- 2,280
- 1,850
- Thread starter
- #161
They're clearly not headcanon, idk how much I can re-iterate the same points.Lol don’t tell me we’re actually going through with these headcanon changes
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They're clearly not headcanon, idk how much I can re-iterate the same points.Lol don’t tell me we’re actually going through with these headcanon changes
Could you please actually voice your concerns with them? From my memory of Riordan stuff they're quite reasonable.Lol don’t tell me we’re actually going through with these headcanon changes
His stuff regarding Percy VS Ares cerainly isn't. Ares was toying with Percy the entire time and only got serious when Percy stabbed him. The only reason Percy survived is because Kronos stopped him from attacking, leading Ares to retreat. It was made clear that as soon as Ares got serious, Percy would've been toastCould you please actually voice your concerns with them? From my memory of Riordan stuff they're quite reasonable.
Right here is why I disagree. There’s literally no anti feats for the gods, and nothing proves Typhon can’t go above High 6-A. And there’s also the logic of assuming that the star creation feats are a form of reality manipulation or matter manipulation (which is a headcanon with no evidence lol)Creating constellations light years away vs having statements of representing an existing object close to the earth are 2 completely different things.
#1 they call Apollo's chariot the manifestation of the Sun's power. Even if it isn't as big as the actual sun, it's stated to be the manifestation of its power, and Apollo sitting smack dab in the middle of it gives him a relative dura rating.
#2 Zeus turns a lady into a star and sent her flying into space. Aside from that being a ridiculously amazing KE feat, this is solid.
#3 Jupiter flat out turns into the planet Jupiter
#4 Hera creates/summons/becomes supernova
"Celestial statements aren't exactly accurate" based on full headcanon from what I've seen
Give them a reason to affect the sun when the sun is literally One god's Job. They don't step in Apollo's/Helios' domain.
You don't see Hera manipulating Oceans or Zeus stopping all of the fires on the world. Why? Because it's none of their business.
What you just said holds no weight in the grand scheme of the verse's wishes. "Why didn't they do this" because they didn't want to.
This too lol, Ares was not trying whatsoever in the fightHis stuff regarding Percy VS Ares cerainly isn't. Ares was toying with Percy the entire time and only got serious when Percy stabbed him. The only reason Percy survived is because Kronos stopped him from attacking, leading Ares to retreat. It was made clear that as soon as Ares got serious, Percy would've been toast
I agree with that, but that doesn't matter since there still is no relativistic feat.His stuff regarding Percy VS Ares cerainly isn't. Ares was toying with Percy the entire time and only got serious when Percy stabbed him. The only reason Percy survived is because Kronos stopped him from attacking, leading Ares to retreat. It was made clear that as soon as Ares got serious, Percy would've been toast
I don't really think 1/3/4 are too viable, 1 could be interpreted in many ways, and 3/4 are a rumor, but 2 is very explicit, so that does make sense.
I don't agree with Percy's relativistic stuff as well, but scaling Percy to Ares is a big no from meI agree with that, but that doesn't matter since there still is no relativistic feat.
Yes and it would be impossible for that to happen to a relativistic character when the enemy is below mach 81. And anyways, with that logic, put them at MFTL+ or infinite if he was just toying with him.His stuff regarding Percy VS Ares cerainly isn't. Ares was toying with Percy the entire time and only got serious when Percy stabbed him. The only reason Percy survived is because Kronos stopped him from attacking, leading Ares to retreat. It was made clear that as soon as Ares got serious, Percy would've been toast
THEY ARE BOTH STARS! There is no false equivalence. And we're even told they're seperate, idk what you mean. Even if we weren't, we see how constelations are made, and it's not by creating scientific stars.And assuming that the Greek stars aren’t “real” because the sun chariot isn’t real is not only a false equivalence fallacy and also another headcanon
I've moved on from that. I never said the 6A was an anti-feat, I said that the star feats are invalid, but the 6A feats are not. Also, I suggested reality manipulation when the thread first started, there's no need to keep bringing it up.Right here is why I disagree. There’s literally no anti feats for the gods, and nothing proves Typhon can’t go above High 6-A. And there’s also the logic of assuming that the star creation feats are a form of reality manipulation or matter manipulation (which is a headcanon with no evidence lol)
Problem is that Greek stars are different from scientific ones, and when Artemis "put someone in the stars", she only brightened up existing stars.but 2 is very explicit, so that does make sense.
Yeah I'm not scaling to him, I'm trying to have him scaled above him lol.I don't agree with Percy's relativistic stuff as well, but scaling Percy to Ares is a big no from me
Hera isn't actually a supernova, but a god showing his true form basically negates durability as it kills any mortal regardless of how durable they are (monsters are included in it as well here)I don't really think 1/3/4 are too viable, 1 could be interpreted in many ways, and 3/4 are a rumor, but 2 is very explicit, so that does make sense.
