Speed: 6-7
Endurance: 6-7
Energy: 5-6
Agility: 5-7

Material: Wood

A good, solid punch dealing medium damage, along with a 3 hit combo doing the same.  I also give him a direct mental attack that causes panic, but I've never been happy with the damage type.  I give him an area attack, medium range that causes mind blank, and a passive defense that occasionally blocks a lot of damage types.

(I'll post more in a bit)

[Obstinate One]

I love both heroes & as much as people are making a point about Aquaman mental powers, I think he would just go toe2toe with Namor, just like he has with anyother underwater villian.... & lose.

[daglob]

Okay, I have these two Champions hulking (literally) villains, Bewilderbeest and Blunderbus, who have as one of their disadvantages that they get "bewildered" occasionally. It works like Berzerk, except instead of running around and tearing things up you stand there and play with your bottom lip going "blub-blub-blub...". All you need to do is sufficiently outthink them, and they will be rendered non compus mentis for the rest of combat.

Bewilderbeest: "I ahm going to BEEET" Smacks fist into plam of hand, "you OPPP!" (Yes, they talk like that)
Heroguy: "No you aren't."
Bewilderbeest: "Yes, I ahm!"
Heroguy: "No you aren't."
Bewilderbeest: "Yes, I ahm!"
Heroguy: "No you aren't."
Bewilderbeest: "Yes, I ahm!"
Heroguy: "Yes you are."
Bewilderbeest: "No, I ahm not!"
Heroguy: "Yes you are."
Bewilderbeest: "No, I ahm not!"
Heroguy: "Okay, have it your way, you aren't."
Bewilderbeest's mental faculaties grind to a halt.

Namor is NOT a deep thinker, and one of the most arrogant so-and-sos to ever exclaim "Imperius Rex!", while all through the early JLA and his own book, Aquaman often had to figure out puzzels and problems that didn't necessarily involve taking to fish (or that was just a small part of it). Namor's first tactic is usually an attempt to overawe someone with some pithy saying while striking a dynamic Kirby pose. If that fails, he tries to overawe his opposition by beating the stew out of them.

Neither of these things is really going to work with The Hulk. They don't work with The Thing either.

So, Aquaman would treat The Hulk as a puzzle (as big, green, enourmously powerful puzzle), and try to come up with some way to remedy the situation, that may or may not involve talking to fish. I like the "Look at the pretty fish, Hulk" solution.

What I would like to see is Orca teaming up with Black Manta, and the two of them comming up with some skullduggery that each can blame of their own adversary. The two rulers meet, negotiate, get tricked into fighting, and after a few panels Namor says "Why do you not fight?" and Aquaman answers "Because I came her to neotiate a solution to the problem, not intesify it by making you an enemy," and after the third time or so he says something like that Namor finally hears him and they stop and compare notes. Then the rest of he adventure looks like some of those Aquaman stories by Steve Skeats where he explored the bottom of the ocean, and it ends with Orca and Manta in custody.

[marhawkman]

Third time? Namor's not an idiot. He usually asks who someone is before punching them. If he likes the answer he sometimes won't punch them.

[BentonGrey]

What I would like to see is Orca teaming up with Black Manta, and the two of them comming up with some skullduggery that each can blame of their own adversary. The two rulers meet, negotiate, get tricked into fighting, and after a few panels Namor says "Why do you not fight?" and Aquaman answers "Because I came her to neotiate a solution to the problem, not intesify it by making you an enemy," and after the third time or so he says something like that Namor finally hears him and they stop and compare notes. Then the rest of he adventure looks like some of those Aquaman stories by Steve Skeats where he explored the bottom of the ocean, and it ends with Orca and Manta in custody.

Yes...yes...Prev, why hasn't that adventure been done yet?

[Previsionary]

What I would like to see is Orca teaming up with Black Manta, and the two of them comming up with some skullduggery that each can blame of their own adversary. The two rulers meet, negotiate, get tricked into fighting, and after a few panels Namor says "Why do you not fight?" and Aquaman answers "Because I came her to neotiate a solution to the problem, not intesify it by making you an enemy," and after the third time or so he says something like that Namor finally hears him and they stop and compare notes. Then the rest of he adventure looks like some of those Aquaman stories by Steve Skeats where he explored the bottom of the ocean, and it ends with Orca and Manta in custody.

