• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Composite character profiles that need to be reworked or deleted due to recent rule changes

Dragomer said:
keep the outliers
Click to expand...
Why would keep outliers? Did you suddenly forget what an Outlier is? This whole "this Pokémon is like 5 tiers above the rest of species because it's trained" non-sense has to stop. We need to keep all profiles streamlined to the actual species and disregard such outliers enterily.
 
Why would keep outliers? Did you suddenly forget what an Outlier is? This whole "this Pokémon is like 5 tiers above the rest of species because it's trained" non-sense has to stop. We need to keep all profiles streamlined to the actual species and disregard such outliers enterily.

I though you meant the outliers of the species, AKA the actual characters, not the outlier feats, species profiles, especialy in their current form just don't make sense.
 
Huh, that makes sense. The issue is, like I said, we're pro-individual profile. It'd be more consistent to keep the individual profiles and argue directly the idea of composite canon pokemon.

Though if it does turn out that Masuda did say everything from Pokemon 7 to PMD to *insert obscure material here*, guess that would be the logical step.
 
AFAIK, the statements only back up main anime (the one with Ash), games and PokéSpe manga sharing the same canon. Unless Cal has more statements that I missed.
 
I know (I think) what you're talking about, however the statement for Pokemon Spe was only secondary canon at best, and specifically regarding the early chapters of it.

Anime has its own issues, probably going to end up getting treated like Z is to Super fyi.
 
Now I know why people don't mess with Pokémon: Kukui's testaments.

>First paragraph

What exactly confirms that different Darkrai have the same background if they are different to Lucarios.

If it's one Darkrai then holy hell how bipolar he is because he doesn't decide if he's good or bad in each incarnation. One of them is even a tamer's slave despite being a ******* legendary (this one is by far the worst case and should totally be separated from the profile because no place in hell would consider it 2-B).

>Second paragraph

Did Femewtwo meet Ash in the movie? If so, he/she should remember the events of the first movie because, c'mon, he's the reason why Mewtwo was evangelized. If not, it's either from a different canon or a different Mewtwo.

Can you also explain why the change tho?

Or can you explain why Origins' Mewtwo seems to be more animalistic than the other depictions? If it's the same Mewtwo, there we have a problem. This Mewtwo is also considerably weaker or Red's Charizard is a ******* monster and should be mentioned.

>Third paragraph

"This isn't the case for Darkrai because they isn't" is the summary of this paragraph. Instead of giving a good reason as why Darkrai is composited either for amnesia or for some weird plot device that makes change ideology from time to time.

>Fourth paragraph

This applies the other way around to Tobías' Darkrai, which is the most prominent case. This so called 2-B gets rekt by an average Sceptile and you can't just say "oh, it's PIS, Tobías actually has a God in his team even if the anime doesn't give a **** about it outside of the movies".

>Fifth

Because you say so, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Characters with no backstory exists in the wiki in every single verse. Lack of backstory is laughably one of the worst explanations you could try to disguise as argument.

>Sixth

Ignoring that every portrayal of the move is different and matters.

I know you agree with him, but I don't see a single reason to not split a Composite profile made of different characters, not just members of the same species.

If they are similar enough, then we yeet the notion that we're compositing the profile and just use the primary media (games, obviously) and ignore what the other depictions show. As it is now, the profile is violating our composite rules and you can't debunk the idea that these are different Darkrais, ergo, they are different characters.
 
I don't know if that helps the case with Pokémon, but I think there is a misunderstanding of what was said about the "canon" (Not that there really is one in Pokémon).

All that Masuda said was that if we want to understand about Pokémon's past, we could see that in Lucario's film. Then he was asked whether the anime, and by extension the films, share the same world as the games. His answer is that in thesis, everything is "Pokémon World", but it can be explained with parallel worlds.

This just means that Pokémon shares the same "setting" between different media , the same myths, a backstory similar enough that if you know it in one, at least something very similar happened in another (So, if we know what happened in the past from Lucario's film, then we can assume that it explains what happened in the past in games). Nothing more than that.
 
>What exactly confirms that different Darkrai have the same background if they are different to Lucarios.

Easy. Don't make assumptions and insert your own headcanons about each darkrai's backgrounds when there isnt any in the first place. That makes much bigger assumptions than whats needed. Especially since Darkrai in general doesnt have any background besides being the pokemon of nightmares.

>One of them is even a tamer's slave despite being a ******* legendary (this one is by far the worst case and should totally be separated from the profile because no place in hell would consider it 2-B).

Yeah, a tamer to a "slave" who has absolutely no backstory, no charaterization, was made at the last second to be another "How will Ash Ketchum be robbed of his league win this generation" and literally never appears again in the franchise afterwards. Using a plot device that makes even Arceus's meteor pleasurable being a tamer to Darkrai (who for all we know, could have chose to go with Tobias) isn't a good argument at all.

