Revising Our Standards for "Varies Tier"

[The_Impress]

I don't believe that's true, I think the writers have an understanding of the power levels (maybe DC isn't the best example here, but I'm generally talking about human action characters here), it's just that those power levels, as paradoxical as it sounds, are "peak human guy that can pull off superhuman feats". Which in my opinion isn't too different from "character that can be strong or weak based on comedy".

I actually disagree immensely with regards to this, given the number of people who attempt to unironically replicate action film stunts IRL and the multitude of " lol if you did this irl you'd die, betcha didn't know". Most 10-A to 9-B feats are genuinely indistinguishable to those unknowledgeable in regards to this.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm still not really convinced by Zark's points and if what ArmorChompy is true, that only makes by disagreements stronger.

Ryukama has still stated on other threads that we need lore based details and not just writers being really forgetful with their own characters/work or showcase the simple fact that they simply do not care about power scaling or logic. Even Matthew Schroeder said that having a variable where someone is as low as Tier 9 or even Tier 10 in some entries and having Tier 2/1 at their peaks is far to big of a gap. And to repeat what they basically said, it's just an excuse to lazily axe all outliers and PIS out of existence. By the looks of it, Andy is also agreeing with that point specifically.

Not to mention, If we're just going to have one key that covers a gap that big, then what ArmorChompy is proposing next to that is basically going to be making a proposal with the powers and abilities that would only end in disaster. I don't know how we could properly format a powers and abilities section on a single key page that just has a tier from "At least Tier 8" via stomping foot soldiers that strong with ease to "2-C/2-B" at his peak because he matched someone physically merged and amplified by a McGuffin that grants multiversal powers of destruction and recreation.

And before people bring up Bugs Bunny or Popeye; they had other issues such as the existence of reboots + a multitude of spinoff series that followed completely different continuities and what not. But then was had a what/if scenario when we still treat each respected series as the same canon even if the various episodes within any individual series is canon. But Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy is another example where it's just one canon even if some episodes are out of order, and there were episodes that ended with people dying but where back to life in other episodes. Mario doesn't have reboots, and even other spin off series have hints or even confirmed facts about past games mainline or otherwise happening before the game(s) and even main series games also had confirmations of spin off games happening before main games that I may elaborate further even if I got 2 days left to do so. Plus there were still other proposals to tackle such as key splits as opposed to just a single key variable tier.

 

[The_Impress]

I'm still not really convinced by Zark's points and if what ArmorChompy is true, that only makes by disagreements stronger.

Good job I addressed every single one of Armor's points to concession then.

Ryukama has still stated on other threads that we need lore based details and not just writers being senile with their own characters/work or showcase the simple fact that they simply do not care about power scaling or logic.

Are you gonna call classic cartoons senile now? Not everything is the same milktoast shit in narrative, saying names of past staff members doesn't favour you when you're shit-talking some of the greatest and most important pieces of medias as "senile", I'd suggest you should be more respectful to them.

In general you're mentioning people not on site, so I can't address what they say since they're NOT ON WIKI to defend it.

Even Matthew Schroeder said that having a variable where someone is as low as Tier 9 or even Tier 10 in some entries and having Tier 2/1 at their peaks is far to big of a gap.

Good job we're not giving tiers off inconsistency, strawman

Not to mention, If we're just going to have one key that covers a gap that big, then what ArmorChompy is proposing next to that is basically going to be making a proposal with the powers and abilities that would only end in disaster

Why? I gave a solution, Armor agrees to it, you're inventing notion it's a disaster

. I don't know how we could properly format a powers and abilities section on a single key page

Good job I showed how to do it.

"2-C/2-B" at his peak because he matched someone physically merged and amplified by a McGuffin that grants multiversal powers of destruction and recreation.

Do you magically forget the basic logic of me just listing this McGuffin in a separate key, make this argument be a thing? I never suggested this, strawman

And before people bring up Bugs Bunny or Popeye; they had other issues such as the existence of reboots

Good thing we're not talking about these reboots anyways.

+ a multitude of spinoff series that followed completely different continuities and what not. But we still treat each respected series as the same canon even if the various episodes within any individual series is canon.

