- 266
- 135
You're missing the point with the Flash example.
It's fiction; not everything necessarily has to fit the logic of what's really necessary. How did Flash achieve this without being supersonic? Well, in the same way that Flash achieved this without incinerating people by moving them or breaking them into pieces with the kinetic energy that something like that, if it really happened, would have had. Or is it that you can only complain about something not fitting with reality when it comes to justifying why something should fulfill your vision?
And i'm not discrediting consistency.
But "consistency" should be about what is truly consistent, not cherry-picking just some feats, those that can be outliers or can be interpreted in more than one way, and interpreting them in the way that best meets your vision.
This happens a lot in Powerscaling: people who aren't looking for true consistency, but rather just justifying why their vision is consistent.
If a character throughout his story 95% of his feats are being hurt with wall-building attacks, not because there are more than 4 feats that could be interpreted as planet level durability means that he is actually at this level consistently
I wasn't even talking about bnha at the beginning of this discussion, I only remarked the importance of statements for a story, if you think that bnha has another type of consistency, it would be more similar to the example of duncan roleau.
But in hindsight, it serves as an example
I mean, what are all those "feats that are much more consistent than the author's word"?
Stain's feat where we assume Iida kicks as fast as his running speed, ignoring elements like acceleration ?
Nagant's feat that assumes times in the manga between when she fired her gun and the movements of a weakened Shigaraki that might not even be subsonic?
Deku's feat being faster than those bullets that requires a lot of ang size, which is a technique that assumes degrees in reference to a screen, when the panels have much more irregular shapes than a screen? And the wiki's own guide mentions "When evaluating the size of objects depicted by an author, it's important to consider that the author may have depicted them inconsistently for artistic reasons"?
All Might's feat traveling to the tower that assumes one second instead of the time it would take to say "I am here"?
The movie feats that calculate the speed of the shock waves they can produce instead of their physical movements?
The Six's feat? where people are arbitrarily assigned snail's speed (relative to Six), even though the original O'clock was on par with someone who hit as fast as bullets, Six sees normal bullets relative to him when they try to attack him, and then later says that a sniper bullet would travel faster than Koichi?
Do half of the feats that require the anime? Which should be analyzed as its own version, distinct from Horikoshi's manga, just an adaptation of it.
You're getting very aggressive when I haven't even attacked you, calling me a hypocrite when I can easily believe that Kratos and doomslayer are highballed without even attacking the author's statements.
Kratos's case is different in itself, because some of those mentions only exist because people are harassing one of the guys' social media accounts and asking "yes or no" questions about things he doesn't understand, rather than because of the author's genuine desire to add that extra information to his character's lore.
The example of invincible is another case that is tremendously fallacious, the statement that an author says only have weight on his own storys, That just means that Robert Kirkman thinks that Superman is weaker than what Mark has achieved or said he can achieve, not that Mark scale over his creator's misinformation on superman lore
But it seems that understanding that things can be analyzed depending on the context in which they exist is something you would also assume is wrong, i guess.
I don't even believe that absolutely all the parameters that the wiki follows are the best, I simply used the wiki as an example because I thought it would be more understandable the point of how not all fiction fits with what the laws of physics would actually require.
If your point is that the wiki isn't necessarily going to follow the logic I'm implying, that's pretty obvious.
But that doesn't make it objectively the only way to view existing fiction, nor necessarily the most correct way. That's why this discussion started with "it should be the other way around btw" not "it IS the other way around"
Last edited:
