Dropping the Riordanverse Tier by smiting it with Zeus' Lightning Bolt

[Kingofwolves999]

You have the the book online to link for me? I don't have the book in english so I can't link it

So how on earth are you making the claim that she said she made the constellation?????

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

I read the book before and saw it, but I can't link the quote. It's has been some time since I last read the book

 

[Kingofwolves999]

I read the book before and saw it, but I can't link the quote. It's has been some time since I last read the book

So you have no evidence that she actually said it? Or of any of the actual quotes from the book? Just prior knowledge that could be incorrect? And you’re daring to say WE are using headcanon when WE are the ones quoting the book directly?

Are you serious?

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

So you have no evidence that she actually said it? Or of any of the actual quotes from the book? Just prior knowledge that could be incorrect? And you’re daring to say WE are using headcanon when WE are the ones quoting the book directly?

Are you serious?

Yes I am. No need to be a prick. You want the scans? If you could link me the site where you took these lines, then I could show it to you

 

[Jibz]

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.

"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."

Yep, wrap it up folks he just completely debunked Star lvl Gods. Just because Artemis makes constellations that way, doesnt mean nobody else does. Regardless of the fact Gods have been consistently shown to have feats similar (the sun chariot comes to mind)

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Except that if Artemis only brightened the stars, then she didn't actually created the constellation

 

[Kingofwolves999]

Yes I am. No need to be a prick. You want proof? If you could link me the site where you took these lines, then I could show it to you

Ask Cryo, I don’t have an online copy, I have physical and my friend has my entire collection.

"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."

Yep, wrap it up folks he just completely debunked Star lvl Gods. Just because Artemis makes constellations that way, doesnt mean nobody else does. Regardless of the fact Gods have been consistently shown to have feats similar (the sun chariot comes to mind)

Dang, that sure looks a lot like NOT creating the stars going on in that quote. She brightened them and didn’t make them at all. I sure do wonder how the other gods made stars!

Obviously all of them brightened pre-existing stars. That’s literally what this scene is showing about Star creation from the Greek gods. That they brighten already existing ones. They do not make new ones.

Unless, of course, you have something to add that is contradictory to this claim?

 

[Jibz]

Ask Cryo, I don’t have an online copy, I have physical and my friend has my entire collection.

Dang, that sure looks a lot like NOT creating the stars going on in that quote. She brightened them and didn’t make them at all. I sure do wonder how the other gods made stars!

Obviously all of them brightened pre-existing stars. That’s literally what this scene is showing about Star creation from the Greek gods. That they brighten already existing ones. They do not make new ones.

Unless, of course, you have something to add that is contradictory to this claim?

Fallacy of assumption, to assume that a lesser god like Artemis brightening up the cosmos to make a constellation this one time negates all the others is ridiculous.

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

Obviously all of them brightened pre-existing stars.

Reasoning?

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Dang, that sure looks a lot like NOT creating the stars going on in that quote. She brightened them and didn’t make them at all. I sure do wonder how the other gods made stars!

She kinda did. The stars didn't exist before, and now they do

Obviously all of them brightened pre-existing stars. That’s literally what this scene is showing about Star creation from the Greek gods. That they brighten already existing ones. They do not make new ones.

You got proof? Just because that's how she made them doesn't mean that's how the other gods did that

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

Unless, of course, you have something to add that is contradictory to this claim?

Zeus literally states that he turned Calisto into a star LMAOOO

 

[Kingofwolves999]

She kinda did. The stars didn't exist before, and now they do

You got proof? Just because that's how she made them doesn't mean that's how the other gods did that

“the stars were brighter now” -> existing stars are brighter. That is all this means. This is the only reference to the stars in the entire quote. Nothing has been created. The stars are brighter. That’s it.

“They made a pattern I had never seen before” -> The stars that have now been brightened are making a new constellation. This =/= she created new stars. The stars that she brightened are forming a constellation he had not noticed. Why had he not noticed it before? Because the stars were not as bright as they are now.

