Adding 3 More Feats to Mario

[DatOneWeeb]

Hello. The first thing I'd like to note before I start is to stay on topic, please. Do not derail and make sure we're talking about these specific games. I'm also going to note this first feat is 3-A to High 3-A (depends on how you view Mario's universe). The last two are Low 2-C.

Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door​

In Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door (peak Paper Mario), it was stated that the Crystal Stars have the power to blow up the universe.

- "No, Peach is in outer space with the X-Nauts. They need the seven Crystal Stars to help them blow up the universe."

This is also supported by in-game text.

- "That's all that matters. Because if they do get it, then once again, this town... No...the ENTIRE WORLD could be destroyed!"

It's pretty blatant, but here's some common counters.

- "The Shadow Queen shouldn't scale to the Crystal Stars since they depower her."

Even if you use the strongest attack, Supernova, it takes away only part of her HP, you'd need to use it several times to actually kill her. As such, she can tank attacks from it several times.

- "When the Shadow Queen covers the world, we only see the planet."

Well for one, it was only meant to display the people who would be there to support Mario later on to get in trouble, Super Paper Mario did the same thing. As The Void was close to destroying everything, we only start seeing some universes get destroyed. But in-context, it was everything. I don't think displaying a universe being encompassed is something you'd even display. Overall, it's not really proof that only the planet was affected.

Mario Party 5​

I don't like this game all that much. In the story mode of Mario Party 5, it was stated that Bowser would've destroyed every dream in the Dream Depot, one by one. Now, each dream is the size of a universe because- wait that's been done and done. Overall, yeah, Bowser was stated by both himself and Misstar to have the power to destroy them all. Simple as that. I don't know what counter can be made for this as of now.

Paper Mario The Origami King​

I don't like this game. The game's main antagonist, King Olly, has the power to passively fold the fabric of reality (which is space-time). In doing so, he's changing all of space-time to how he wants it.

The only legitimate counter that can be talked about (last time it was argued if Mario was amped, which he was not) is if Olly really meant planet. But there's two issues. One, fabric of reality and planet do not go together, that does not sound like planet. Second, they've already displayed they've been messing with space before, so their main target certainly isn't the planet only.

 

[Tllmbrg]

Okay

 

[Jasonsith]

So is this a 3-A (everything in a universe), High 3-A (everything in a universe of an infinite size) or Low 2-C (one whole space time continuum)?

As if Mario and friends with Pure Hearts are Multiverse level?

 

[DatOneWeeb]

So is this a 3-A (everything in a universe), High 3-A (everything in a universe of an infinite size) or Low 2-C (one whole space time continuum)?

As if Mario and friends with Pure Hearts are Multiverse level?

First feat is 3-A to High 3-A since Mario's universe is argued to either be finite or infinite. The last two are Low 2-C.

 

[Foxthefox1000]

I think people will argue consistency with the writing for Shadow Queen. Only an outside source claims universe while all we have in the game is "world" referred to quite a few times iirc. I think we'd need more proof that the game was referring to the universe as a whole to convince people.

Mario Party 5 I think has the counter that Bowser was only planning to corrupt these dreams with his own, therefore the "destruction" can be argued to be a take on that. I don't quite remember the details right though, so maybe I'm getting details wrong. This debunk imo seems kinda shaky so I'm hesitant to believe it myself.

For King Olly, people commonly will resort to saying it's hax/an ability that doesn't scale to AP.

If there are good debunks to any of these then I believe more people will be inclined to agree.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with Fox on points 1 and 2. And as for point 3, I'd prefer to use the Japanese scans discussed on Discord. It mentions folding and collapsing the entire world which is in a spatial or dimensional sense and clearly includes far beyond the planet Earth given the Sun was effected. So I believe it to be Universal in context yeah.

 

[liluzivert]

blaze this is cool and all but ichigo is still better




anyways i agree

 

[DatOneWeeb]

I think people will argue consistency with the writing for Shadow Queen. Only an outside source claims universe while all we have in the game is "world" referred to quite a few times iirc. I think we'd need more proof that the game was referring to the universe as a whole to convince people.