>Did Femewtwo meet Ash in the movie?

...Yes? This already tells me you don't know the full story.

>If so, he/she should remember the events of the first movie because, c'mon, he's the reason why Mewtwo was evangelized. If not, it's either from a different canon or a different Mewtwo.

You do know the first movie isn't even when Ash remembers Mewtwo right? It's from the special "Mewtwo Returns". And he remembers Mewtwo in the Genesect movie considering neither he or Pikachu are surprised one bit by Mewtwo's sudden appearance to save them from a rampaging Genesect.

Obviously that Mewtwo is different from the first movie one. I said both have the same generic backstory (being created by mew from scientists and hating humans as a result). They are cut from the same cloth. Beside's being able to self-mega evolve, this Mewtwo's capabilities are literally no different from what the first movie Mewtwo is capable of doing.

>This Mewtwo is also considerably weaker or Red's Charizard is a ******* monster and should be mentioned.

Or we go the normal route and treat Red's Charizard as an outlier. Which should be quite obvious.

>"This isn't the case for Darkrai because they isn't" is the summary of this paragraph.

It's the summary of this paragraph because I have examples in the previous ones about why Darkrai doesnt fall under this like Pikachu or Lucario does.

>This applies the other way around to Tobías' Darkrai, which is the most prominent case.

It doesn't. Because as said prior, Tobias is literally a character who comes in the last second with a Darkrai he gets out of nowhere, never expanding on any backstory or characterization, just so he stops Ash from winning a league. And then permanently vanishes afterwards. Living example of a plot device and is completely different from Pikachu having a backstory with Ash, Lucario having a backstory with Sir Aaron, and other examples of pokemon having backstories with actual characterized trainers.

>This so called 2-B gets rekt by an average Sceptile

So a sceptile from Ash of all people is average now? What? It's an obvious outlier anyway, but your view of Ash's Scpetile is very innacurate.

>and you can't just say "oh, it's PIS, Tobías actually has a God in his team even if the anime doesn't give a **** about it outside of the movies".

Darkrai gets beat because Ash literally pulls a "power of friendship" out of his ass to make Sceptile, out of nowhere, wake up from a Dark Void (which even Dialga and Palkia needed barriers to stop) and then 2 shots a Darkrai that solo'd all Sinnoh Gyms and every Sinnoh league competitor without breaking a sweat. And THEN, Sceptile gets one shotted by a Latios literally right afterwards.

I can very much say its PIS here. And on Arceus and meteor levels of it.

>Characters with no backstory exists in the wiki in every single verse.

Not as separate pages from their normal counterparts, which is the very thing your so adamant to argue for Darkrai here.

>Ignoring that every portrayal of the move is different and matters.

This last point was addressing Dragomer, not you. But since you mentioned it, why not.

The portrayl isn't even different. It's just another way of using the move. Does the same thing, but in a different form. Its, again, not some Ash-Pikachu Thunder Armor, Ash-Infernape Blaze or Ash-Greninja water shuriken that pops up out of nowhere.

>If they are similar enough, then we yeet the notion that we're compositing the profile and just use the primary media (games, obviously) and ignore what the other depictions show.

Because, as everyone else have mentioned time and time again, the other media in Pokemon are exactly as canon as the games are for the reasons laid out. All of the canons exist with each other, this is much more than just being "similar". So this is an option that, as far as I and others go, is absolutely not happening.

>As it is now, the profile is violating our composite rules

And if you understood Pokemon's canon, it actually doesn't.

>you can't debunk the idea that these are different Darkrais, ergo, they are different characters.

They aren't different characters and you have brought absolutely nothing that says they are.
 
>The games are obviously the primary media

Statements about the anime and PokéSpe manga being put on the same level as the games: Are we a joke to you?
 
Like I mentioned, the Pokemon Spe statements you're refering to put them in secondary canon and the anime statement was the one he was discussing...
 
Too big for me, but I do want to note something:

"Using a plot device that makes even Arceus's meteor pleasurable being a tamer to Darkrai (who for all we know, could have chose to go with Tobias) isn't a good argument at all."

Plot device =/= plot induced stupidity, we actually use the former (The Dragon Balls, the arrow from bleach, etc) in consideration for the plot.

Also how much character one has is subjective and not a point onto whether they should actually be considered. We have characters with less screen time / background here.
 
If you take Taijiri's statement regarding PokéSpe at face value, he's actually saying that manga is more canon than the game, calling it the truest version of the franchise based on his vision of it.
 