This is basic sentence structure. “The stars are now brighter -> oh look a new pattern I hadn’t seen before of those stars”

None of this implies she created anything. She brightened stars, and because of that, a new pattern could be seen from them. That is all.

This false takeaway that she literally created the stars and then pushed them into place to make a constellation is unfounded

Zeus literally states that he turned Calisto into a star LMAOOO

You mean similarly to how Artemis made Zoe a constellation? Unless you have the direct quote, and he says that he made a scientific Star or something to that effect, then that “feat” means nothing.

Zeus going “I made her a star!” when we see a feat of Star creation and it’s not making a literal star puts heavy doubt on Zeus doing it literally too. We do not assume the highest possible outcome from something ESPECIALLY when someone else doing the same exact thing does so in a far less powerful way.

Unless Zeus has concrete evidence of creating a REAL star in a manner that is far more powerful than what Artemis is doing, then I see no reason why he gets the benefit of the doubt. He needs to accomplish the basics of creation just as much as anyone else.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

“the stars were brighter now” -> existing stars are brighter. That is all this means. This is the only reference to the stars in the entire quote. Nothing has been created. The stars are brighter. That’s it.

“They made a pattern I had never seen before” -> The stars that have now been brightened are making a new constellation. This =/= she created new stars. The stars that she brightened are forming a constellation he had not noticed. Why had he not noticed it before? Because the stars were not as bright as they are now.

This is basic sentence structure. “The stars are now brighter -> oh look a new pattern I hadn’t seen before of those stars”

None of this implies she created anything. She brightened stars, and because of that, a new pattern could be seen from them. That is all.

This false takeaway that she literally created the stars and then pushed them into place to make a constellation is unfounded

Then if the stars already existed and she made them move to create a new pattern, then this is still High 4-C regardless of anything since she causes the stars to move to form a new pattern that Percy didn't noticed before.

And if the constellation was always there (and it wasn't), then Artemis literally did nothing, which contradicts the entire statement, since making the stars brighter momentarily before they returned to their normal brightness doesn't mean anything when the constellation was always there and the stars were there too, since according to you Percy just now noticed the pattern, not that it didn't exists, which literally contradicts the entire point of this scene, since if she was always there, then why does Artemis saying the lines she says as if she only now became memorialized in the stars?

 

[Kingofwolves999]

Then if the stars already existed and she made them move to create a new pattern, then this is still High 4-C regardless of anything since she causes the stars to move to form a new pattern that Percy didn't noticed before.

And if the constellation was always there (and it wasn't), then Artemis literally did nothing, which contradicts the entire statement, since making the stars brighter momentarily before they returned to their normal brightness doesn't mean anything when the constellation was always there and the stars were there too, since according to you Percy just now noticed the pattern, not that it didn't exists, which literally contradicts the entire point of this scene, since if she was always there, then why does Artemis saying the lines she says as if she only now became memorialized in the stars?

She didn’t move them. She didn’t create them. She made them brighter.

That is all she did.

If that isn’t impressive, than that’s just how it is. Not impressive.

 

[Kingofwolves999]

Also she used the silver dust to make them brighter, and the dust was Zoe. I would call that being immortalized.

Anyway, I’m taking a break from this thread.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Also she used the silver dust to make them brighter, and the dust was Zoe. I would call that being immortalized.

Except she also said to her "live forver in the stars", but if the stars already existed before, than that means that she already did before Artemis even made it??? Which completely cojtradict her statement, since if these stars already existed and in this pattern, why did she needed Zoë to be immortalized in the stars? Since according to you, she was already immortalized before her death, which makes absolutely no sense and contradict the narrative even further

Again, nothing says that they were there before. Percy only described what he saw, not what she did.