Yes...yes...Prev, why hasn't that adventure been done yet?

I don't know who you are or why you think you can address me. Cease and desist, please.

[herodad1]

the best portrayal of namor and his hot-temper and arrogance is on the newest fantastic four cartoon.the episode is called "imperious rex" !they nailed him.thats one of the traits of namors i like.kinda like a angry version of hercules.he gives you THE GIFT just because he likes you and thinks he's doing you a favor by punching your lights out.

[daglob]

Third time? Namor's not an idiot. He usually asks who someone is before punching them. If he likes the answer he sometimes won't punch them.

Maybe Namor has mellowed in the past few years. He always seemed to me to shoot first and not really bother to ask questions later. He was not an idiot, just quick tempered, caused by an overwhelming bitterness and hate of the human race (which was somewhat justified).

[marhawkman]

Not much. but he does at least ask one or two questions first.

[yell0w_lantern]

RIIIIISE!

I can't believe you guys let this die.

How do you think this would have been handled in the old crossovers, back when there was no dimension hopping - they just hadn't "run into each other" until that time (e.g. Supes and Spidey)?

I think they would stale-mate with Namor being King of Atlantis and Aquaman being King of the Seas - the great city versus the wilds/wastes. Aquaman would be a valuable ally but a constant threat to Namor. Who would use Aquaman's help while remaining suspicious and watchful.

[Kenn]

BTW... those scenes with Aquaman dealing with War Maker 1 as he was retrieving the Shaggy Man were from the story that transformed General Eiling into the General (or as I liked to call him ... the Shaven Man.)

Never figured out which of the two Shaggy Men Eiling appropriated, or how he turned off the Shaggy Man's regeneration in his hair follicles, but...

Great thread.

And Benton's right.  All hail the Benton!

[BWPS]

I wonder what would happen if they fell in love 

[yell0w_lantern]

KENN! Long time no see, man.

I'd still like to hear what people think in regards to my previous post.

[JeyNyce]

Namor & Aquaman are STILL fighting???  I thought they would have made up by now.

[Kenn]

How do you think this would have been handled in the old crossovers, back when there was no dimension hopping - they just hadn't "run into each other" until that time (e.g. Supes and Spidey)?

I think they would stale-mate with Namor being King of Atlantis and Aquaman being King of the Seas - the great city versus the wilds/wastes. Aquaman would be a valuable ally but a constant threat to Namor. Who would use Aquaman's help while remaining suspicious and watchful.

I think there would have been some story difficulties to overcome.  Sometime in the early-mid 1960s, Aquaman became heavily embroiled in Atlantis.   Similarly, sometime in the 1960s was when it was finally established that Namor's undersea kingdom was Atlantis.   So, it would have depended exactly when they did the story. 

I think the easiest way to write the story would be to set it during the time that Namor was searching for his missing people, and have him find Poseidonos (as Aquaman's Atlantis came to be known) and wonder who these other sea dwellers were and what had they done with his people.

[Tawodi Osdi]

I have always thought it would be interesting to write a set of short stories melding DC and Marvel into a cohesive whole and still keep many of my favorite characters.  I am thinking it would be necessary to start from scratch on the universe and build upwards, but some characters and groups would be harder than others.  Keeping both Namor and Aquaman would be hard to explain the similarities and dissimilarities of the two characters, but I am having the same problem with Green Arrow/Hawkeye, Vision/Red Tornado, JLA/Avengers, and Doom Patrol/X-Men.

[Mr. Hamrick]

Aquaman
I'm not buying the "Aquaman as a powerful mentalist".  From all the stuff that I have seen originally portrayed about the guy, his telepathy was limited to sea life.  That hardly qualifies him as being a telepath on the level of Martian Manhunter, Charles Xavier or Jean Grey or any other major telepaths in comics.  It's a major leap to say that his telepathy would ever be on the level of Professor X or even The White Queen. 

No doubt that Aquaman is great at figuring stuff out, though.  He is a good but not great tactician.  I would say at least Batman and Wonder Woman are better at battle tactics than he is.  If the JLA was not clogged with characters with equal or superior leadership skills then I would buy that him as the leader of the JLA.  However, I can name three other characters who for one reason or another are better suited in a leadership role than Aquaman WITHOUT mentioning DC's BIG THREE.  Aquaman should excel in the leadership role and were the team on his turf then he would.