Did you read a word of my proposal? This is LITERALLY ABOUT Popeye and Bugs, and no, they don't. Just saying they do doesn't magically make it a thing.

And what "we treat verses as" is irrelevant when I am LITERALLY ADDRESSING how we're treating verses, this is a sitewide staff thread, man.

But Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy is another example where it's just one canon even if some episodes are out of order, and there were episodes that ended with people dying but where back to life in other episodes.

Good thing we're not talking about canon DDM, for the 5th time. We're talking narrative flexibility, things can be non-linear as well as muddled, but still canon, solution isn't to go "**** CONTINUITY, LET'S COMPOSITE AND ACT LIKE THESE CARTOON CHARACTERS ARE MASTER HAXLORDS",

Mario doesn't have reboots, and even other spin off series have hints or even confirmed facts about past games mainline or otherwise happening before the game(s) and even main series games also had confirmations of spin off games happening before main games that I may elaborate further even if I got 2 days left to do so.

Having references doesn't make things canon, by this logic Marvel is canon to DC, and Smash Bros. is canon to Bayonetta, and Sonic as well as Earthworm Jim is canon to Mario.

And at the end of the day issue isn't that what is canon and what is not, strawman.

Plus there were still other proposals to tackle such as key splits as opposed to just a single key variable tier.

I'm not allowing 9 million keys on the same file, thank you.

In general 70% of your argument is strawmen, 10% of it is bringing up Armor's points which I got a concession from Armor himself on, and rest 20% is hyperfocusing on a single verse when this is sitewide, I don't what's happening here, man.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I'm still not really convinced by Zark's points and if what ArmorChompy is true, that only makes by disagreements stronger.

Ryukama has still stated on other threads that we need lore based details and not just writers being senile with their own characters/work or showcase the simple fact that they simply do not care about power scaling or logic. Even Matthew Schroeder said that having a variable where someone is as low as Tier 9 or even Tier 10 in some entries and having Tier 2/1 at their peaks is far to big of a gap. And to repeat what they basically said, it's just an excuse to lazily axe all outliers and PIS out of existence. By the looks of it, Andy is also agreeing with that point specifically.

Not to mention, If we're just going to have one key that covers a gap that big, then what ArmorChompy is proposing next to that is basically going to be making a proposal with the powers and abilities that would only end in disaster. I don't know how we could properly format a powers and abilities section on a single key page that just has a tier from "At least Tier 8" via stomping foot soldiers that strong with ease to "2-C/2-B" at his peak because he matched someone physically merged and amplified by a McGuffin that grants multiversal powers of destruction and recreation.

And before people bring up Bugs Bunny or Popeye; they had other issues such as the existence of reboots + a multitude of spinoff series that followed completely different continuities and what not. But we still treat each respected series as the same canon even if the various episodes within any individual series is canon. But Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy is another example where it's just one canon even if some episodes are out of order, and there were episodes that ended with people dying but where back to life in other episodes. Mario doesn't have reboots, and even other spin off series have hints or even confirmed facts about past games mainline or otherwise happening before the game(s) and even main series games also had confirmations of spin off games happening before main games that I may elaborate further even if I got 2 days left to do so. Plus there were still other proposals to tackle such as key splits as opposed to just a single key variable tier.

This logic seems to only apply for inconsistent/gag characters.

 

[The_Impress]

This logic seems to only apply for inconsistent/gag characters.

Ok so I have two proposals actually, so as to clarify confusion

The varies narrative stuff applies to those cartoon characters where it wasn't an A->B->C narrative, it is explained first.

The Toon Force stuff applies to gag characters, it is explained in latter half

 

[Armorchompy]

Good job I addressed every single one of Armor's points to concession then.

I haven't agreed on the Toon Force stuff, just agreed that if we are to do it, it's a good idea to get pretty strict standards going.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Good job I addressed every single one of Armor's points to concession then

I still don't think its necessary for THAT many tabbers on a single profile page. 6 keys is generally the limit for a single profile, and there should be some limit for the number of tabbers.