 

[Cryo123]

Except she also said to her "live forver in the stars", but if the stars already existed before, than that means that she already did before Artemis even made it??? Which completely cojtradict her statement, since if these stars already existed and in this pattern, why did she needed Zoë to be immortalized in the stars? Since according to you, she was already immortalized before her death, which makes absolutely no sense and contradict the narrative even further

The pattern was almost impossible to notice before, so when she brightened up the stars in such away that that pattern was noticable, she "made a constelation", as all she needs to do is make existing stars more noticeable, which is what the text says she did.

Again, nothing says that they were there before.

What!? It literally says that specific stars were brighter than normal, which Formed a pattern he had not noticed before.

Being brighter than normal shows they were there beforehand as they already had a pre-existing brightness, it affecting specific stars means it was targeted, and that's how the constelation was made.

I'm sorry but even my little brother is capable of understanding what this passage is saying, I'm 100% sure at this point you really don't care about the facts of the matter and just want to blindly maintain the status quo.

Percy only described what he saw, not what she did.

So ignore the part where he said she blew a palmful of dust into the sky, and don't use basic literacy skills to know that the author is telling us what's happening whithout breaking the first person perspective Percy's story is written from.

Also here's the link to the quote, which was in a blog post that got accepted. Artemis gives the stars a glow up or whatever but the math makes some massive assumptions and also the OP is making the same mistake you are, in that they're assuming that those stars were completely invisible before, which they were not.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

The pattern was almost impossible to notice before, so when she brightened up the stars in such away that that pattern was noticable, she "made a constelation", as all she needs to do is make existing stars more noticeable, which is what the text says she did.

She actually made the constellation to immortalize Zoe. If the stars were already visible before, then how Artemis said that only NOW Zoe was immortalized in the stars? Because if it already existed before, then that mean she was always immortalized in the stars, even though Artemis did it only when Zoe died as a way to honor her

What!? It literally says that specific stars were brighter than normal, which Formed a pattern he had not noticed before.

Being brighter than normal shows they were there beforehand as they already had a pre-existing brightness, it affecting specific stars means it was targeted, and that's how the constelation was made.

No it doesn't explains it. If the stars were already there, it means the constellation was already there before, regardless of its visibility, which defeats the whole purpose of Artemis creating the constellation to honor Zoe.

Basically, if the constellation was already there before, then Artemis brightening the stars wouldn't change the fact that it still exists, meaning that Zoe was always immortalized in the sky, which is completely false as the story makes it clear that she only immortalized Zoe after her death

I'm sorry but even my little brother is capable of understanding what this passage is saying, I'm 100% sure at this point you really don't care about the facts of the matter and just want to blindly maintain the status quo.

Then you'd be 100% wrong as well. I don't care about the tiers, but when your method is clearly wrong I say against it

So ignore the part where he said she blew a palmful of dust into the sky, and don't use basic literacy skills to know that the author is telling us what's happening whithout breaking the first person perspective Percy's story is written from.

Percy's point of view is still subjective. Again, he only describes what he saw, not how the feat actually happened

Also here's the link to the quote, which was in a blog post that got accepted. Artemis gives the stars a glow up or whatever but the math makes some massive assumptions and also the OP is making the same mistake you are, in that they're assuming that those stars were completely invisible before, which they were not.

The blog was never approved by any calc member, so I wouldn't use it. Also, if the stars were not invisible before, then how did she created anything? Again, that means that Zoe was always immortalized in the stars even though the story makes it clear it happened after her death

 

[Hellbeast]

No, Zeus got bodied by a 4-B character who performed a 6-A feat. The highest feat HE’S performed is 6-A, however he scales far above gods who can create REAL stars. Your argument would only apply if the specific 6-A attack that Typhon did was capable of extremely harming Zeus

Technically wasn’t Artemis’ feat 5-C via expanding the luminosity of stars
I thought the reasoning for High 4-C was Hera causing supernova when Zeus committed Affairs?

