• 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.

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

I seriously doubt that this would need an entire page.

Our Attack Potency page already has a section for additional terms in ratings. Varies isn't listed there, but would fit in well.
 
This works too. I was searching for an appropriate section to add it. I will work on the draft. Thank you for helping out.
 
I haven't even read the thread (I've skimmed it to confirm my suspicions) but I know the same issue always rears its ugly head so I'm just here to say do not give cartoon characters varies just because le quirky toon force, you're literally just making up a headcanon mechanic to justify inconsistency in a medium that's just not meant to be battleboarded. Find the closest thing to a reasonable end you can (and in a lot of cases it's going to be low, deal with it) and stick with that, or just don't make profiles for something that's one step away from absurdism.

Also with the way Varies work every cartoon profile would just be "Varies from 10-C via the absolute weakest antifeat in a series full of them to 4-A via this random gag in exactly one episode out of 100000" and you'd just be indexing the bottom and top 1% of the show.

You also just should not be capable of doing scaling if you're assuming a character's strength varies all the time in a way that they cannot control, so that would just end up making your workload hundreds of times bigger because every character has their own ratings, and it would even end with a protagonist being rated way higher than a side character who's consistently stronger than they are, given that they'd likely never get to match them in the second in which they actually pull off the feat.
 
Last edited:
There's ALSO an issue of where you draw the "toon force" line, just look through this category. I feel like you'd have a pretty easy time arguing someone like Mario or Sonic are cartoony enough for the ability to apply to them, and at that point you'd just be able to immediately invalidate their current tiers by saying "oh they're only this strong like 1% of the time, here, add a 10-C end for the time they got hurt by something trivial, btw you literally cannot use them in vs matches anymore".

You can draw the line at "they need to be from an actual cartoon", but then you have a different issue of just randomly shutting out characters that clearly qualify as Toon Force havers, like Peppino from Pizza Tower or Cuphead. Not only that, but it's not like all cartoons are the same. Bugs Bunny is way more inconsistent than Popeye, who is way wilder than Tom & Jerry, who are way more toon force-y than Ben 10. You can't draw a line, does anime count? It's just cartoons made in a specific part of the world. Do classic Disney movies count? How about Pixar ones? Does Spider-Verse count?

Back to the first paragraph, the "you literally cannot use them in vs matches anymore" bit wasn't hyperbole. There's no factor determining how a toon force character's power level behaves in any given circumstance, outside of the headcanon, vague ass "they're strong when it's funny for them to be that" idea, which is very subjective. Is it funny for Bugs Bunny to beat Darkseid in a fight? Maybe, but maybe I have a darker sense of humor and I think that Darkseid grabbing a beloved cartoon character and absolutely beating the shit out of him is hilarious. Maybe I don't think either situation would be any funny at all. You can't determine this sort of stuff, so characters who have toon-force based power variation would, by necessity, have to be thread-banned. You can't even lock them in any specific tier, because "An exception would be if the restricted ability/technique has a separate tier from the main one, and is one the character can consciously restrict themselves from using. In this case, the match can be added." Toon force is basically always involuntary, so you can't lock it.

I should specify, when Toon Force is an actual, canon characteristic of a character, in something like Who Framed Roger Rabbit or Slapstick, the Deadpool villain, then I do think that a "varies" tier can absolutely be discussed, this is just for when it's just something that characters abide by for comedy's sake rather than an actual canonical verse mechanic.
 
So what should we do about the Spongebob characters currently all being scaled from their peak outliers, or Marvel Comics characters only scaling from their peak feats while ignoring all of the lowest instances, such as Thor being defeated by a regular handgun and Hulk losing to a regular python snake, for example?
 
Last edited:
I don't think there's any reason to discuss Marvel here, as far as this thread is concerned they're not an issue. If their allegedly overblown statistics are to be downgraded, this isn't the place.
 
I don't think Marvel really abuses "Varies" ratings in the same ways. A lot of them have justifications, and/or are ludicrously low anti-feats that are outweighed into irrelevancy by the 200 times such characters have gone through walls.
 
I don't think DT specifically held that view.
DontTalkDT said:
Whether a character that is inconsistent can get varies should be determined case-by-case IMO.
Toon Force stuff in particular just has a natural tendency to be inconsistent in the nature of the ability. If you so want, cartoon logic is the canonical mechanic of them varying, even if not explicitly spelt out. (Didn't we have a thread on that before? I believe we had)
Click to expand...
Seems like he views Toon Force as one of multiple ways a character can get Varies for being inconsistent. But I don't think he's outlined any others.
 
I have prepared a draft taking into account your suggestions, although it may not be entirely accurate in every aspect. I made an effort to incorporate your suggestions and establish certain standards. Feel free to make edits, as long as they maintain the overall flow of the sentences.

You can find the draft at the following link: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:ImmortalDread/varies

@DarkDragonMedeus, I'm a little uncertain about your inconsistency types, but I believe they should be addressed on the inconsistencies page instead. Therefore, I didn't include them in my draft.
 