Yeah we should add that to their ability list.Hera isn't actually a supernova, but a god showing his true form basically negates durability as it kills any mortal regardless of how durable they are (monsters are included in it as well here)
He was literally not even trying the entire time. Also you realize PIS exists right? Such things happen in fictionYes and it would be impossible for that to happen to a relativistic character when the enemy is below mach 81. And anyways, with that logic, put them at MFTL+ or infinite if he was just toying with him.
The stars are real stars. You have no evidence for claiming otherwise, and the other constellations, which also exist and were created by the Olympian Gods in the Greek myths, are real stars as well. Regardless of the way the Gods created these stars, they are real because science is real in this verse too and we know they are real starsTHEY ARE BOTH STARS! There is no false equivalence. And we're even told they're seperate, idk what you mean. Even if we weren't, we see how constelations are made, and it's not by creating scientific stars.
You have nothing going for your claims. Until then it remains headcanonI've moved on from that. I never said the 6A was an anti-feat, I said that the star feats are invalid, but the 6A feats are not. Also, I suggested reality manipulation when the thread first started, there's no need to keep bringing it up.
How are they different when the Kane Chronicles go out of its way to establish both science and magic are true?Problem is that Greek stars are different from scientific ones, and when Artemis "put someone in the stars", she only brightened up existing stars.
The stars didn't exists before then. She literally created theseIt’s explicitly stated that Artemis brightened existing stars in our sky by putting stuff there. Not by literally making the stars. Unless the quote I’m constantly seeing is incorrect.
Prove it when the quote says she brightened them not created.The stars didn't exists before then. She literally created these
Artemis stood, said a kind of blessing, breathed into her cupped hand and released the silver dust to the sky. It flew up, sparkling, and vanished. For a moment I didn't see anything different. Then Annabeth gasped. Looking up in the sky, I saw that the stars were brighter now. They made a pattern I had never noticed before?a gleaming constellation that looked a lot like a girl's figure?a girl with a bow, running across the sky. "Let the world honor you, my Huntress," Artemis said. "Live forever in the stars." Source: The Titan's Curse
Yeah, but even then, it is there only real reaction featHe was literally not even trying the entire time. Also you realize PIS exists right? Such things happen in fiction
That's actually a flat out lie, the quote tells us as much.The stars didn't exists before then. She literally created these
Magic and science are both true, but also shown to be seperate factors. They are not directly linked to eachother. There are multiple example of this. If you're an athiest, then when you die, you enter true nothingness, and if you're Christian you go to heaven or Hell. Both of these things after death exist, but are not congruent to eachother. The objects in the sky are the manifestation of how the Greeks themselves viewed stars, which is seperate from real stars.The stars are real stars. You have no evidence for claiming otherwise, and the other constellations, which also exist and were created by the Olympian Gods in the Greek myths, are real stars as well. Regardless of the way the Gods created these stars, they are real because science is real in this verse too and we know they are real stars
Because when the Sun Chariot Crashed, the Sun didn't go out or get affected, but when Apophis swallowed Ra's boat, the Sun does go out even though there are two Suns in the sky. Kane Chronicals enforces a premise or idea that affects the verse, but still has its own rules.How are they different when the Kane Chronicles go out of its way to establish both science and magic are true?
What are you on rn? It literally says that stars that already existed brightened to form a Pattern that Percy hadn't noticed. Not one that didn't exist.These stars didn't exist before hand, the stars got brighter because they appeared for the first time.
Well she would be brightening up certain stars so that when you just looked at those stars, they formed a particular image.How does brightening create a whole new constellation? It would just mean the individual stars got a new magnitude
Still PIS, still nothing says Percy scales to Ares in any wayYeah, but even then, it is there only real reaction feat
No it isn't. This is false equivalence. The realm of the dead is purely magical and does not exists in science, unlike the constellations which are actual stars and exists both scientifically and in the myth, and since we know that the stars in the previous constellations are real, then the Gods created actual stars.Magic and science are both true, but also shown to be seperate factors. They are not directly linked to eachother. There are multiple example of this. If you're an athiest, then when you die, you enter true nothingness, and if you're Christian you go to heaven or Hell. Both of these things after death exist, but are not congruent to eachother. The objects in the sky are the manifestation of how the Greeks themselves viewed stars, which is seperate from real stars.
Apophis never swallowed the boat, it swallowed Ra (which was in Zia's body at the time). The Sun boat have nothing to do with it so you're basing your argument on something that is explicably false.Because when the Sun Chariot Crashed, the Sun didn't go out or get affected, but when Apophis swallowed Ra's boat, the Sun does go out even though there are two Suns in the sky.
Because it doesn't. If the stars were already there, it means that the constellation was also always there, but not visable, which is clearly not the case, as Artemis only created the constellation laterHow does brightening create a whole new constellation? It would just mean the individual stars got a new magnitude
And the Greek stars are not THE stars.The Sun Chariot isn't the sun. We discussed this.
They are stated to be there before, Percy just didn't notice the pattern.Because it doesn't. If the stars were already there, it means that the constellation was also always there, but not visable, which is clearly not the case, as Artemis only created the constellation later
I'm sorry I made that mistake, but whether it's Ra or his boat it serves the same purpose.Apophis never swallowed the boat, it swallowed Ra (which was in Zia's body at the time). The Sun boat have nothing to do with it so you're basing your argument on something that is explicably false.