Are you gonna call classic cartoons senile now? Not everything is the same milktoast shit in narrative, saying names of past staff members doesn't favour you when you're shit-talking some of the greatest and most important pieces of medias as "senile", I'd suggest you should be more respectful to them.

In general you're mentioning people not on site, so I can't address what they say since they're NOT ON WIKI to defend it.

Not the cartoons, the writers. Also, I looked up the word again, and noticed the change in definition so I edited my post to just say "Very forgetful"; which literally a great majority of writers and creators are. And I call myself forgetful/senile all the time too.

That isn't shit talking that's constructive criticism. Being excellent pieces of media doesn't mean they're flawless; blame the existence of a battle boarding community and not them. Still it doesn't change my point that writers forget how OP their characters were or better yet simply don't care about crossover Vs Debating. That's one of the most common facts ever presented when the wiki was formed.

Also, just because people have been inactive for years doesn't make their statements pointless and saying otherwise could be interpreted as poisoning the well. Especially in Ryu's case and I may not agree with everything he said, but this statement still raises a good point. Simply giving a character the absolute lowest portrayal and absolute highest portrayal and just slapping a variable tier without having some in verse lore explanation is just being lazy.

Good job we're not giving tiers off inconsistency, strawman

Well, you post doesn't even what is commonly proposed and is just using a different example exempt from "Variable tiers". That's what Variable tier means is characters being rated based on some "The angrier they get, the stronger they get" statement while giving a low point and high point that covers all in betweeners. That's not the same thing as just making many different versions of the character via each of them being entirely different characters from different series or continuities who happen to share the same name.

Why? I gave a solution, Armor agrees to it, you're inventing notion it's a disaster

Good job I showed how to do it.

If it is still for each and every episode of a couple hundred long series, that's still overkill to squeeze a couple hundred tabs on one page.

Do you magically forget the basic logic of me just listing this McGuffin in a separate key, make this argument be a thing? I never suggested this, strawman

Not everyone is using said "McGuffin", and that time, I was the one who has been strawmanned. That character already has a key for said McGuffin yes, but I'm talking about a scenario where Character B was amped by it, and Character A matched character B without a similar amplification.

Did you read a word of my proposal? This is LITERALLY ABOUT Popeye and Bugs, and no, they don't. Just saying they do doesn't magically make it a thing.

And what "we treat verses as" is irrelevant when I am LITERALLY ADDRESSING how we're treating verses, this is a sitewide staff thread, man.

I'm talking about multiple series, and acknowledging case be case. Looney Toons legit did have multiple spin off series as did Scooby Doo. They have other differences that suggest the spin off series in question were different canons from the original animated series such as rewritten backstories and what not and despite characters often originally not knowing each other as adults in one continuity have known each other as little kids in other continuities. But my other point was about Mario; in Popeye and Bugs' case there are notable differences about canons but in Mario's case it's literally all Mario games since Yoshi's Island have basically made Mario's official backstory static within the main games. The cartoon and movie adaptations are different.

But again, the "Many different non-canon versions from adaptations and spin offs" isn't the relevant part related to variable tiers so what you're saying comes off as derailment. The argument is just that simply being a Type II protagonist (In my Verse Consistency/Character Archetype Hypothesis) within a single continuity alone with no in verse lore explanation about their powers fluctuating is not enough to warrant a variable tier.

Good thing we're not talking about canon DDM, for the 5th time. We're talking narrative flexibility, things can be non-linear as well as muddled, but still canon, solution isn't to go "**** CONTINUITY, LET'S COMPOSITE AND ACT LIKE THESE CARTOON CHARACTERS ARE MASTER HAXLORDS",

You are the one who brought them up first, not me. This was the very quote that initiated that discussion.

How cartoon characters, traditional ones anyways, work is that each story unless stated otherwise is a singular canon, so essentially a cartoon character has a key for every episode.

I was the one who said it was a different story from characters who are simply inconsistent within the same singular narrative from the very beginning long before you suddenly jumped on the thread.

Having references doesn't make things canon, by this logic Marvel is canon to DC, and Smash Bros. is canon to Bayonetta, and Sonic as well as Earthworm Jim is canon to Mario.