I don't think that's a good argument, because your own logic would indicate that stuff like Black Jewel's feat shouldn't be used because the mentions of a universe being made was not from the game only. Same goes by Galaxy, the universe was threatened, but that alone isn't enough obviously. As well as Mario 64. So I don't understand why in this specific game, I can't use this source to determine what was just said.

Mario Party 5 I think has the counter that Bowser was only planning to corrupt these dreams with his own, therefore the "destruction" can be argued to be a take on that. I don't quite remember the details right though, so maybe I'm getting details wrong. This debunk imo seems kinda shaky so I'm hesitant to believe it myself.

Destroy in this context would sound really weird if Bowser just wanted to corrupt them. He would've said something like "replace", which would make a lot more sense.

For King Olly, people commonly will resort to saying it's hax/an ability that doesn't scale to AP.

Olly was able to achieve this power via origami, which is how he got that powerful in the first place. Bowser then also used origami power to boost his power according to Olivia. In which Mario stomps a stronger Olly.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Wario World's example came from Nintendo of Europe's official website, which is still a Nintendo published source. TTYD's example is just a review on GameInformer, which is just a game critic website not affiliated with Nintendo.

 

[DatOneWeeb]

TTYD's example is just a review on GameInformer, which is just a game critic website not affiliated with Nintendo.

Actually they're officially partnered with Nintendo. "Future has a long tradition of publishing in the Nintendo market and after over a decade covering Nintendo products we're excited to finally seal an official partnership", said Future MD Robert Price. "We will deliver a magazine that reflects the breadth, fun and quality of Nintendo games and the audience who play them." There was also a page that their info comes from Nintendo, but the archive was deleted.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Nintendo Power maybe is partnered with Nintendo, but I thought that scan came from Game Informer

 

[DatOneWeeb]

It did not, lol.

 

[Foxthefox1000]

In Galaxy amd 64's case those guides can mostly be corroborated with in-game text/lore (like the japanese translation supporting Bowser wanting to create a new universe iirc).

I don't think TTYD here is necessarily the same?

Idk. I feel like we still need a little more.

I'm fine with Olly and MP5 for now, but still a bit indifferent I guess towards the Shadow Queen thing.

 

[Foxthefox1000]

Interesting. Checked again, and inside the Dream Worlds Bowser says he'll "ruin this dream by filling it with my own dreams"

That seems to support corruption.

 

[DragonLord]

Nintendo Power maybe is partnered with Nintendo, but I thought that scan came from Game Informer

I don’t really think it matters where the review came from honestly, reviews just don’t have extensive lore fact checks, a strategy guide maybe since it’s recap and “guide” to a whole game, but a review isn’t meant to be an extensive summary of the games events, it’s at best a recommendation and general summary of what to expect, it would be kinda odd for any editor to look at review and say “hey that’s good kid but they were going to destroy the Universe not just the World”

plus this reviews tone is pretty exaggerated and “funny” I mean right after the statement he just says “People get paid to make up these plots”

 

[RethPo]

Idk hardly anything about mario but kinda interested to give my take to hopefully satisfy blaze enough to not drag my screaming body to other certain potential revisions

Idk about the first one.
For the second one ive mentioned that it sounds more like bowser less doing anything ap related but just messing up the dreams with his own. Like if i you were having a peaceful dream and i just went in and spawned a bunch of cthulu embodiments and ruined it. Even if he affected the dream in its entirety including its universe it sounds more 3-A than anything.
The third one maybe, if the "fabric of reality" alone is enough to be considered on a universal scale and not just reality warping. Sounds okay as a supporting feat if anything.

 

[Antvasima]

@Maverick_Zero_X @Newendigo @Dino_Ranger_Black @Ryukama @Crazylatin77 @Starter_Pack @GyroNutz

What do you think about this?

 

[Antvasima]

@Niarobi_(Formerly_Hadou) @LuckyEmile @I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die @CrimsonStarFallen @Bobsican @EMagoIorSouI @Robot972

Your help would also be appreciated here.

 

[TyranoDoom30]

i agree with these feats being putted on the profile

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

1. The problem with the 1st feat is that it being a review but partnered with Nintendo is not as valuable as an actual statement from Nintendo, plus, like Fox said, every reference to the Shadow Queen in-game referred to her destruction of the planet, so it may be inconsistent.

2. Bowser's feat can be argued as corruption rather than raw AP as "he will ruin this dream by filling it with my own dreams". Even if you bring proof he was physically destroying it, it seems like a 3-A feat

3. I am not knowledgable on TOK enough to give a comment, although I may say that fabric of reality on a universal scale would be a tier for Olly, but would it be 3-A or Low 2-C???

 

[SMASHssf2]

Following

 

[Lou_change]

Even if bowser is just corrupting the dreams that would be corrupting the whole dream would if affecting the dream's timeline should still be low 2-C given this corruption is compared to destroying the original dream but if this is thru magic it is questionable if anyone scales also it seems koopa kid is capable of doing this.

 

[liluzivert]

Is Low 2-C Power Stars accepted? If so, then shouldn't we just remove 4-A for star children and rosa, and then just find out who scales to the tier afterwards?

 

[DaReaperMan]

Is Low 2-C Power Stars accepted? If so, then shouldn't we just remove 4-A for star children and rosa, and then just find out who scales to the tier afterwards?

Possibly Low 2-C power stars are accepted.

 

[liluzivert]

Possibly Low 2-C power stars are accepted.

I went back to the thread and Ant just said it was more or less accepted. Tho it isn't clear what he means, he should come and clarify.

 

[Foxthefox1000]

I checked Japanese quotes and Bowser says he'll "break" and destroy dreams and make them into selfish dreams.

It's arguable if he physically destroys them and then makes them into dreama that fit his desire or if it's simply corruption. We'd need good proof for the destruction side of the argument. But hey, if it IS corruption then that's some good base range hax. I know Fury Bowser already has wordly corruption but we don't know if "world" refers to the universe, and Power Stars also have this range, but this is a good base hax upgrade even if not an AP feat I'd say.

I think King Olly's feat is an actual feat, and I'm inclined to agree there.

And we still need more to support the universe claim for the Crystal Stars.

 

[DatOneWeeb]

In Galaxy amd 64's case those guides can mostly be corroborated with in-game text/lore (like the japanese translation supporting Bowser wanting to create a new universe iirc).

I don't think TTYD here is necessarily the same?

Idk. I feel like we still need a little more.

That feels like a double standard and an unneeded thing. If you were to just play Mario 64, Bowser creates a world, that's it. Add in your guides, we get more context. But, a thing to add is in the Nintendo Power guide for SPM, it states that Mario needs to save the universe again. Galaxy wasn't out yet, and this is the PM series, so it's most likely referring to its previous game, TTYD. So if he needed to save the universe again, then the last time would need to be in TTYD.

I don’t really think it matters where the review came from honestly, reviews just don’t have extensive lore fact checks,

"Everything we write is based on our own opinions. Information we use comes from the companies, or is correct to our knowledge. News, previews and release dates are based on the information we found to be true at the time of going to press."

I am not knowledgable on TOK enough to give a comment, although I may say that fabric of reality on a universal scale would be a tier for Olly, but would it be 3-A or Low 2-C???

The fabric of reality is literally just another term of space-time, why else do you think Galaxy was Low 2-C.

Interesting. Checked again, and inside the Dream Worlds Bowser says he'll "ruin this dream by filling it with my own dreams"

That seems to support corruption.

Time to pull up the weeb scans.

- "I'll destroy all the dreams that are here and replace them with my own dreams!"

- "Otherwise the Dream World will be destroyed."

- "Gwahahah! I will destroy this sweet dream and change it with my personal dream!!"

Destroy is still being used, so it's more likely he wants to destroy each dream world and then make his own. Because the original text is he'll ruin it by filling it with his own dreams. Here he says he'll destroy it and then change it to make his own dream. Which means he's doing one action and then another over doing an action that results in something else. Also this would be Low 2-C as destroying the Dream Depot as a whole would mean time in there goes bye bye, he's literally destroying an entire multiverse by destroying each universe within.

 

[DragonLord]

Everything we write is based on our own opinions. Information we use comes from the companies, or is correct to our knowledge. News, previews and release dates are based on the information we found to be true at the time of going to press.

That doesn’t really confirm or deny that the reviews are lore fact checked, in fact “Based on our own Opinions” and “or is correct to our knowledge” actually would suggest the opposite

 

[DatOneWeeb]

That doesn’t really confirm or deny that the reviews are lore fact checked, in fact “Based on our own Opinions” and “or is correct to our knowledge” actually would suggest the opposite

No, because the "based on our opinions" section is the reviewing part, not the story section. In-fact none of their words were contradicted, add that to the fact that they're literally partnered with Nintendo means that we can use it.

 

[DragonLord]

No, because the "based on our opinions" section is the reviewing part, not the story section. In-fact none of their words were contradicted, add that to the fact that they're literally partnered with Nintendo means that we can use it.

The Story part is a part of the review, the reviewer is praising the game for “knowing it’s all a bit rubbish” and the fact they have to say some of the stuff is only correct to there knowledge would go against the idea that everything they say is 100% the intent of the developers, I highly doubt any one in Nintendo of Japan even cares about a UK Nintendo magazine

 

[liluzivert]

That doesn’t really confirm or deny that the reviews are lore fact checked, in fact “Based on our own Opinions” and “or is correct to our knowledge” actually would suggest the opposite

Can you please stop nitpicking? These guides are accepted by Nintendo, if they were to lie or exaggerate the story then the review probably wouldn't be accepted in the first place. Can you move on to the feats instead of complaining about how the reviews are "not lore fact checked"?

 

[DragonLord]

Can you please stop nitpicking? These guides are accepted by Nintendo, if they were to lie or exaggerate the story then the review probably wouldn't be accepted in the first place. Can you move on to the feats instead of complaining about how the reviews are "not lore fact checked"?

This isn’t even a guide it’s a review that states the serious part of the Story is rubbish

 

[DatOneWeeb]

The Story part is a part of the review, the reviewer is praising the game for “knowing it’s all a bit rubbish” and the fact they have to say some of the stuff is only correct to there knowledge would go against the idea that everything they say is 100% the intent of the developers, I highly doubt any one in Nintendo of Japan even cares about a UK Nintendo magazine

Which is still a part of explaining the general plot of what the X-Nauts were going to do. If you wanna play nitpicky, Nintendo Power is literally considered to be a magazine themselves that also hold reviews of games. So why is the UK variant that is also partnered with Nintendo be literally any different to a Nintendo Power? I don't care what you doubt, Nintendo partnered with them, so that section is irrelevant to me.

 

[liluzivert]

This isn’t even a guide it’s a review that states the serious part of the Story is rubbish

It is a review by a company who's information comes from Nintendo. The information of the story was given to them. And if you read the review again, the "story is rubbish" part is his own opinion. You are assuming all of the informative statements are just his opinion, which is flat out false. Not to mention, saying the universe would be destroyed really isn't contradicted in any way by the main game. You are again, nitpicking statements while ignoring the full context.

 

[DragonLord]

Which is still a part of explaining the general plot of what the X-Nauts were going to do. If you wanna play nitpicky, Nintendo Power is literally considered to be a magazine themselves that also hold reviews of games. So why is the UK variant that is also partnered with Nintendo be literally any different to a Nintendo Power? I don't care what you doubt, Nintendo partnered with them, so that section is irrelevant to me.

Assuming Nintendo Power is completely accurate anyway. Different Magazines, different branches of Nintendo entirely frankly, not only would it be questionable to immediately say they go by the same rules due to standards not being the same in general from the EU to the USA to Japan, not only because of country laws and culture but also the companies themselves not being consistent with each other (why the hell did it take so long for the USA to release The Wii version of Pikmin 2?), the Magazine itself clarifies that, at least, the book’s words are correct to what they know or just there own opinion, making everything they say put into question, because if everything was checked by Nintendo, they would have no doubt in there knowledge of the material

The information of the story was given to them.

and you know who gave it to them?, Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door, because you know, Reviewers kinda usually play the game there reviewing, Nintendo didn’t shove a giant lore book and story summary for a Brit getting minimum wage for a brief review on there game, they played the game and wrote there feelings, probably got some guy to make sure there was no spelling mistakes or problematic writing and sent it to print

the "story is rubbish" part is his own opinion.

the entire part is an opinion, there using the summary to show an example of how the story is “rubbish” and “people get payed to write this stuff”, and then uses Paper Luigi’s side thing as an example of why the game isn’t taking itself seriously, the whole article is the review, there’s no part where the serious story summary begins

I don’t see how I’m being “Nitpicky” by questioning a source on it’s validity, Plenty of statements even from serious Lore Guides have been questioned here and I find this no different

 

[DatOneWeeb]

Assuming Nintendo Power is completely accurate anyway. Different Magazines, different branches of Nintendo entirely frankly, not only would it be questionable to immediately say they go by the same rules due to standards not being the same in general from the EU to the USA to Japan, not only because of country laws and culture but also the companies themselves not being consistent with each other (why the hell did it take so long for the USA to release The Wii version of Pikmin 2?), the Magazine itself clarifies that, at least, the book’s words are correct to what they know or just there own opinion, making everything they say put into question, because if everything was checked by Nintendo, they would have no doubt in there knowledge of the material

Which you yourself would need to prove what they say is wrong. If not, it's usable. None of what you said at all attacks on why what I sent was usable. This is literally just a UK variation of Nintendo Power. You claim all of this shit, but have nothing to back it up. They say their info comes from the company, or is correct to their knowledge. And wouldn't you know it, it's correct. So it's not like what they said was just made up. I fail to see why this means much.

 

[liluzivert]

and you know who gave it to them?, Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door, because you know, Reviewers kinda usually play the game there reviewing, Nintendo didn’t shove a giant lore book and story summary for a Brit getting minimum wage for a brief review on there game, they played the game and wrote there feelings, probably got some guy to make sure there was no spelling mistakes or problematic writing and sent it to print

This is like saying I read a marvel comic and then got information from Stan Lee about what the comic is about. What, if I play a Sonic game I get information from Takashi Iizuka? I got information from Sonic Team? Do you not understand what you're saying? I don't get information from the damn company by playing the game, I get information from the game itself. Getting information from Nintendo the company =/= getting information from the game made by them.

the entire part is an opinion, there using the summary to show an example of how the story is “rubbish” and “people get payed to write this stuff”, and then uses Paper Luigi’s side thing as an example of why the game isn’t taking itself seriously, the whole article is the review, there’s no part where the serious story summary begins

Dragon, do you even know how reviews work? There are informative statements on what the game is about, the story, the gameplay, etc. And afterwards there are opinionated statements on how they feel about said info. Not everything said in the review is an opinion. Why would explaining the plot of the game be an opinion? Why would the information they got from Nintendo be an opinion? If you actually understood how a review works, you would notice that statements like "the game knows the story is rubbish" is his opinion on how the plot is represented within the game. The statement of the plot itself is an informative statement. He is saying that the game doesn't take itself too seriously in his eyes, not that the plot is not legit because it's not a serious game.

I don’t see how I’m being “Nitpicky” by questioning a source on it’s validity, Plenty of statements even from serious Lore Guides have been questioned here and I find this no different

Nitpicking is where you give too much attention to details that aren't even relevant.

You are saying stuff that "could be the case", without any evidence at all. And your argument becomes less and less valid the more "could be's" you stick into it.

"Oh the entire review could be an opinion" "Getting info from Nintendo could refer to getting information from the game" "Oh Nintendo Power could not be accurate because of several different divisions of the company"

Meanwhile we just have "It is valid because the review is partnered with Nintendo, and it's not contradicted by the game". See how simple of an explanation that is? If you have to literally come up with a convoluted solution to the problem with no evidence supporting it, then you have failed to make a counterargument.

 

[Foxthefox1000]

I don't think it's a double standard at all.

Fact of the matter is this ONE claim from a guide or whatever is all we have to suggest the Crystal Stars function on a universal scale when MULTIPLE statements in-game across both English and Japanese state simply "the world/planet". We need more proof they function on a universal scale or that "world" in the games means universe. In the game all we're told is Grodus wants to conquer the world. They are referred to as "world-conquering tools" by Bowser. Provide the evidence these refer to the universe and corroborate the claim if you can, and I'll concede.

If those translations for the Dream stuff can be checked and verified then we're good. I'd consider MP5's dreams to be a legitimate feat as well.

But I'm still not sold on the Crystal Stars, sorry.