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

I thought the reasoning for High 4-C was Hera causing supernova when Zeus committed Affairs?

True, point stands though. There has not yet been a debunk for Hera’s feat

 

[Hellbeast]

I mean....
It comes squarely from Percy and he's known as being quite unreliable and prone to exaggeration

Also while I'm not strictly knowledgeable on the verse it does seem magnitudes above the next best feats (Such as Artemis/' star thing)

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

I mean....
It comes squarely from Percy and he's known as being quite unreliable and prone to exaggeration

Also while I'm not strictly knowledgeable on the verse it does seem magnitudes above the next best feats (Such as Artemis/' star thing)

Pretty sure there’s also a 5-A feat (Jupiter (the god) turns into Jupiter (the planet)

 

[Hellbeast]

Pretty sure there’s also a 5-A feat (Jupiter (the god) turns into Jupiter (the planet)

Which comes from the same source as the High 4-C and is shifty as hell
Especially since Jupiter clearly exists at all times and doesn't just pop out of existence when Zeus isn't Jupiter

I also certainly can't recall any other Gods becoming celestial bodies which adds to the shiftiness and it again runs into the issue of overall consistency

Hera isn’t remotely the strongest Olympian and yet she has feats sveral magnitudes above characters far stronger then her such as Typhon

 

[Armorchompy]

Yeah if High 4-C is the only tier 4 feat then I'm absolutely opposed to it since it's worded like a rumor

 

[Cryo123]

I found the quote on goodreads, idk if that counts as reliable but it says the same thing

Edit: Hit post early, the link is here https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/710576-zoe-i-said-stars-she-whispered-i-can-see-the

 

[Cryo123]

She actually made the constellation to immortalize Zoe. If the stars were already visible before, then how Artemis said that only NOW Zoe was immortalized in the stars? Because if it already existed before, then that mean she was always immortalized in the stars, even though Artemis did it only when Zoe died as a way to honor her

Because the pattern wasn't really noticable before, fun fact, irl there are a near infinite amount of patterns you could make off of the stars in our sky. The human brain just has to notice them (Which is what she did to immortalize her), and you're trying to discredit the point of an entire paragraph with no evidence.

No it doesn't explains it. If the stars were already there, it means the constellation was already there before, regardless of its visibility, which defeats the whole purpose of Artemis creating the constellation to honor Zoe.

I mean every constelation was techincally there in this world before the gods even existed, so you're not saying much. And if it's not really noticeable, it might as well not be there.

Basically, if the constellation was already there before, then Artemis brightening the stars wouldn't change the fact that it still exists, meaning that Zoe was always immortalized in the sky, which is completely false as the story makes it clear that she only immortalized Zoe after her death

Basically, you could make any pattern you wanted out of the stars alredy in the sky rn.

And saying that something dampens the dramatic impac of a story event does not make it invalid anyways. So what if it ended up being a hollow gesture that's clearly what she did.

Percy's point of view is still subjective. Again, he only describes what he saw, not how the feat actually happened

The blog was never approved by any calc member, so I wouldn't use it. Also, if the stars were not invisible before, then how did she created anything? Again, that means that Zoe was always immortalized in the stars even though the story makes it clear it happened after her death

1. The quote on goodreads has us see exactly what she does. From her taking dust from the dead body to sending it up in the air. Also, stop using the subjectivity thing, because then any feat in first person is invalid, the narrative is describing something through Percy's eyes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. When subjective wording is used such as "bright as a supernova" by a first person character, that's different. And it seems clear that Anabeth observed the same phenomenon regardless, as she's the one who pointed it out the change to Percy in the first place.

2. Okay I linked the quote.

Pretty sure there’s also a 5-A feat (Jupiter (the god) turns into Jupiter (the planet)

That was a rumor, and they say he either is, or goes to Jupiter. It's a rumor, and it's his Roman form, and they give two distinct possibilties of what he's doing.