And at the end of the day issue isn't that what is canon and what is not, strawman.

All false equivalencies. The difference not of them are just hints to pop culture references; there are literal statements in which someone's canon backstory is identical to what is shown in a previous game.

I'm not allowing 9 million keys on the same file, thank you.

I said more than 6 keys would just be reserved for making more pages in general. And I doubt any verse material to make keys in the millions; hundreds maybe, but not millions.

I'm not focusing on a specific verse I'm speaking in general and we are here to discuss the concept for making a variable tier, even if I strawmanned by accident, countering a strawmen with more strawmen isn't the best practice either.

Making multiple keys whether it be different periods in the same canon, or different series/canons altogether is not the same as variable tier nor relevant to this post. I'm going to take that up in the other thread; I have my research in progress for said off topic discussion I will post later. So I'd appreciate it if you didn't quote me on this.

This logic seems to only apply for inconsistent/gag characters.

This is just discussing variable tiers. But being a gag character alone isn't enough to warrant a variable tier is all I'm saying. Which Impress voiced disagreement but immediately just said, "Each cartoon episode is treated as its own canon" which is a different issue entirely. The only character I can think of where Toon Force has a lore based statement ATM is Pinkie Pie when she did her 7-B gag calculation, but I don't see where a variable is in play regarding that and it's more so treated like a character specific UES.

All in all, I have not heard an explanation for why being a gag character alone AND has zero lore based details for how their gag powers work AND has no details about the fluctuations warrants a variable tier. All I was given was just a argument about "Different canons" which is not relevant to the concept of variable tiers.

 

[The_Impress]

I still don't think its necessary for THAT many tabbers on a single profile page. 6 keys is generally the limit for a single profile, and there should be some limit for the number of tabbers.

Good thing I proposed a single tabber

Not the cartoons, the writers.

Are you calling the writers senile?

Also, I looked up the word again, and noticed the change in definition so I edited my post to just say "Very forgetful"; which literally a great majority of writers and creators are. And I call myself forgetful/senile all the time too.

Doing basic non-linear storytelling isn't being forgetful.

That isn't shit talking that's constructive criticism.

If forcing others to follow a linear narrative is "constructive criticism", I'll offer constructive criticism in that you're too closed-minded in how you perceive fiction and storytelling. Not everything ever is A, B, C, narrative flexibility for humour and artistic purposes exist. It is acknowledged as such, in fact.

Being excellent pieces of media doesn't mean they're flawless; blame the existence of a battle boarding community and not them. Still it doesn't change my point that writers forget how OP their characters were or better yet simply don't care about crossover Vs Debating. That's one of the most common facts ever presented when the wiki was formed.

Demonstrate that the writers forgot that Tom and Jerry wasn't set in medieval France but then recalled right afterwards in the next short.

And also demosntrate the 90 million times Mickey meeting Minnie for the first time was Walt Disney being "forgetful" when he cared so much about the character's representation and nuances that he won't even allow others to voice him until he was too sick to do it himself.

This is the most reductive I've seen these hallmarks of culture be reduced to. Not everything is Naruto, and not everything is flawed because it's not, and the writers aren't "Senile" or have Alzheimer's to have their characters not locked in a narrative to restrict freeform artistic representations of them.

It is a CHOICE, not a FLAW, and if you're critiquing it as a method of exclusion, you have uninformed criticisms

Also, just because people have been inactive for years doesn't make their statements pointless and saying otherwise could be interpreted as poisoning the well. Especially in Ryu's case and I may not agree with everything he said, but this statement still raises a good point. Simply giving a character the absolute lowest portrayal and absolute highest portrayal and just slapping a variable tier without having some in verse lore explanation is just being lazy.

Is Ryu on the wiki to defend these points? No? Then this is literally that one accepted Staff thread of people bringing up offsite things and that's their sole argument.

Well, you post doesn't even what is commonly proposed and is just using a different example exempt from "Variable tiers"'

Yes, that is called a sitewide. I want them to be not exempt.

If it is still for each and every episode of a couple hundred long series, that's still overkill to squeeze a couple hundred tabs on one page.