Last edited:
In cases where a verse exhibits unexplainable and irreconcilable inconsistency, every feat should be taken into account. The character should be rated based on the tier that is most frequently demonstrated.
Click to expand...
While I agree with the first sentence, I disagree with the second. We don't have a consistently-applied definition of consistent tiers. I'd personally draw my line at "The first tier where the number of feats on or above that tier is equal to the amount of anti-feats below that tier." But I think most verses kind of go off of vibes, rather than trying to math it out like that.

I don't think Toon Force characters would have to be thread-banned, but they would be largely useless. While you couldn't restrict their high tier, you could create a match where they wildly fluctuate, for which very few opponents would be fair.
 
Agnaa said:
While I agree with the first sentence, I disagree with the second. We don't have a consistently-applied definition of consistent tiers. I'd personally draw my line at "The first tier where the number of feats on or above that tier is equal to the amount of anti-feats below that tier." But I think most verses kind of go off of vibes, rather than trying to math it out like that.
Click to expand...
Agnaa said:
I don't think Toon Force characters would have to be thread-banned, but they would be largely useless. While you couldn't restrict their high tier, you could create a match where they wildly fluctuate, for which very few opponents would be fair.
Click to expand...
What do you suggest currently for the first part?

I guess I am going for the line like (second part of your sentence):
Toon Force characters whose power levels vary involuntarily cannot be locked into specific tiers. While they may not necessarily be thread-banned, their unpredictable power fluctuations make it difficult to create fair and balanced matches. Opponents would need to be carefully selected to ensure a reasonable level of competition.
Click to expand...
 
ImmortalDread said:
I have prepared a draft taking into account your suggestions, although it may not be entirely accurate in every aspect. I made an effort to incorporate your suggestions and establish certain standards. Feel free to make edits, as long as they maintain the overall flow of the sentences.

You can find the draft at the following link: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:ImmortalDread/varies
Click to expand...
Thank you. Your suggested regulations seem good to me.
 
Agnaa said:
While I agree with the first sentence, I disagree with the second. We don't have a consistently-applied definition of consistent tiers. I'd personally draw my line at "The first tier where the number of feats on or above that tier is equal to the amount of anti-feats below that tier." But I think most verses kind of go off of vibes, rather than trying to math it out like that.

I don't think Toon Force characters would have to be thread-banned, but they would be largely useless. While you couldn't restrict their high tier, you could create a match where they wildly fluctuate, for which very few opponents would be fair.
Click to expand...
Well, at the very least, if characters fluctuate between tier 9-B and 1-A depending on the story, as some Marvel Comics characters do, I think that we should try to find some kind of consistent and reliable middle-ground.
 
Okay. No problem.
 
ImmortalDread said:
What do you suggest currently for the first part?
Click to expand...
I'd want a lot more opinions on it, but what I suggested could probably just be slotted in. i.e.
The character should be rated based on the highest tier where the number of feats outweighs the number of anti-feats.
Click to expand...
ImmortalDread said:
I guess I am going for the line like (second part of your sentence):
Click to expand...
Yeah that seems good.
Antvasima said:
Well, at the very least, if characters fluctuate between tier 9-B and 1-A depending on the story, as some Marvel Comics characters do, I think that we should try to find some kind of consistent and reliable middle-ground.
Click to expand...
I'm not fully familiar with those, but I'm under the impression that such characters either get those tiers from specific forms/power-ups that they don't usually have, or they have a decent amount of anti-feats in the tier 10 to 8 range, that would make their highest ends too rare to get a rating, inevitably leading to a fine middle-ground.

Although the enormous scaling chains would complicate this, potentially to the realm of not being reasonable to implement.
 
I think "The character should be rated based on the tier that is most consistent or reliable." is better than "The character should be rated based on the tier that is most frequently demonstrated."
 
Yeah, a more vague answer like that could work too.
 
I think vagueness in this case is warranted, every verse has its context and I don't want to force a rating that doesn't make sense just because it's technically the one the rules point to.
 
I didn't intend any negativity in my statement; I mentioned it simply because we had a recent discussion on the topic.

If you believe the message was unnecessary or disrespectful, feel free to disregard or remove it.
 
Armorchompy said:
I think "The character should be rated based on the tier that is most consistent or reliable." is better than "The character should be rated based on the tier that is most frequently demonstrated."
Click to expand...
Yes, agreed.
 
ImmortalDread said:
I didn't intend any negativity in my statement; I mentioned it simply because we had a recent discussion on the topic.

If you believe the message was unnecessary or disrespectful, feel free to disregard or remove it.
Click to expand...
You're good, I'm just explaining.