Namor
I don't get why Namor is considered a "hero".  It seems to me that he has been forced into that role moreso than Catwoman over in DC Comics (and a few other DC characters who have been forced into that role).  Namor is, at best, an anti-hero.  He is a loud, brash, allegedly human hating character (and for the most does hate humans) who is the complete antithesis of Aquaman.  He is not much of a tactician.  His leadership skills are negligible outside of "his people" and even then half of his people would just as quick serve Attuma. 

Personally, I think Aquaman would be able to outsmart Namor unless Namor got the jump on him.  In a fair fight, Aquaman would win.  However, and this has been proven, Namor is more than willing to cheat.

[BentonGrey]

Aquaman
I'm not buying the "Aquaman as a powerful mentalist".  From all the stuff that I have seen originally portrayed about the guy, his telepathy was limited to sea life.  That hardly qualifies him as being a telepath on the level of Martian Manhunter, Charles Xavier or Jean Grey or any other major telepaths in comics.  It's a major leap to say that his telepathy would ever be on the level of Professor X or even The White Queen.

No doubt that Aquaman is great at figuring stuff out, though.  He is a good but not great tactician.  I would say at least Batman and Wonder Woman are better at battle tactics than he is.  If the JLA was not clogged with characters with equal or superior leadership skills then I would buy that him as the leader of the JLA.  However, I can name three other characters who for one reason or another are better suited in a leadership role than Aquaman WITHOUT mentioning DC's BIG THREE.  Aquaman should excel in the leadership role and were the team on his turf then he would.

Namor
I don't get why Namor is considered a "hero".  It seems to me that he has been forced into that role moreso than Catwoman over in DC Comics (and a few other DC characters who have been forced into that role).  Namor is, at best, an anti-hero.  He is a loud, brash, allegedly human hating character (and for the most does hate humans) who is the complete antithesis of Aquaman.  He is not much of a tactician.  His leadership skills are negligible outside of "his people" and even then half of his people would just as quick serve Attuma.  

Personally, I think Aquaman would be able to outsmart Namor unless Namor got the jump on him.  In a fair fight, Aquaman would win.  However, and this has been proven, Namor is more than willing to cheat.

Emphasis added.  What exactly are you basing this on, Mr. Hammick?  What is "original" in this sense?  In the mid to early Silver Age, some five to ten years from his creation, his telepathy was already affecting humans.  He was also shown as being able to contact sea creatures from vast distances and control literal armies of marine life.  In the "original" Golden Age Aquaman stories, he had a different origin and explanation for his powers, though he was still powerful in his own right.

What is original?  What is the importance of the original portrayal of a character with a seventy year+ history?  When Superman was created, he couldn't fly, didn't have just about any of the powers he later developed, and was much weaker and much more vulnerable than he has been portrayed for the last, say, sixty years.  In fact, it was some five + years before he took on the appearance, power list, and even the HISTORY that we recognize as Superman today.  So, which is correct?  Can we attach a term like "correct" to a fictional character?  What is more important, the history of the character or his or her creator's original intent?  I've got a fairly fluid approach to answering those questions, but if you have an easy answer, I'm plenty open to hearing it.  

The fact is that, for the greater bulk of his history, Aquaman's telepathy has A) been able to affect humans, even if this detail has been forgotten about from time to time, and B) been extremely powerful in terms of range and scope.  He can commands armies of sea creatures....well, it is impossible to quantify things like this, as I explained earlier, but using the shaky logic that we can apply to this type of question, it seems to me that this is evidence for a prodigious telepathic power and talent.  Is he on the level of Martian Manhunter?  Well, seventy years of stories have implied that, yes, he is, although he lacks the training or focus to manipulate his power in the same way.  

As for his leadership abilities, well the man is a king, and the type of man that people are willing to follow.  There is more to leadership than tactics.  I've always loved this moment (which I posted earlier in this thread):
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8976/aquamanv614153ql.jpg

I'm interested who those other three characters you could name are, not that I'm necessarily saying you're wrong, simply pointing out other facets of the issue.  I DO think that he's an indispensable member of the League because of his ability to hang with the heavy hitters, and because of his unique point of view.