Name a SINGLE TIME ACROSS THE THREAD, I say make a hundred tabbers.

Medeus, I am genuinely getting annoyed by this frequent strawmanning.

Not everyone is using said "McGuffin", and that time, I was the one who has been strawmanned. That character already has a key for said McGuffin yes, but I'm talking about a scenario where Character B was amped by it, and Character A matched character B without a similar amplification.

This is known as an inconsistency. Something I state as exempt.

I'm talking about multiple series, and acknowledging case be case. Looney Toons legit did have multiple spin off series as did Scooby Doo

Name a single time I said "no these extend beyond reboots". I am saying in-series.

I literally made the thread splitting the Looney Tunes verse into continuities, in fact.

But my other point was about Mario; in Popeye and Bugs' case there are notable differences about canons but in Mario's case it's literally all Mario games since Yoshi's Island have basically made Mario's official backstory static within the main games. The cartoon and movie adaptations are different.

Argue Mario in Mario's thread, since your crux of point right now is Mario just isn't comparable to classic cartoons

But again, the "Many different non-canon versions from adaptations and spin offs" isn't the relevant part related to variable tiers so what you're saying comes off as derailment. The argument is just that simply being a Type II protagonist (In my Verse Consistency/Character Archetype Hypothesis) within a single continuity alone with no in verse lore explanation about their powers fluctuating is not enough to warrant a variable tier.

There is no derailment in staff thread when the thread topic is about Variable tier and I'm talking variable tier. Staff were called to evaluate my post all the same.

I don't know what the hell a Type 2 protagonist is, please don't bring it up unless it's a standard accepted sitewide yet anyhow.

I was the one who said it was a different story from characters who are simply inconsistent within the same singular narrative from the very beginning

Medeus I like how you take my minor slip-up in wordings as literal, so yeah I am sorry that English isn't my first language and the billion other times we had this conversation demonstrate I wasn't talking about canon, wasn't sufficient enough for you to not null them to further your points

long before you suddenly jumped on the thread.

and I'm sorry me providing basic input is now "jumping on the thread", and the wiki unknowingly operates on a first come first serve basis.

All false equivalencies. The difference not of them are just hints to pop culture references; there are literal statements in which someone's canon backstory is identical to what is shown in a previous game.

No. Marvel and DC example very much is not, don't claim falsehoods to further your point, and point of contention isn't "LMAO THERE"S NO CHANCE THEY"RE NON-CANON"

I said more than 6 keys would just be reserved for making more pages in general. And I doubt any verse material to make keys in the millions; hundreds maybe, but not millions.

Do you know what an exaggeration is, and that people can exaggerate for comedic purposes?

I'm not focusing on a specific verse I'm speaking in general and we are here to discuss the concept for making a variable tier, even if I strawmanned by accident, countering a strawmen with more strawmen isn't the best practice either.

. Mario doesn't have reboots, and even other spin off series have hints or even confirmed facts about past games mainline or otherwise happening before the game(s) and even main series games also had confirmations of spin off games happening before main games that I may elaborate further even if I got 2 days left to do so.

Making multiple keys whether it be different periods in the same canon, or different series/canons altogether is not the same as variable tier nor relevant to this post

Funny since you literally picked Option B on the Mario thread.

This is just discussing variable tiers. But being a gag character alone isn't enough to warrant a variable tier is all I'm saying. Which Impress voiced disagreement but immediately just said, "Each cartoon episode is treated as its own canon" which is a different issue entirely. The only character I can think of where Toon Force has a lore based statement ATM is Pinkie Pie when she did her 7-B gag calculation, but I don't see where a variable is in play regarding that and it's more so treated like a character specific UES.

Also another fix I feel should be, Toon Force should be considered as a valid mechanic to grant a Varies tier as well, as many times a character's capability can be exceptionally higher or lower if it FITS the gag. To limit exploitation we can say it applies only to characters that show consistent fluctuations for humorous purposes.

All in all, I have not heard an explanation for why being a gag character alone AND has zero lore based details for how their gag powers work AND has no details about the fluctuations warrants a variable tier. All I was given was just a argument about "Different canons" which is not relevant to the concept of variable tiers.

