Establishing rules for Varies ratings

[Antvasima]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Mr._Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler @DarkGrath

What do you think about this? I would appreciate some well-considered input here.

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

I'm still of my own opinions that allowing varies for inconsistency is a dangerous road to go down

vsbattles.com

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

I'm still of my own opinions that allowing varies for inconsistency is a dangerous road to go down

vsbattles.com

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

There's nothing I can say without sounding like a broken record player, but I still do not agree with Eficiente and think Toon Force alone shouldn't automatically justify criteria for a variable tier.

 

[Eficiente]

think Toon Force shouldn't automatically justify requirements for a variable tier.

I hope you don't think this is what I argued, since you can have one w/o the other.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

There's nothing I can say without sounding like a broken record player, but I still do not agree with Eficiente and think Toon Force alone shouldn't automatically justify criteria for a variable tier.

I hope you don't think this is what I argued, since you can have one w/o the other.

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody summarise which staff members that have thought what here and why please?

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody summarise which staff members that have thought what here and why please?

Well, this would likely help us with reaching a conclusion here.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Well, this would likely help us with reaching a conclusion here.

@Armorchompy @Eficiente

 

[Armorchompy]

I have been asked to summarize my thoughts several times and have done so each of them. I'm not sure what else you want out of me.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

I have been asked to summarize my thoughts several times and have done so each of them. I'm not sure what else you want out of me.

@Antvasima

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I have been asked to summarize my thoughts several times and have done so each of them. I'm not sure what else you want out of me.

Same. And even that statement is getting redundant on my end too.

 

[Antvasima]

What do you think about this? I would appreciate some well-considered input here.

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

I'm still of my own opinions that allowing varies for inconsistency is a dangerous road to go down

vsbattles.com

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

I'm still of my own opinions that allowing varies for inconsistency is a dangerous road to go down

vsbattles.com

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Agnaa @Just_a_Random_Butler @DarkGrath @Dereck03

Your help would be very appreciated here.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

This is still going on... anyway, I agree with both sides to some extent. If the characters with Toon Force have either an in verse reason of their varied power our something along that line, the should get various but if not, they shouldn't. I'm tired but I'll give my thoughts but nothing I'm going to say now is anything new that hasn't already been said in some way.

One of the verses I work on has cartoon characters that do wacky stuff and seemingly very in power (Camp Lakebottom), however, they are rated as 9-B, likely 9-A because this is their most consistent tier for feats, the higher feats are building to much size explosions but those are either gag feats or too few. However, the verse actually has no real sub human feats, the characters despite being toons are consistent in their superhuman portrayal so it's not like all toon force users will suffer. There is even a legit tier 5 feat done by a character in the verse that's valid because it's actually explained in verse. Honestly, if the toons got the reasoning, be it a statement, a power system, or something that theoretically explains their buff or debuff, give them varies, I don't care if it was a sudden burst of courage or whatever but if they have nothing explaining such mass change in statistics then simply they don't get it.

And to reiterate my point on many toon force users won't suffer. I mean that the low end feats (those below human ones) aren't even going to be in consideration when we know they are out preformed by them just living life. SpongeBob (Note: He doesn't have a Varies rating anymore but he's still an example) for example can't be scaled to being unable to lift those teddy bears or marshmallows because he's already got higher feats simply by doing his job. It still comes down to consistency. If they have legitimate Tier 4 or whatever feats that have an explanation behind it and not just a random one time event it would still be valid even if they had more Tier 9 feats. What matters is if those tier 9 feats are consistently shown as a cap, dangerous to them, or struggle with them. We should treat them like any other verse. Heck it i remember correctly, SpongeBob has some legit reasons for some of his feats fluctuating (not all the time) but he can legit still have Varies as a rating, it just needs a description. (Note: Once again, this is just an example, I'm not advocating to downgrade SpongeBob specifically, this is just an example using a character I'm familiar with)

 

[Propellus]

This is still going on... anyway, I agree with both sides to some extent. If the characters with Toon Force have either an in verse reason of their varied power our something along that line, the should get various but if not, they shouldn't. I'm tired but I'll give my thoughts but nothing I'm going to say now is anything new that hasn't already been said in some way.