 

[DragonLord]

Which you yourself would need to prove what they say is wrong. If not, it's usable. None of what you said at all attacks on why what I sent was usable. This is literally just a UK variation of Nintendo Power. You claim all of this shit, but have nothing to back it up. They say their info comes from the company, or is correct to their knowledge. And wouldn't you know it, it's correct. So it's not like what they said was just made up. I fail to see why this means much.

If the Source has it’s own section saying that not all of there statements are completely given by Nintendo and just correct to there own know-how, then it is put into question if everything they say is true, again huge officially published lore books are treated like this too, The Zelda Verse page has entire note saying that notes from the Hyrule Encyclopedia that aren’t substantiated by any other source are put into question, and the Game itself in this case has no real clear indication the entire Universe is what there talking about, I don’t think I need to explain why “entire world” isn’t an inherent meaning of the Universe, and the game itself only really shows the planet, there’s not really much blatantly supportive of the statement itself

This is like saying I read a marvel comic and then got information from Stan Lee about what the comic is about. What, if I play a Sonic game I get information from Takashi Iizuka? I got information from Sonic Team? Do you not understand what you're saying? I don't get information from the damn company by playing the game, I get information from the game itself. Getting information from Nintendo the company =/= getting information from the game made by them.

I, don’t really know what your trying to say here honestly, you, I assume, are saying that this reviewer got the info on the story through Nintendo, which I find kinda weird when that would be kinda pointless to explain the plot to a person who’s job is now to play the game in question, Paper Mario isn’t complicated, a reviewer can figure out the plot

Dragon, do you even know how reviews work?

Do you?, can you definitively prove ether way without just asking the writer themselves?, honestly I’d like to know, I gave my reasoning why I think it’s a part of there opinion and I don’t really see a debunk for that reading, in the end there blurb is nothing but exaggerated, there feelings on the story is that it’s rubbish and that the game knows it is and uses examples of the story to show this, the story summary is even paused to ask why Peach gets kidnapped so many times and questioning her security

Meanwhile we just have "It is valid because the review is partnered with Nintendo, and it's not contradicted by the game". See how simple of an explanation that is? If you have to literally come up with a convoluted solution to the problem with no evidence supporting it, then you have failed to make a counterargument.

The Simpler sounding wording does not make an argument inherently more correct, I can make any extremely wrong statement and put it in a simple way, and my argument is not standing on could he’s, these factors that can make these statements are even factors admitted by the magazine itself for clarity, and if no source can make it definitive, it’s a bit up in the air of it’s validity, and if these factors aren’t definitively debunked I feel I have the right to question them

and please, it’s Mario, you don’t need to fill your messages with how I’m “you claim all this Shit” or “don’t know how reviews work”, I don’t have any ill will against you and (I hope) I’ve come off as calm


And really I feel like this question should be asked, if Shadow Queen scales to her own creations why does she need them to reshape/destroy the world in the first place?, she could just do it herself, her taking the Supernova really seems more like evidence that Mario can’t use there entire power, which considering that before she’s depowered the stars don’t even do damage at all and the thing that depowered Her was with help of everyone in the game, is probably just more likely

or just game mechanics really, even some characters that don’t scale to Mario can take Supernova

 

[DatOneWeeb]

If the Source has it’s own section saying that not all of there statements are completely given by Nintendo and just correct to there own know-how, then it is put into question if everything they say is true, again huge officially published lore books are treated like this too, The Zelda Verse page has entire note saying that notes from the Hyrule Encyclopedia that aren’t substantiated by any other source are put into question, and the Game itself in this case has no real clear indication the entire Universe is what there talking about, I don’t think I need to explain why “entire world” isn’t an inherent meaning of the Universe, and the game itself only really shows the planet, there’s not really much blatantly supportive of the statement itself

Except again, YOU need to point this out if they say something that is incorrect. Anything. I don't want "can" "could" or "might", I need examples for this. And Mario isn't TLoZ, so that isn't my problem, because the encyclopedia has mistakes, this doesn't. Not to mention I already sent yet another guide where Mario had to "save the universe again" in SPM, Galaxy wasn't out, so that's referring to TTYD. There you go, two mentions of universe alongside world for extra context.