[Previsionary]

I'm just going to add that Namor IS considered an anti-hero and has been considered one for much of his history. He's actually seen as one of the earliest comic anti-heroes... yes, before Wolverine and Punisher, and everyone knows by now that he'll switch sides whenever it's convenient to him, his people, or his family.

Secondly, aquaman is an antithesis of Namor. Namor came first.

[Talavar]

Aquaman
I'm not buying the "Aquaman as a powerful mentalist".  From all the stuff that I have seen originally portrayed about the guy, his telepathy was limited to sea life.  That hardly qualifies him as being a telepath on the level of Martian Manhunter, Charles Xavier or Jean Grey or any other major telepaths in comics.  It's a major leap to say that his telepathy would ever be on the level of Professor X or even The White Queen.

No doubt that Aquaman is great at figuring stuff out, though.  He is a good but not great tactician.  I would say at least Batman and Wonder Woman are better at battle tactics than he is.  If the JLA was not clogged with characters with equal or superior leadership skills then I would buy that him as the leader of the JLA.  However, I can name three other characters who for one reason or another are better suited in a leadership role than Aquaman WITHOUT mentioning DC's BIG THREE.  Aquaman should excel in the leadership role and were the team on his turf then he would.

Namor
I don't get why Namor is considered a "hero".  It seems to me that he has been forced into that role moreso than Catwoman over in DC Comics (and a few other DC characters who have been forced into that role).  Namor is, at best, an anti-hero.  He is a loud, brash, allegedly human hating character (and for the most does hate humans) who is the complete antithesis of Aquaman.  He is not much of a tactician.  His leadership skills are negligible outside of "his people" and even then half of his people would just as quick serve Attuma.  

Personally, I think Aquaman would be able to outsmart Namor unless Namor got the jump on him.  In a fair fight, Aquaman would win.  However, and this has been proven, Namor is more than willing to cheat.

Emphasis added.  What exactly are you basing this on, Mr. Hammick?  What is "original" in this sense?  In the mid to early Silver Age, some five toi ten years from his creation, his telepathy was already affecting humans.  He was also shown as being able to contact sea creatures from vast distances and control literal armies of marine life.  In the "original" Golden Age Aquaman stories, he had a different origin and explanation for his powers, though he was still powerful in his own right.

What is original?  What is the importance of the original portrayal of a character with a seventy year+ history?  When Superman was created, he couldn't fly, didn't have just about any of the powers he later developed, and was much weaker and much more vulnerable than he has been portrayed for the last, say, sixty years.  In fact, it was some five + years before he took on the appearance, power list, and even the HISTORY that we recognize as Superman today.  So, which is correct?  Can we attach a term like "correct" to a fictional character?  What is more important, the history of the character or his or her creator's original intent?  I've got a fairly fluid approach to answering those questions, but if you have an easy answer, I'm plenty open to hearing it.  

The fact is that, for the greater bulk of his history, Aquaman's telepathy has A) been able to affect humans, even if this detail has been forgotten about from time to time, and B) been extremely powerful in terms of range and scope.  He can commands armies of sea creatures....well, it is impossible to quantify things like this, as I explained earlier, but using the shaky logic that we can apply to this type of question, it seems to me that this is evidence for a prodigious telepathic power and talent.  Is he on the level of Martian Manhunter?  Well, seventy years of stories have implied that, yes, he is, although he lacks the training or focus to manipulate his power in the same way.  

I don't think original versions of characters are necessarily the most important versions, but rather the "core" or definitive versions of characters are the ones we should base our views of them from.  For Superman, flight and vision powers, and his origin, while not their from his creation, have become part of the definitive version of Superman.  For Aquaman, powerful telepathy that has no fish-based limitations has not become part of his core character.  Sure, it's been used that way a few times, but Namor has also had electric eel-based powers once or twice, and Superman had super-hypnosis.