One of the verses I work on has cartoon characters that do wacky stuff and seemingly very in power (Camp Lakebottom), however, they are rated as 9-B, likely 9-A because this is their most consistent tier for feats, the higher feats are building to much size explosions but those are either gag feats or too few. However, the verse actually has no real sub human feats, the characters despite being toons are consistent in their superhuman portrayal so it's not like all toon force users will suffer. There is even a legit tier 5 feat done by a character in the verse that's valid because it's actually explained in verse. Honestly, if the toons got the reasoning, be it a statement, a power system, or something that theoretically explains their buff or debuff, give them varies, I don't care if it was a sudden burst of courage or whatever but if they have nothing explaining such mass change in statistics then simply they don't get it.

And to reiterate my point on many toon force users won't suffer. I mean that the low end feats (those sub human ones) aren't even going to be in consideration when we know they are out preformed by them just living life. SpongeBob (Note: He doesn't have a Varies rating anymore but he's still an example) for example can't be scaled to being unable to lift those teddy bears or marshmallows because he's already got higher feats simply by doing his job. It still comes down to consistency. If they have legitimate Tier 4 or whatever feats that have an explanation behind it and not just a random one time event it would still be valid even if they had more Tier 9 feats. What matters is if those tier 9 feats are consistently shown as a cap, dangerous to them, or struggle with them. We should treat them like any other verse. Heck it i remember correctly, SpongeBob has some legit reasons for some of his feats fluctuating (not all the time) but he can legit still have Varies as a rating, it just needs a description. (Note: Once again, this is just an example, I'm not advocating to downgrade SpongeBob specifically, this is just an example using a character I'm familiar with)

This seems like a reasonable approach

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for your evaluation.

 

[Eficiente]

However, the verse actually has no real sub human feats, the characters despite being toons are consistent in their superhuman portrayal so it's not like all toon force users will suffer.

And to reiterate my point on many toon force users won't suffer. I mean that the low end feats (those below human ones) aren't even going to be in consideration when we know they are out preformed by them just living life. SpongeBob (Note: He doesn't have a Varies rating anymore but he's still an example) for example can't be scaled to being unable to lift those teddy bears or marshmallows because he's already got higher feats simply by doing his job. It still comes down to consistency.

For the record, I have made clear that I'm not advocating for that, and that I'm aware of it.

Hypothetically, a low-end I would throw would be saying that SpongeBob characters should Vary with [Something barely below being able to destroy a building in their series] being the low-end; with a list of 30 or so examples of characters being below that power in order to demonstrate that stance being reasonable.

 

[Propellus]

For the record, I have made clear that I'm not advocating for that, and that I'm aware of it.

Hypothetically, a low-end I would throw would be saying that SpongeBob characters should Vary with [Something barely below being able to destroy a building in their series] being the low-end; with a list of 30 or so examples of characters being below that power in order to demonstrate that stance being reasonable.

Or why not simply just "X normally, Y at their best showings"?

 

[Eficiente]

Well, the difference between 1 stat (normally) and another (at their best showings) is another way of saying "Varies." I mean with the definition of the word, not necessarily how we use it in the Tiering. So that would run into the same issues as before; I can't seem to get part disagreements on how a Varies would be applied on profiles if it isn't directly stated.

LordGriffin may say

I don't care if it was a sudden burst of courage or whatever

but in terms of what gets approved, he may as well he saying "a sudden burst of courage stated to amp the character's stats." Because a character whose normally 9-A with tons of Toon Force abilities having a sudden burst of courage as they make a 7-C, Toon Force feat wouldn't get approved to vary in power and to have used his Toon Force & courage for that feat. Either the 7-C feat would be seen as an outlier, or they are simply "7-C." Or "9-A, likely/possibly 7-C."

And of course I disagree with that being seen that way 100% of the time with scenarios alike. Because I find reasonable that Toon Force is able to give momentary boosts in stats even if it isn't stated, like any other thing it can grant that isn't stated.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

For the record, I have made clear that I'm not advocating for that, and that I'm aware of it.

And I never said that's what you were advocating for. I was just making a point.