True, point stands though. There has not yet been a debunk for Hera’s feat

Uh yeah there was, I don't think you were online when it was.

The first feat with Jason has no supernova level damage, Jason is 6C, and only says it looked as bright as one, which is a perfect example of a subjective and unreliable perspective. Also, only people that look at her die or get injured.

The other "supernova feat" is another rumor that's prone to hyperbole and is unreliable at best.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Because the pattern wasn't really noticable before, fun fact, irl there are a near infinite amount of patterns you could make off of the stars in our sky. The human brain just has to notice them (Which is what she did to immortalize her), and you're trying to discredit the point of an entire paragraph with no evidence.

Wasn't noticable doesn't mean wasn't existing. Again, look at the final quote Artemis says. She says "live forever in the stars", but if the constellation was always there, then she was immortalized before her death, which makes no sense because the scene clearly implies that she was only immortalized in the stars as the onstellation AFTER her death, meaning the stars didn't exist before hand, or they did and they changed their formations to form the shape of a huntress

I mean every constelation was techincally there in this world before the gods even existed, so you're not saying much. And if it's not really noticeable, it might as well not be there.

In this verse, they weren't. The ancient myths where the Gods created the constellations are still true in this verse, but the science is also true. Both co-exist, so it could be that the gods simply created them at the age they would've been had they formed naturally. Also, might as well not been there = / = not been there, because even if Percy and the others could see it, it would still exist

Basically, you could make any pattern you wanted out of the stars alredy in the sky rn.

That's irrelevant to the conversation

And saying that something dampens the dramatic impac of a story event does not make it invalid anyways. So what if it ended up being a hollow gesture that's clearly what she did.

This have nothing to do with being dramatic. What are you suggesting literally contradict the entire narrative point of the scene. If she would already be immortalized, then Artemis wouldn't need to do anything, nor declare that she became immortalized now AFTER she did her feat. It literally makes no sense and the scene has no purpose to exist had it been like you said

1. The quote on goodreads has us see exactly what she does. From her taking dust from the dead body to sending it up in the air. Also, stop using the subjectivity thing, because then any feat in first person is invalid, the narrative is describing something through Percy's eyes, that doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. When subjective wording is used such as "bright as a supernova" by a first person character, that's different. And it seems clear that Anabeth observed the same phenomenon regardless, as she's the one who pointed it out the change to Percy in the first place.

Then how is Percy's description is completely reliable, while Jason's isn't? I don't say I agree with Jason's description, but you still need to explain it

 

[Cryo123]

Then how is Percy's description is completely reliable, while Jason's isn't? I don't say I agree with Jason's description, but you still need to explain it

Jason says "as bright as a supernova". He never mentions it having comparable power, it never shows a comparable amount of power, and he is directly comparing it to something else that he has never seen before/has never had experience with. Percy just saying the stars were brighter than before is an objective statement, and also Annebeth, who is more logical and objective, also experiences the same phenomenon.

So the short answer is, there are many differences, from the wording, to the contradictions, to the fact that there are multiple witnesses seeing the same thing as Percy.

That's irrelevant to the conversation

It is very relavent, because it means that the constelation already existed no matter what.

This have nothing to do with being dramatic. What are you suggesting literally contradict the entire narrative point of the scene. If she would already be immortalized, then Artemis wouldn't need to do anything, nor declare that she became immortalized now AFTER she did her feat. It literally makes no sense and the scene has no purpose to exist had it been like you said

She DID do something, she made the constelation noticeable. There is no contradiction here, you're pulling at straws.

It's purpose is to memorialize her, the fact that the stars were brightened doesn't take away from that. And even then, its prupose would be to show how the gods "make" the constelations.

In this verse, they weren't. The ancient myths where the Gods created the constellations are still true in this verse, but the science is also true. Both co-exist, so it could be that the gods simply created them at the age they would've been had they formed naturally.