[BentonGrey]

I don't think original versions of characters are necessarily the most important versions, but rather the "core" or definitive versions of characters are the ones we should base our views of them from.  For Superman, flight and vision powers, and his origin, while not their from his creation, have become part of the definitive version of Superman.  For Aquaman, powerful telepathy that has no fish-based limitations has not become part of his core character.  Sure, it's been used that way a few times, but Namor has also had electric eel-based powers once or twice, and Superman had super-hypnosis.

Actually, Talavar, as I've mentioned, Aquaman's powers having no hardcore fish-based limitation has been a fairly consistent part of his characterization for the last twenty-five to thirty years (thirty out of fifty, taking his Silver Age incarnation as a new creation), and not unprecedented before that.  Superman had super-hypnosis for only about six or eight years, really.  From him using his telepathy on several human  beings without even batting an eye in the 80's when he was part of JLA: Detroit, to him consistently using his telepathy as an offensive weapon in Morrison's JLA run, there has been ample evidence of Aquaman being able to jump that boundary for decades.  
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2917/964/1600/notafish.jpg

It was around in the Silver Age, it was pretty consistent in the Bronze Age both in his own book and in JLA, and it is constant in the Modern Age.  In JLA: Classified he did this a few times, and in the JLA books that featured him until his death, he made constant use of this power as well, battling the likes of Despero.  Needless to say, his own books showcased this as well, with our much maligned hero being able to casually scan his teamate, Martian Manhunter's thoughts, invade the mind of an evil scientist, and do a whole lot more.  Arthur being a POWERFUL telepath (in terms of scope and range), fish-based or otherwise, has been part of his character for seventy years, reaching all the way back to his creation in 1941.

What is the core?  I'd say the core of his character is that he's an incredibly powerful telepath who usually doesn't use his telepathy to affect humans, but who has been shown to be capable of such a feat.  However, it IS a feat for him in the early days, although why that is can be a subject for debate.  Also, if there IS an overarching continuity to these characters, a certain amount of experience gain is both implicit and occasionally explicit in the way they act.  Thus, his increased facility with his mental powers could certainly be explained from the simple fact that he's been doing it for years now, even in comic time.

[Kenn]

I will say in comparison to the Martian Manhunter, I'm not sure when J'onn's mental powers became as powerful as they've seemed for the past decade or two.

As far as quantifying Aquaman's mental powers I think the problem faced is the brain twister of "he can affect a whole herd of whales at once but he can't affect a single human being" (which to me makes no sense), combined with a generation of people who grew up listening to Norm Alden (original and "All-New") and Bill Callaway ("Challenge of the..." on) refer to "my aquatic telepathy."

[Mr. Hamrick]

Emphasis added.  What exactly are you basing this on, Mr. Hammick?  What is "original" in this sense?  In the mid to early Silver Age, some five toi ten years from his creation, his telepathy was already affecting humans.  He was also shown as being able to contact sea creatures from vast distances and control literal armies of marine life.  In the "original" Golden Age Aquaman stories, he had a different origin and explanation for his powers, though he was still powerful in his own right.

What is original?  What is the importance of the original portrayal of a character with a seventy year+ history?  When Superman was created, he couldn't fly, didn't have just about any of the powers he later developed, and was much weaker and much more vulnerable than he has been portrayed for the last, say, sixty years.  In fact, it was some five + years before he took on the appearance, power list, and even the HISTORY that we recognize as Superman today.  So, which is correct?  Can we attach a term like "correct" to a fictional character?  What is more important, the history of the character or his or her creator's original intent?  I've got a fairly fluid approach to answering those questions, but if you have an easy answer, I'm plenty open to hearing it.  

The fact is that, for the greater bulk of his history, Aquaman's telepathy has A) been able to affect humans, even if this detail has been forgotten about from time to time, and B) been extremely powerful in terms of range and scope.  He can commands armies of sea creatures....well, it is impossible to quantify things like this, as I explained earlier, but using the shaky logic that we can apply to this type of question, it seems to me that this is evidence for a prodigious telepathic power and talent.  Is he on the level of Martian Manhunter?  Well, seventy years of stories have implied that, yes, he is, although he lacks the training or focus to manipulate his power in the same way.  

First of all, it amazes me that you of all people are using that argument.  The same guy who has indicated elsewhere that he felt the the Timmiverse was the end all, be all and ultimately correct portrayal of a character as oppose to say... a live action movie interpretation.  I am speaking in particular with regards to the Catwoman discussion.