Actually can you bring up the quote? When I searched for it, I got: "This is the comic that most resembles the world I was trying to convey." for Pokemon Red's Volumes (3) which would fall under Death of the Author, but I'm really hoping we didn't just accept it for the entire run.
 
Death of the Author makes what the author says irrelevant because the interpretation of the author is no more valid than that of anyone else. You can apply Death of the Author to every single statement said by the author regarding their work.
 
So Darkrai is abritrarily good or bad depending on the incarnation and (as Executor pointed) timeline where he is, making him the biggest bipolar in existence because he has a single backstory since there's no evidence of them existing at all. Are you paying attention or do I need to explain this this to you slower?

Now we suddenly reject profiles for plot devices, McGuffins, Gary Stus and a lot of other cliche just because they are all bad writing. Biggest lol.

I haven't seen every movie. That's why I'm asking you, dude.

If the Mewtwo is different (because the question was if Femewtwo remembered Ash, not the other way around) then it's a clear case of a different individual with a clear difference (that you can claim it's because Megas didn't exist back at that year). But the fact that two different characters have the same background despite being portrayed different than the first, with a different capability, no mention of the story shared with the prota (or that's what you're making me think since you're not adressing this correctly) then it's pretty clear to me that this case isn't applicable for a species.

Yeah, just like how we treat Pikachu as one, or the other Lucarios. See? Double standard. Said Mewtwo is very different from the others and your response it's "oh, it's an outlier". Same with Femewtwo, and I don't remember the PokeSpe manga, but just from the whole psy spoon which isn't adressed in the first movie (at least) leads me to think that these are different characters that share a same species. Like a bunch of clones, literally.

Your argument relies on "oh, he has no backstory, he's an asspull", but that's not an argument. Tell me which characters' profiles have been deleted because of this. How many?

Obviously misleading the point to not face the fact that Tob's Darkrai isn't comparable to his fellow Darkrais. Good.

So that Darkrai's DV can be resisted or nulled. Good. More evidence of it being different from the normal Darkrais. What else? Tell me so the profiles creation are much easier.

At this point I'm arguing for different incarnations based on feats and powers if the backstory isn't enough. That or just nuking the whole composite shit that contradicts our rules. Pokémon only gets a free pass because the profiles are made for the species, but these are clearly different individuals sharing the same species only.

If the move is used differently in different media, then yeah, different depiction. It doesn't need to devolve into the fundamentals of the move, like the effects and shit. Just looking that one Darkrai can use DV with a thought and the rest of them need either a portal or a beam is enough to qualify as different portrayals. You don't need to be rocket scientist to understand this.

I'm more inclined to believe Executor's version that includes the multiversal theory. Makes more sense when you think about it and would explain every different portrayal much better than just assuming everything exists in the same world.

Totally different mindsets and different power applications. Yeah, totally the same character.

If Darkrai is truly an unique legendary, then each version belongs to its own continuity rather than just doing all that shit in the same timeline because he's James McAvoy now.


The solution is simple. Darkrai must not be treated as a composite. You're treating it in vs threads like he can switch ideologies and the way it uses its powers like it has a button to do it. Which is pitiful, if you ask me.
 
Think you're confusing Word of God with Death of the Author.

The latter applies to opinion and interpretation, the former are just specific details not in the book.

Kinda like how Hank Pym wasn't supposed to slap his wife kinda thing, the intent was there but what is on the page is different. Also why we disregard stuff like "my verse is omniversal" for a tier 8 series.
 
SomebodyData said:
Think you're confusing Word of God with Death of the Author.
Click to expand...
I'm not confusing them in any way. Word of God is what the author says outside of their work, such as during an interview. Death of the Author is saying such thing is invalid because it doesn't happen in the work and what the author thinks happened is no more valid than that of any idea made up by the reader.
 
"The latter applies to opinion and interpretation, the former are just specific details not in the book."

Otherwise sequels would fall under death of the author and fanfiction would be just as canon.

Obviously we still call out death of the author in a lot of things, so if you want to allow statements that fall under death of the author, be my guest, make a thread. But the conclusion for this discussion is that it is death of the author.
 
WHY this falls under death of the author is what I'm asking. You're basically interpreting what I said in the exact opposite way of what I'm saying.
 
Oh sorry, thought that I already said why.

He's talking about what he tried to convey, not whether its canon or not but his own personal interpretation on what his work was supposed to be like.
 
SomebodyData said:
Oh sorry, thought that I already said why.
He's talking about what he tried to convey, not whether its canon or not but his own personal interpretation on what his work was supposed to be like.
Click to expand...
Yeah, an author saying 'i was trying to convey X' is very different from an author saying 'it is X and nothing else'.
 