That's why I specifically brought up people who only take the current scientific information on death as an example. Both the scientific and religious death are real, and are seperate from eachother. And it doesn't matter because the two types of stars are stated to be different regardless. I don't need to make an analogy to prove my point when it's right there.No it isn't. This is false equivalence. The realm of the dead is purely magical and does not exists in science, unlike the constellations which are actual stars and exists both scientifically and in the myth, and since we know that the stars in the previous constellations are real, then the Gods created actual stars.
Hate to say it, but when your only feat is while casual, being tagged by a 12 year old Percy, it's not PIS.Still PIS, still nothing says Percy scales to Ares in any way
Bro the quote itself is telling you you're wrong!!!!!!!!!Because it doesn't. If the stars were already there, it means that the constellation was also always there, but not visable, which is clearly not the case, as Artemis only created the constellation later
You got proof for that?And the Greek stars are not THE stars.
Except the constellation literally couldn't be there before because if it would then Artemis wouldn't been able to create it. You can't create something that already exists, so this sentence contradicts Artemis' feat. Artemis literally said she will create a constellation to honor Zoe's death, but if the stars were already there, it means it already exists but simply isn't visible to Percy's eyes, which means Artemis didn't actually created it, which again, is false since the book literally said she created itThey are stated to be there before, Percy just didn't notice the pattern.
Not it doesn't, because the boat isn't Ra. It's just his vehicle and how he transports through the skyI'm sorry I made that mistake, but whether it's Ra or his boat it serves the same purpose.
The Afterlife isn't real regardless, so still false equivalenceThat's why I specifically brought up people who only take the current scientific information on death as an example. Both the scientific and religious death are real, and are seperate from eachother. And it doesn't matter because the two types of stars are stated to be different regardless. I don't need to make an analogy to prove my point when it's right there.
It still is PIS. Hw was never serious the entire match, and if you try to scale Percy to Ares I have nothing else to say to youHate to say it, but when your only feat is while casual, being tagged by a 12 year old Percy, it's not PIS.
Still doesn't change the argument. If it only brightened already existing stars, then that means this constellation has existed BEFORE Artemis even made it, which is even more false since the story explicably say she made it. Not my problem you're getting mad thoughBro the quote itself is telling you you're wrong!!!!!!!!!
Yeah I am kind of pissed off ngl. I've shown you quotes, pointed out the illogicity of the other star feats, quoted one of our experts agreeing with my sentiment, and come up with a more consistent rating, and yet you use the same frail arguments "But [thing that doesn't matter or has already been disproven]."Not my problem you're getting mad though
“The stars were brighter now. They made a pattern I had never seen before”
She did not create new stars, she brightened them so a new constellation would be seen. That’s explicitly what is being said.
Assuming she literally created them is unfounded unless there’s a counter quote saying she did.
Provide quote that doesn’t necessarily disprove her creating stars
Quote is just confusing without context
Doesnt apply any context
Mb, just tired of people doing 1 line quotes and acting like that debunks any other interpretation of the featFolks, let's try to stay polite here
I apologize if I offended anyoneFolks, let's try to stay polite here
What part of the rest of that quote supports the idea that she created the stars themselves and DIDN’T just brighten them?Guess i should just blindly agree with such undeniable evidence
Because she literally stated she created the constellation? If she just brightened the stars, it means that the constellation already existed before she "created" it, which makes no sense. Even if the stars were invisible before, they still exists and thus she didn't created anything, which everything in contexts argues againstWhat part of the rest of that quote supports the idea that she created the stars themselves and DIDN’T just brighten them?
Show me the part of that quote that says she created the constellation.Because she literally stated she created the constellation? If she just brightened the stars, it means that the constellation already existed before she "created" it, which makes no sense. Even if the stars were invisible before, they still exists and thus she didn't created anything, which everything in contexts argues against
way to completely misinterpret my entire pointWhat part of the rest of that quote supports the idea that she created the stars themselves and DIDN’T just brighten them?
The fact you don’t even know the context of that scene from the Titan’s Curse, especially when the entire quote has been said like 3 times in this thread and I was paraphrasing the part that everyone was discussing, is not my burden. The full quote is higher up and I’m certain you can find the context of the scene very easily.way to completely misinterpret my entire point
Artemis literally said that she made the constellation in that same chapter. Are you ignoring that on purpose?The fact you don’t even know the context of that scene from the Titan’s Curse, especially when the entire quote has been said like 3 times in this thread and I was paraphrasing the part that everyone was discussing, is not my burden. The full quote is higher up and I’m certain you can find the context of the scene very easily.
post the quote. I’ve been asking you this like 3 times now and you just keep saying she did this without showing anything.Artemis literally said that she made the constellation in that same chapter. Are you ignoring that on purpose?
You have the the book online to link for me? I don't have the book in english so I can't link itpost the quote. I’ve been asking you this like 3 times now and you just keep saying she did this without showing anything.