Generally, I consider The Silver Age version to be the "core" with regards to most of the DC characters.  Most of the DC characters were altered significantly during 50s and 60s for better or worse.  (Even Batman was altered in a few ways.)  With Aquaman, it's always seemed to me that the times where his telepathy had "some degree of effect on humans" were a stretch by writers who didn't know what else to do with his telepathy powers.   In the past, Aquaman's telepathy having an effect on humans was on the basis of "humans that evolved from sea life" not "all humans".  The telepathic powers were and always have been centered around his connection to the sea.  

Furthermore, DC has made a point of where there was "Arthur Joseph" and "Orin" who have both had the mantle of Aquaman.  I'm going moreso with the version portrayed in the early to mid 60s.

However, the point of my argument is the usage of his telepathy by the potency of it and the potential.  Martian Manhunter is a horrid example but he was the only hero in the DCU who I could recall having telepathy offhand.  My point is neither Martian Manhunter nor Aquaman are nor should be on the level of telepaths like Professor X or Emma Frost over at Marvel.  It doesn't fit the "DCU".  The only villain (that I recall offhand) is a "major telepath" is Hector Hammond and he is completely paralyzed physically.

In your earlier post, Benton, you said

If I were telling the story, Aquaman would eventually realize the full potential of his mental powers, and it would become evident that his really was the most powerful mind on the planet, able to pretty much do whatever he wants.  Then he would retire from superheroing to rule Atlantis, so as not to abuse his power.  Physically, pushed to his limits would probably look like his entry in the DCUG, bumped up a bit....:

Which I wholeheartedly call BS on.  Even if he was to realize the full extent of his mental powers, I don't think he would be the "most powerful mind" in the DCU.  There are characters who are already at that point (and no, I don't consider Martian Manhunter near that point) and who are suffering the consequences in some cases.   There is a big difference between reading minds and putting thoughts into one's mind and the idea of mind control and mentally altering another person's mind.  Ask Matt Parkman.

Could Aquaman's powers be developed further under the right writer?  Yes.  And they should.  And it should be done in a way makes sense.
Should they be developed to the level of "Professor X" or "Emma Frost"?  No.

Again, Aquaman is at best equal to Martian Manhunter as far as telepathy.  Where Martian Manhunter surpasses him is the way in which he uses it.  (I am thinking from a tactical standpoint.)
Are you the right person to write Aquaman?  Clearly not.  You'd write him practically out of existence.   Just like I am not the right person to let anywhere near a Batman story.

As for his leadership abilities, well the man is a king, and the type of man that people are willing to follow.  There is more to leadership than tactics.  I've always loved this moment (which I posted earlier in this thread):
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8976/aquamanv614153ql.jpg

I'm interested who those other three characters you could name are, not that I'm necessarily saying you're wrong, simply pointing out other facets of the issue.  I DO think that he's an indispensable member of the League because of his ability to hang with the heavy hitters, and because of his unique point of view.

I fully agree that there is more to leadership than tactics.  My point in mentioning tactics specifically is that its the area where Aquaman is arguably weakest.  Mind you, I am talking land tactics.  IF you need underwater tactics then he is your guy.

As for the three other than The Big Three.

1) Green Lantern (Hal Jordan) - Should go without saying.  I will add in that he has proven himself capable of leading in combat situations with regards to tactical strategies.  

2) Green Arrow

3) Oracle - My rationale on this goes back to information and tactics.  She is the information center for the League.

Mind you, we are talking about leading a team of Superheroes into major combat or at best handing a major catastrophe.  We are not talking about simple things like patrol duty of a city.  Or round up a small time street gang or group of non-powered thugs.  

I am not trying to argue that Aquaman isn't an indispensable part of the League.  However, he is arguably one of the major members of the League whose role in the League is the worst defined.  Again, I am basing this on what I have read of his appearances in the Justice League comics, JLA, Superfriends, and and some (admitted few) of his solo title.  
I suspect that most of his solo appearances portray him differently than his usage in the Justice League titles.  Which cements my point.

Secondly, aquaman is an antithesis of Namor. Namor came first.  

I think everyone knows I prefer DC to Marvel.  