I feel like it is though, certain characters being able to substantially shift their own relation to the verse if it is humorously convenient for them.

And I'll assert it is a change we'll have to induce for our own purposes too, since as a wiki I feel like this is the only feasible way to list characters like these without gross misrepresentation.

Batman and Bond's power-shifts don't come from narrative flexibility usually, they come from the writer's misinterpretation of these characters' power levels, in gag characters' scenario, it DOESN'T stem from the writer not knowing, it is done on purpose for comedic effect, since it is gross unreality represented.

I think the only other comparable case might be surrealist stories, but correct me if I'm wrong, we don't list any verses with that specific type of storytelling.

Ok so I have two proposals actually, so as to clarify confusion

The varies narrative stuff applies to those cartoon characters where it wasn't an A->B->C narrative, it is explained first.

The Toon Force stuff applies to gag characters, it is explained in latter half

Am I just immensely cryptic?

Sorry if I'm getting annoyed right now, but this is an immensely poor way to debate, I am getting bombarded with strawman after falsehoods after strawman after falsehoods, and the message length isn't helping, mate.

Literally half of my posts at this point is pointing out a fallacy, and these aren't particularly hidden information that is getting misunderstood, so it only serves to annoy me further.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Good thing I proposed a single tabber

I meant a tabber with many tabs/buttons. Still don't see how it wouldn't be cluttered.

Are you calling the writers senile?

I meant to just say forgetful, because I recall looking up that word to just mean very forgetful, but now I just said they are forgetful.

Doing basic non-linear storytelling isn't being forgetful.

I never said that was specifically, I only meant struggling to do Urban level feats shortly after they casually did Tectonic feats or far higher before hand is.

If forcing others to follow a linear narrative is "constructive criticism", I'll offer constructive criticism in that you're too closed-minded in how you perceive fiction and storytelling. Not everything ever is A, B, C, narrative flexibility for humour and artistic purposes exist. It is acknowledged as such, in fact.

I have not "Forced writers" to do anything. They can do what they want and it's their work. Just as much as I can criticize works of fiction however I want; it's not like writing a review for a game, movie, cartoon series ect and giving it anything less than a 10 out of 10 is shit talking or "Close-minded". I'm fully aware of non linear continuities and some series have season 9 taking place before the first season ect. I also know full well that prequals are a thing. I'm anything but close-minded.

Heck, I'm not even disliking the writers or works. I'm just pointing out that nothing is flawless and that's especially true when people are looking for outliers and PIS. But people are meant to view fictional works for entertainment purposes first and foremost; powerscaling is only secondary at best in comparison. But this wiki/site is meant for indexing tiers and what not which makes that more counter-intuitive. Acknowledging that writers don't have consistent feats, fight scenes, or high tiers is very much constructive criticism regardless.

So I'd appreciate it if you dropped the allegations.

Not everything is Naruto, and not everything is flawed because it's not, and the writers aren't "Senile" or have Alzheimer's to have their characters not locked in a narrative to restrict freeform artistic representations of them.

This is more real strawman; they're not Naruto and even "Naruto" has flaws. What's not a flaw in person A's eyes can still be a flaw in person B's eyes. I'm not solely an Anime fan, I'm a fan of various mediums regardless of region. Authors aren't God IRL, and neither am I or you.

You're the one who brought it up and falsely accused me of having a mindset where I literally think "Everything is linear progression based". I don't have that mind set, I'm fully aware each verse tells their story differently. All you're doing is derailing this thread with things irrelevant to making a variable tier here

Is Ryu on the wiki to defend these points? No? Then this is literally that one accepted Staff thread of people bringing up offsite things and that's their sole argument.

It doesn't matter if he is, lots of people agreed with him when he stated that and many could dig up the same argument and continue what he started.

Name a SINGLE TIME ACROSS THE THREAD, I say make a hundred tabbers.

Medeus, I am genuinely getting annoyed by this frequent strawmanning.