This is HEADCANON! Your only solution to reconcile the scientific stars being older than the gods is headcanon. Yes both magic and science are true, but they are shown to be seperate things many, many times. Also co existing and being congruent is different. You're ignoring the stars in both science and the verse are not the same, even if they hold the same role in each verse****.

****I'm putting this in bold because you keep bringing this up and you keep making the same exact mistake, it's for emphasis, not agression, it's just what I feel is the most important thing to note.

Also, might as well not been there = / = not been there, because even if Percy and the others could see it, it would still exist

Yeah, and it did already exist, that's what I and the text is trying to tell you! The stars were already there! You saying "well in that case she might as well have done nothing" doesn't mean anything at all. She was letting everyone notice and see her by brightening up those specific stars, which immortalized her image to hundereds of millions of people that would not have noticed her before.

You may think it's dumb, but that doesn't make it less valid, especially when it's exactly what we're being told is happening.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Honestly I agree with Gilad here

 

[Cryo123]

Honestly I agree with Gilad here

How? His reasoning is headanon and saying it makes the scene feel pointless, which disproves/proves nothing.

 

[DaReaperMan]

How? His reasoning is headanon and saying it makes the scene feel pointless, which disproves/proves nothing.

Because he makes more sense then you or King does. Is that not enough?

 

[Cryo123]

Because he makes more sense then you or King does. Is that not enough?

But that doesnt make sense. Isn't the whole point of this sight to provide the most accurate ratings? It may dampen the story, but the facts clearly point in that direction.

 

[DaReaperMan]

In my opinion and Interpretation of the quotes given, Gilad makes more sense, is that not enough? Don't go ape because someone just magically doesn't agree with you.

 

[FalseTrajectory]

This thread was exhausting to read. It devolved into the same arguments and counter-points being made repeatedly with no real progress being made towards an actual verdict.

So can we get back on track and reach a some-what agreed upon and objective conclusion?

Alright. Now to actually contribute to this thread.

The quotes in question are:

Artemis turns Zoe into a constellation:
"I watched as Artemis cupped her hand above Zoë’s mouth and spoke a few words in Ancient Greek. A silvery wisp of smoke exhaled from Zoë’s lips and was caught in the hand of the goddess. Zoë’s body shimmered and disappeared. 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 honour you, my huntress,’ Artemis said.
‘Live forever in the stars.’"

Zeus turns Callisto into a constellation:
"“Let me make it up to you.” He transformed her into stars and lobbed
them into the sky. He did the same for Arcas, figuring the boy would be safe
from Hera that way. The stars formed patterns that looked like bears, which is
why the Greeks named them the Big Dipper and the Little Dipper.
Ha-ha! Just kidding! The Greeks called them Ursa Major and Ursa Minor,
or the Great Bear and the Little Bear. Ursa Major looks like a—well, like a
big water dipper, actually, with a bent handle and a wide-mouthed bowl. Ursa
Minor is a smaller version of a dipper with a handle that bends up instead of
down.
FYI: Rumor has it that Zeus and Callisto secretly hang out when he’s in
his Roman form. He hides in the planet Jupiter—or maybe he becomes the
planet Jupiter—and she revolves around him in the nearby moon named after
her. Watch for a supernova in that quadrant of the sky when Hera discovers
their trysts."

Note: If anyone requires a particular scan, I have access to both a physical and digital copy of a majority of the books apart of the Riordanverse and would be happy to supply them.

In the Artemis feat the wording is important to look at:

"I watched as Artemis cupped her hand above Zoë’s mouth and spoke a few words in Ancient Greek. A silvery wisp of smoke exhaled from Zoë’s lips and was caught in the hand of the goddess. Zoë’s body shimmered and disappeared. 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 honour you, my huntress,’ Artemis said.
‘Live forever in the stars.’"