A couple other suggestions:
  • "have unexplainable variations in their abilities" -> "have unexplainable variations in their displayed power level"
  • I think it'd be better to remove the bit about holding back your durability. Generally, I agree that it's dumb, however, some verses do treat it that way, even if it doesn't make sense. Biggest example of all is that it's just how we treat a lot of Marvel characters, it's not a good look for us to say that that isn't acceptable while our second biggest verse acknowledges it.
  • I strongly disagree with "In cases where Toon Force characters are intentionally overpowered, such as Bobobo or Popeye with Spinach, it may be appropriate to assign them a consistent rating based on their best feats.", if they have anti-feats those should also be considered.
  • I think you iterate on the Toon Force stuff too much. I think the Notes stuff is fine to remove since it's just repeating or contradicting things said above, and fusing guideline 2 and 4 might not be a bad idea.
 
Armorchompy said:
You're good, I'm just explaining.
Click to expand...
Ty, (give me pat)
Armorchompy said:
  • "have unexplainable variations in their abilities" -> "have unexplainable variations in their displayed power level"
Click to expand...
Done
Armorchompy said:
  • I think it'd be better to remove the bit about holding back your durability. Generally, I agree that it's dumb, however, some verses do treat it that way, even if it doesn't make sense. Biggest example of all is that it's just how we treat a lot of Marvel characters, it's not a good look for us to say that that isn't acceptable while our second biggest verse acknowledges it.
Click to expand...
We could adjust it a bit and include Marvel characters to be an exception. In general, I do find the rule fine.
Armorchompy said:
  • I strongly disagree with "In cases where Toon Force characters are intentionally overpowered, such as Bobobo or Popeye with Spinach, it may be appropriate to assign them a consistent rating based on their best feats.", if they have anti-feats those should also be considered.
Click to expand...
Removed
Armorchompy said:
  • I think you iterate on the Toon Force stuff too much. I think the Notes stuff is fine to remove since it's just repeating or contradicting things said above,
Click to expand...
I removed the first note
Armorchompy said:
  • and fusing guideline 2 and 4 might not be a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Done
 
ImmortalDread said:
@DarkDragonMedeus, I'm a little uncertain about your inconsistency types, but I believe they should be addressed on the inconsistencies page instead. Therefore, I didn't include them in my draft.
Click to expand...
I have mentioned plans to write a blog post that may or may not get linked to our Outlier or Inconsistency page, but I never really got a change to write it on a blog let alone make a thread for it, but have mentioned it both on threads or on various PMs about "Four protagonist types" making it easier to judge case by case on how outliers and PIS are applied. It's more hypothetical rather than mandatory, but it's at least easy to see some of those distinction types.

Armorchompy said:
  • I strongly disagree with "In cases where Toon Force characters are intentionally overpowered, such as Bobobo or Popeye with Spinach, it may be appropriate to assign them a consistent rating based on their best feats.", if they have anti-feats those should also be considered.
  • I think you iterate on the Toon Force stuff too much. I think the Notes stuff is fine to remove since it's just repeating or contradicting things said above, and fusing guideline 2 and 4 might not be a bad idea.
Click to expand...
I can sort of see how you mean given "Type 4 protagonist" I do demand should only be applied to like vary specific characters such as Saitama. And it's not like we can take every hyperbolic statement 100% literally obviously, but at the end of the day, Saitama is a character who is basically 100% invulnerable compared to everything in his own verse thus far and basically has 0 real anti-feats. And he qualifies as someone who can just stay simple and be scaled from this absolute highest feat.

I will admit that Popeye might have been a bad example given he can vary depending on if he's recently had his Spinach. And thus since he isn't naturally 100% invincible in his verse and needs to spinach to reach such a tier in the first place, he would in the end qualify for type 2. But I'm not the Bobobo expert, but he's essentially someone who is just as if not more overpowered than Saitama within his own verse compared to even how OP Saitama is due to the fact that Bobobo is literally the writer of his own verse. But perhaps "The writer from DC comics" would have been a better example to list.

But other than that, I can agree with other stuff Agnaa mentioned and some of the stuff Armor brought up.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I can sort of see how you mean given "Type 4 protagonist" I do demand should only be applied to like vary specific characters such as Saitama. And it's not like we can take every hyperbolic statement 100% literally obviously, but at the end of the day, Saitama is a character who is basically 100% invulnerable compared to everything in his own verse thus far and basically has 0 real anti-feats. And he qualifies as someone who can just stay simple and be scaled from this absolute highest feat.
Click to expand...
If he has no anti-feats then there's no need for the rule to exist. But say that OPM had a legitimate, non-gag anti-feat that placed him at 3-B or something, and at the same time there was a vague statement you could interpret as Low 1-C, I think you definitely should be allowed to use the former to argue against the latter.
ImmortalDread said:
We could adjust it a bit and include Marvel characters to be an exception. In general, I do find the rule fine.
Click to expand...
I think it'd be better to just not mention it IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Firestorm808
Acceptable Narrative Examples of "Uncountably Infinite" Addition to the Tiering System Explanation Page
2
Replies
62
Views
13K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Catzlaflame
  • Locked
Regarding Page Names (Semantics)
Replies
22
Views
3K
Catzlaflame
Catzlaflame
GrathOfLux
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Rules Revision
2 3
Replies
93
Views
11K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top