I didn't say you said it. And I meant to say Tabber with hundreds of buttons. But that's what could very well happen by your proposal. It's not strawmanning if all I'm doing is addressing a notable risk. I'll define what a Strawman is, an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument. I in know what, shape, or form intentionally misinterpreted what you said or intentionally accused you of saying things you having. I simply thought outside the box of a possible risk.

Name a single time I said "no these extend beyond reboots". I am saying in-series.

I literally made the thread splitting the Looney Tunes verse into continuities, in fact.

I'm aware and agreed with it, but not my point. We didn't give any version "Varies between Tier A to Tier B" via Toon Force iirc however.

There is no derailment in staff thread when the thread topic is about Variable tier and I'm talking variable tier. Staff were called to evaluate my post all the same.

I don't know what the hell a Type 2 protagonist is, please don't bring it up unless it's a standard accepted sitewide yet anyhow.

When I read the quoted text of your initial post, you just said "You think Toon Force" should be a reason to give variable tiers, but didn't actually explain why. Your explanation had nothing to do with variable tiers in the first place and was just repeat of "Every episode was its own canon".

A character who is notable inconsistent; portrayed as an average joe one day but the top superhero the next is the gist of what it means. Plenty of other higher up staff including the Bureaucrats + Damage agreed with the general premise and thought some plans for a blog post of how to find outliers, PIS, and Inconsistencies easier to spot or recommended to avoid calling out. Even so, being the main protagonist of a nonlinear continuity and/or just goes back and forth between tiering portrayals alone isn't enough to give variables. We don't give every single cartoony character the ultimate variables from inconsistency alone. Again, that is all I'm saying and I don't get what's so hard to make a big deal about.

Demonstrate, because last time I recall you kept forcing the narrative I was talking about floating timeline multiple times when I said I wasn't.

I already quoted the texts.

Medeus I like how you take my minor slip-up in wordings as literal, so yeah I am sorry that English isn't my first language and the billion other times we had this conversation demonstrate I wasn't talking about canon, wasn't sufficient enough for you to not null them to further your points

Ok, I respect not everyone speaks English as their native language. It also explains some things. But I'm still not a fan of sarcastic attitudes. I have a combination of social anxiety and PTSD, which excessive multi-tasking and/or work stash can awaken a beast that lives in me and speed reading through some threads are often ways to avoid awakening that too quickly. I have thick skin normally, but even that has limits and especially if it's many things going on all at once as opposed to one or two things.

No. Marvel and DC example very much is not, don't claim falsehoods to further your point, and point of contention isn't "LMAO THERE"S NO CHANCE THEY"RE NON-CANON"

I wasn't laughing; but other differences is that Marvel and DC are different companies, rivals, and franchises altogether. Which shouldn't be compared to shame franchise + Company combination with legit sequels and side stories; in which side stories sometimes reveal what happens between sequels.

Do you know what an exaggeration is, and that people can exaggerate for comedic purposes?

Yes, but this isn't a Fun and Games Board or Vs Thread, this is a Staff Discussion board meant to have serious/civilized discussions.

Funny since you literally picked Option B on the Mario thread.

I never officially picked either option, I only leaned towards one but noted I didn't like either option. But off topic.

Am I just immensely cryptic?

Sorry if I'm getting annoyed right now, but this is an immensely poor way to debate, I am getting bombarded with strawman after falsehoods after strawman after falsehoods, and the message length isn't helping, mate.

Literally half of my posts at this point is pointing out a fallacy.

One, you posted a lengthy post first. Two, I don't need to repeat my usual routines; work shift exhaustion, hardware issues, still a lot of multitasking both site and offsite related, having a lot of RL people in my family or workplace to help out.

A lot of things you're accusing me of are what you're doing more in my eyes + Fallacy Fallacies are fallacies too.

I read parts about "Toon Force gags are consistent with the gags' humor," parts which still doesn't really give me a reason for a variable tier. And it just means some middle ground could be laid out. I seen a few parts talking about it, but instead of focusing on alleged fallacies or repeating the other topics about canons. Just focus on "The gags being consistent with the episode's humor" parts.

I'm not going to sit here and argue forever whether it be here, or on Discord.