[Trelau]

you both make a lot of interesting points, and about half fly above my head
so i don't know the character well enough, but i just wanted to ask about aquaman's telepathy: wasn't Aquaman "powerful" mind a major plot in Alex Ross' Justice? I'm pretty sure Brainiac had him detained to study his mind/brain because of its potential or something.

I've always seen aquaman as a generic telepath wo had a specialty in sea life (manipulation hordes of fishes is a special exercise, coordinating their movement and such) so it was a just a matter of "how they think" (explaining why he affected human evolved from fish more easily). Now if he was to train himself and learn the human mind to know it as much as he knows sea-life minds, he could be pretty powerful, and maybe too powerfull (i agree that phoeniw/xavier telepath who can control hugue crowd of people is not the way to go for aquaman)

You talk about sea-limitation, i've always understood it as sea-specialisation (then again i wasn't contaminated by "superfriend" when i was young). Same goes for his strengh. A lot of people think of him a human-strong at beast then when splashed with water or underwater he become somewhat strong. For me it always was somewhat strong in the begining (able to lift a car but not a truck) and if reinforced by water insanely strong (not superman level, but maybe between wonderwoman and martian manhunter)

As for the "core" version of characters, i think we can agree that there is none. Each generation and even each individual has his own "core" version of popular character. It depends on what version you liked the most, and just what version you saw first.
For example: a lot of people consider Chritopher Reeve to be superman; but me i saw the movies way after, and for my brother and i superman will always be be Dean Cain. And still going, my younger sister got interested in superman only thanks to Smallville, and that "her" core character.
If you're talking about "generally accepted as" core character, i'm not sure it as a lot of weight. In 5 years (lets say after the JLA movie) a lot of characters could be reinterpreted by a lot of people.

[GhostMachine]

In a straight up, man-y-mano fight, Aquaman would get his clock cleaned, no matter what. Namor vastly outclasses him in strength and durability, and that's not even factoring in the fact Namor can fly.

However, in a fight that involved tactics rather than a toe to toe throwdown or troops, I'd give it to Aquaman. Because Namor is arrogant and tends to head into things without thinking and Marvel Atlanteans are idiots whose loyalty flip-flops at the drop of a hat.

Aquaman's telepathy should NOT be able to have any major effect on humans or be hard to resist. If I remember correctly, back during the Justice League Detroit days he used it on someone (Vibe?) and ended up explaining he doesn't do for moral reasons and because its stressful to use it on humans. Any other telepathic hero - DC or Marvel - should be able to thrash Aquaman in a telepathic fight.....unless they're both using it on fish.

[Tawodi Osdi]

One thing that should be taken into account about Aquaman's telepathy is it's ability to cross into all aquatic species regardless of species types.  It includes mammals, fish, mollusks, and crustaceans and have even been shown to work on alien aquatic species, and I have seen comics were it has had a limited capacity on humans.  It is possible that the limitation on aquatic animals might be some sort of sub-conscious thing, and he is could be a powerful telepathy as far as range and scope, but I don't see him having the telepathic focus that more dedicated telepaths would have.

[Talavar]

As for the "core" version of characters, i think we can agree that there is none. Each generation and even each individual has his own "core" version of popular character. It depends on what version you liked the most, and just what version you saw first.
For example: a lot of people consider Chritopher Reeve to be superman; but me i saw the movies way after, and for my brother and i superman will always be be Dean Cain. And still going, my younger sister got interested in superman only thanks to Smallville, and that "her" core character.
If you're talking about "generally accepted as" core character, i'm not sure it as a lot of weight. In 5 years (lets say after the JLA movie) a lot of characters could be reinterpreted by a lot of people.

Core versions of character do change over time, but it generally takes quite a while.  Look at your 3 examples of Superman - how different are they really?  They have the same powers (though Reeve-Superman still has a little bit of that "I make up new powers as necessary" holdover from the Silver Age), they have the same values, the same origin, mostly the same supporting cast, villains, etc.  Contrast the three of them (produced over a period of 30 years) to Superman as he was originally created, and you have a character who is different in almost every one of those respects. 

[thalaw2]

What do namor and aquaman eat?  Has that question been answered?  I mean...if you could telepathically call to fish is it fair to eat them?