The Calaca said:
So Darkrai is abritrarily good or bad depending on the incarnation and (as Executor pointed) timeline where he is, making him the biggest bipolar in existence because he has a single backstory since there's no evidence of them existing at all. Are you paying attention or do I need to explain this this to you slower?

Now we suddenly reject profiles for plot devices, McGuffins, Gary Stus and a lot of other cliche just because they are all bad writing. Biggest lol.

I haven't seen every movie. That's why I'm asking you, dude.

If the Mewtwo is different (because the question was if Femewtwo remembered Ash, not the other way around) then it's a clear case of a different individual with a clear difference (that you can claim it's because Megas didn't exist back at that year). But the fact that two different characters have the same background despite being portrayed different than the first, with a different capability, no mention of the story shared with the prota (or that's what you're making me think since you're not adressing this correctly) then it's pretty clear to me that this case isn't applicable for a species.

Yeah, just like how we treat Pikachu as one, or the other Lucarios. See? Double standard. Said Mewtwo is very different from the others and your response it's "oh, it's an outlier". Same with Femewtwo, and I don't remember the PokeSpe manga, but just from the whole psy spoon which isn't adressed in the first movie (at least) leads me to think that these are different characters that share a same species. Like a bunch of clones, literally.

Your argument relies on "oh, he has no backstory, he's an asspull", but that's not an argument. Tell me which characters' profiles have been deleted because of this. How many?

Obviously misleading the point to not face the fact that Tob's Darkrai isn't comparable to his fellow Darkrais. Good.

So that Darkrai's DV can be resisted or nulled. Good. More evidence of it being different from the normal Darkrais. What else? Tell me so the profiles creation are much easier.

At this point I'm arguing for different incarnations based on feats and powers if the backstory isn't enough. That or just nuking the whole composite shit that contradicts our rules. Pokémon only gets a free pass because the profiles are made for the species, but these are clearly different individuals sharing the same species only.

If the move is used differently in different media, then yeah, different depiction. It doesn't need to devolve into the fundamentals of the move, like the effects and shit. Just looking that one Darkrai can use DV with a thought and the rest of them need either a portal or a beam is enough to qualify as different portrayals. You don't need to be rocket scientist to understand this.

I'm more inclined to believe Executor's version that includes the multiversal theory. Makes more sense when you think about it and would explain every different portrayal much better than just assuming everything exists in the same world.

Totally different mindsets and different power applications. Yeah, totally the same character.

If Darkrai is truly an unique legendary, then each version belongs to its own continuity rather than just doing all that shit in the same timeline because he's James McAvoy now.


The solution is simple. Darkrai must not be treated as a composite. You're treating it in vs threads like he can switch ideologies and the way it uses its powers like it has a button to do it. Which is pitiful, if you ask me.
Click to expand...
These points still stand.
 
Well, it is possible that we should keep The Doctor from the TV show and the novels and audio dramas separate, but it would be considerable work for our knowledgeable members to handle.
 
A proposition was also made to split up the Doctor into keys and further split the Doctor profiles into 2 parts: 1-8 and War-Onwards for a clearer profile, and on the basis of the Modern and Classic series separation.

The reason for this is because apparently while the latest Doctor does have access to prior equipment, prior incarnations tend to not, the first Doctor for example, has some quite mundane equipment and feats, so as to better reflect the character, keys would be made for each major Doctor, abilities-wise. So the keys hence would get increasingly stronger.

Also from my understanding the Audio Dramas and Novels are expanded canon, and as such do not need be removed IMO
 
I agree with Zark on the keys and the 2 profile split, this would better show what each incarnation is capable of doing, and what they have, and the 2 pages would help keep the profiles neater and less cluttered than if they were all on one page

From what I've been told, the audio dramas, novels, comics, and all of that are all canon to Doctor Who or at least some sort of extended canon, so keeping them together with the rest of it is fine although that's only because fhere isn't an established canon to DW
 
I think Zark's and Paul's points on the Doctor page being split make sense and Zark's proposal works as a good solution.
 
Zark makes sense to me as well. Should we remove the "Composite Profiles" category then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Locked
Wiki problems that need to be dealt with
Replies
24
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Killerdrone123
  • Locked
To be canon or not to be that is the question.A Dragon ball Super revision
2 3 4
Replies
152
Views
11K
AwkguyDB
AwkguyDB
Detective_Blizzard
Lupin III: Composite Update
Replies
14
Views
658
Detective_Blizzard
Detective_Blizzard
Deidalius
Can THE STRONGEST Minecraft Mod be added to this wiki or any other wiki related to vs battles wiki? Like idk, jokes battles wiki or alt battles wiki?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Deidalius
Deidalius
OculoOmnibus
Questions regarding Universal Requirements and Fanfiction/Canon comparison scaling
Replies
1
Views
214
TheShape03
TheShape03
Back
Top