 

[Antvasima]

Impress, there is not need to be so antagonistic towards Medeus. He doesn't mean any harm and is just trying to help out.

Anyway, can you outline more precisely what your suggested changes here would mean for different types of franchises in our wiki as a whole please?

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I also agree with Impress' points that verses with non-linear storytelling / narrative flexibility should quantify for Variable Tiers as well, i.e. cartoons with very loose continuities where a character’s strength level can go up and down depending on the gag. Though it should be noted that a character from a Shonen battle manga being depicted as weaker in occasional gag moments wouldn’t be equated to straight up “gag characters”.

As for the main topic, I agree that characters shouldn’t have Variable Tiers for simple inconsistencies.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, can you outline more precisely what your suggested changes here would mean for different types of franchises in our wiki as a whole please?

@The_Impress

 

[Eficiente]

I also agree with Impress' points.

Medeus, you may have saw this comment I gave defending how Varies should be given based on inconsistencies, if not then I linked it anyway. I think I can give a more convincing comment than it: The reason why inconsistencies in cartoons can give a Varies tier w/o an in-universe reason like "the angrier they get the stronger they become" is simply Toon Force. We all know what Toon Force is but most apply it pretty bad in practice. It actually makes no sense to apply only to superpowers and not stats, and what that means should be deconstructed for a second, please stick with me for a moment. At best, characters with Toon Force may have 1. powers & abilities they would without Toon Force, 2. powers & abilities they have due to/related to Toon Force they somewhat often use, and 3. one-off powers & abilities they have due to/related to Toon Force, which they use once in their career, those that it would be ridiculous to say they would ever do in-character but we of course list in profiles. I imagine I don't need to bring examples of that. Why do I bring this up? Well, again, having a superpower we need to list as Toon Force is no different than a feat calc'd at some high stat that's Toon Force-based too, there is no segregation that comes up when logically thinking about it, only how what we might have been doing so bad maybe not fitting with it. So, if characters have one-off abilities they never use again when they would come in handy, and that's to be listed in their powers, it stands to reason that the same can happen with their stats; The feats would not be outliers (ideally for the purpose of what I'm saying), the characters having those stats is to be listed as part of who they are, but it would be wrong to say they always have those stats. I'm of course talking about high stats inconsistent with the characters.

It would not matter if their average, regular stats are also done via Toon Force-based feats because, again, characters with Toon Force have powers that are both regularly used & also Toon Force-based.

Toon Force alone is a sufficient reason for a Varies, in that context, and another way to look at it is how those one-off powers can come out of nowhere with no explanation. A character can glare at things & make them decay as a power and that's fine, but suddenly for stats they would need an in-lore reason like "the angrier they get the stronger they become" for us to portray it that way? That's counterintuitive, it should come off just as out of nowhere to say "they did this crazy feat that makes X stat higher, unlike how they usually are, just because Toon Force" and not "This is another feat to their logical, on-going stat consistency, since nothing states a reason as to why they would have grown stronger. When they do the crazy feat, that's the same character in stats as how they are normally, and how they are normally, that's the same character in stats as to when they do the crazy feat". I of course think this is way too closed-minded, less logical and more attached to "how we do things", which is still very much open to atrocious errors.

It should hopefully be needless to say that not every cartoon character should have a Varies based on inconsistencies & Toon Force, but, you know, the ones that would deserve it.

 

[The_Impress]

@The_Impress

I'm a bit busy right now, my PG entrance exams and college board are in a week, so won't be online relevantly for a while :v

 

[Antvasima]

I'm a bit busy right now, my PG entrance exams and college board are in a week, so won't be online relevantly for a while :v

Okay. That is unfortunate, but no problem. I suppose that we should probably delay this discussion for a few weeks then?

 

[The_Impress]

Okay. That is unfortunate, but no problem. I suppose that we should probably delay this discussion for a few weeks then?

Not by much, it's probably a week or two.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. No problem then.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Should we merge this thread into https://vsbattles.com/threads/establishing-rules-for-varies-ratings.154266/?

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Since this thread is apparently on the same topic as that one, but died over a year ago, I'd say this one should just be closed for redundancy.