Now its easy to see why there are conflicting interpretations of this feat, there are multiple instances in the quote that might give the impression of Zoe turning directly into stars.

Her body disappearing as Artemis sends the silver dust into the sky, Percy noting that he didn't see anything different and Artemis stating that Zoe would "Live forever in the stars." all make it seem like that is the case.

However, the following section of the quote makes it clear that is not the case.

"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."

So to break this down, Percy initially didn't notice any change in the night sky, but then does stating that "the stars were brighter now". Him referring in past tense to the stars that were then brighter insinuates that the stars he is referring to existed prior to them brightening.

These now brighter stars created a new pattern that Percy hadn't noticed before due to their previous dullness, a constellation of Zoe.

The emphasis on increasing brightness of stars in the formation of the constellation seems to indicate that it was not created by stars moving or being created but previously dull stars increasing in luminosity to create an image juxtaposed against the rest of the stars in the sky.

It should also be noted that we do not know exactly what method Artemis used to brighten the stars. All we have is a play by play of it occurring and not an explanation.

Obviously, due to how we all know the Riordan Cosmology works Artemis could not have been affecting real stars directly as she is apart of the Greek Mythologic belief system, therefore she would interact with the stars as they exist in the Greek Mythology.

Now we have never to my knowledge been told what stars are in the greek belief system in the Riordanverse, however we still know they are not scientifically accurate as that interpretation did not exist when the belief system was first conceived.

Since we do not know exactly how the universe compensates for Greek Mythological stars (GM Stars) being brightened we cannot reasonably say this feat is equal to brightening scientifically accurate stars (SA Stars for short) without supporting information as there is no reason to assume that Artemis brightening GM stars requires the same amount of energy as brightening SA stars.

The second quote cannot be used as it falls victim to the same issue, in which Zeus transforms Callisto into GM stars, not SA stars, so other examples must be used.

I propose that until the assumption that brightening a GM star takes the same amount of energy to brightening a SA star can be proven the gods should have their AP and durability lowered to that of their next best showings.

There's also the argument to be made that even if prior feats were examples of the Greek gods creating SA constellations and stars, since they do not show that level of power in combat, they would only be 4-C via Creation Hax and their durability and AP should be altered regardless.

 

[Cryo123]

There's also the argument to be made that even if prior feats were examples of the Greek gods creating SA constellations and stars, since they do not show that level of power in combat, they would only be 4-C via Creation Hax and their durability and AP should be altered regardless.

Sounds reasonable, my only issue is that the SA stars would be massively older than the gods themselves, which is the only reason I'm hesitant to agree with 4C via Creation Hax.

 

[GraveDigger84]

Riordanverse stars are a little tricky.

Apollo says in THO:

Of course, even without my help, other forces would keep the cosmos chugging along. Many different belief systems powered the revolution of the planets and stars. Wolves would still chase Sol across the sky. Ra would continue his daily journey in his sun barque. Tonatiuh would keep running on his surplus blood from human sacrifices back in the Aztec days. And that other thing—science— would still generate gravity and quantum physics and whatever.

This could be interpreted as science being a seperate force compared to the various mythos, or all of them working together.

However, I think they are separate judging by the sun chariot crashing into the lake and not affecting the entire Earth.

Thalia slammed her foot on the brake, and the sun bus pitched forward at a forty-five- degree angle, slamming into the Camp Half-Blood canoe lake with a huge FLOOOOOOSH! Steam billowed up, sending several frightened naiads scrambling out of the water with half- woven wicker baskets.

This should probably apply to Artemis's feat too, and she would be using spiritual/Greek magic rather than affecting 'real' stars.

 

[FalseTrajectory]

Sounds reasonable, my only issue is that the SA stars would be massively older than the gods themselves, which is the only reason I'm hesitant to agree with 4C via Creation Hax.

This is simply the alternative I proposed if it cannot be agreed that the lack of evidence regrading the energy it takes to manipulate/create a GM stars is enough for a downgrade.

And remember we do not know the exact workings of how the Riordanverse works in regards to new stars being created.

Its entirely possible that the Mist makes stars appear older than they are, or that some other reality-altering shenanigans takes place, we simply do not know enough to determine how the universe reacts to big things being altered at this stage.

 

[FalseTrajectory]

And, as requested:

The whole Hermes shoe calc took multiple quotes disgustingly out of context.

Its whole logic is based on the fact that Percy and Annabeth fell for 9 days before reaching Tartarus and that Kronos in TLT had to react to Grover's flying shoes traveling that same distance when they entered Tartarus in order to attempt to suck them into it.

Anybody who has so much as read the books could point out multiple issues with that rationale and because I have the time I'm going to list them all.

1. Percy and Annabeth didn't fall for 9 days, she was referencing that the poet Hesiod:
"Nine days. As she fell, Annabeth thought about Hesiod, the old Greek poet who'd speculated it would take nine days to fall from earth to Tartarus. She hoped Hesiod was wrong. She'd lost track of how long she and Percy had been falling - hours? A day?"

2. There's no reason to assume that the shoes fell the distance that Percy and Annabeth did as they fell in a completely different entrance that was in Rome, not in the underworld. Even if you factor the distance to Hades given in SoN and subtract that from the distance Percy and Annabeth fell, we still don't know how deep that section of Tartarus goes.

3. There's no reason to assume that Kronos reacted to the shoe's travelling that distance as he was in a scattered form that did not reside in a single place within Tartarus and would not need to see the shoes to react as he is capable of sensing beings in the mortal world.

4. The shoes had never shown comparable speeds before in any of the several fights they were used in the book prior. The value calc'ed would be an outlier on principle of it being orders of magnitudes faster than its best feat.

The fact that Percy and Annabeth were able to keep up with said shoes on foot should be enough to debunk the calc.

As for Riordan being inconsistent, the lighting reaction feats aren't even outliers considering they all have in universe explanations.

Percy fails to react to lightning every time its fired at him and Jason has never explicitly reacted to lightning.

The feat used to give most of the verse "Massively Hypersonic" speeds never mentions Jason reacting to the lightning:

"The second spirit let loose a bolt of lightning, but Jason's blade absorbed the charge."

The fact that Jason was subconsciously using his powers to direct attacks away from himself even with amnesia and that he can control lightning already alone casts enough doubt on the feat as it is, but the fact that Percy couldn't react to lightning from further away when there was a clear wind-up on the attack back in TTC and still couldn't react to it again in his fight with Jason later on (who is evenly matched with Percy in terms of reaction speed) debunks the calc outright.

I should also note the distances mentioned in the calc of 21 meters is also bogus as the 2 Venti attacking Jason charged him at the same time, the first of which he cut with his sword, the second being the one who then launched lightning at him, meaning the distance was closer to 5 meters than 20.

 

[Cryo123]

And, as requested:

Thanks, I definitely agree with this.

And remember we do not know the exact workings of how the Riordanverse works in regards to new stars being created.

Its entirely possible that the Mist makes stars appear older than they are, or that some other reality-altering shenanigans takes place, we simply do not know enough to say that is or isn't the case. That is why evidence should be brought up and discussed to determine that.

There's not much evidence either way, we know that the SA stars are seperate from GM stars, and we've only ever seen the gods affect GM stars. We also know that Apollo only affects his GM Sun, and has no connection to the SA Sun. Through this quasi-scaling chain, it is more likely than not that gods only create GM stars, and while the mist could solve this, it would just be a baseless assumption unless someone has a scan on the mist doing this.

 

[Cryo123]

Also, on speed, if all the Hypersonic-MHS+ feats are invalid, the best feat we have is Percy blocking bullets, which is only going to be Subsonic. Then an amped Percy tagged a casual Ares, so gods would be what, Transonic, Subsonic+?