LordGriffin may say

but in terms of what gets approved, he may as well he saying "a sudden burst of courage stated to amp the character's stats." Because a character whose normally 9-A with tons of Toon Force abilities having a sudden burst of courage as they make a 7-C, Toon Force feat wouldn't get approved to vary in power and to have used his Toon Force & courage for that feat. Either the 7-C feat would be seen as an outlier, or they are simply "7-C." Or "9-A, likely/possibly 7-C."

And of course I disagree with that being seen that way 100% of the time with scenarios alike. Because I find reasonable that Toon Force is able to give momentary boosts in stats even if it isn't stated, like any other thing it can grant that isn't stated.

No, that's not what I said, don't twist my words. The number of Toon Force abilities are irrelevant in the scenario in my opinion. If someone was has consistent Tier 9 feats is put into a situation that shows a sudden emotional shift (courage, friendship ect) and they proceed to bust out a Tier 7 feat that would not immediately be seen as an Outlier, that's an opinion as it's clear not every views outliers the same. Even without statements, the verse usually can show serious moments that even if gags (Toon Force) would still be valid for varies.

For example, In Camp Lakebottom, Squirts entire gag/toon force gimmick is his over the top farts that range from causing a nuclear explosion that destroyed a camp and leveled mountains to reigniting a small dying sun. No where to my recollection is it "stated" by a character that his farts varies but visually we see that the longer he holds them the more potent they become so a varies rating is a valid option even though they are gag feats. So no, I did not mean "a sudden burst of courage stated to amp the character's stats.", I ment "Honestly, if the toons got the reasoning, be it a statement, a power system, or something that theoretically explains their buff or debuff, give them varies, I don't care if it was a sudden burst of courage or whatever but if they have nothing explaining such mass change in statistics then simply they don't get it."

We have eyes and common sense, when can see when something shouldn't count as a valid feat. Not all Toon Force users function the same, if you think Toon Force is a valid reason behind a characters change in statistics then prove it for that verse/characters specifically. I already mentioned that it's possible without statements but this isn't always the case, there are characters who still have consistent power levels regardless. All you half to do is provide the evidence on why you think it's the case.

 

[Eficiente]

And I never said that's what you were advocating for. I was just making a point.

I never said you did, but it is or could be seen as strange to make a point based something being wrong that nobody is arguing for and I want us all in the same page.

No, that's not what I said, don't twist my words.

"May as well [be] saying" refers to the practicality of your stance here will have, not that those are your words. The point is that you didn't commit to being specific, and that therefore it leads to certain specific things happening, regardless of if you agree with them or not.

I agree with what you say after that, but the way the discussion was going before would not have accommodated for it. Now they seem to have eased up a little.

 

[Antvasima]

So what are the current conclusions here, in summary?

 

[Eficiente]

At first, I wanted the rules on Varies to be clear on how to deal with Toon Force. I made proposals that people claimed to not like, but then they never bothered to add their views on rules (possibly because that would require paying attention to the topic, I suspected). So I didn't bother with the thread for a time, it didn't make things clear as I would wish but it didn't prohibit anything implied to be bad in the thread itself. And now it turns out that at least some people doesn't buy what they claimed before.

Ok, cool, can we commit to put it into words then? Toon Force is weird; how and if a user of it gets a Varies tier is worth a paragraph about it in our rules. That way people know it exists, and people who already know this doesn't abuse it on cases that don't count, or wrongly powerscales profiles to feats that don't indicate the regular stats of those profiles (because they were operating on higher capabilities than normal).

If not then I will simply ignore the topic again as everyone does whatever they feel is right about this. I want to know if we're all in the same page and if we can proceed accordingly.

 

[Armorchompy]

but then they never bothered to add their views on rules (possibly because that would require paying attention to the topic, I suspected [...] If not then I will simply ignore the topic again as everyone does whatever they feel is right about this

Brother, shut up. I and several others have made our views crystal clear. Your refusal to accept them as valid to stall the thread and make them seem illegitimate just makes you come off as an unbearable, condescending pedant.

But I'm going to make mine as clear as I possibly can. Toon force/inconsistency Varies with no backing = Bad. Toon force Varies with lore/acknowledgment = Good. Toon force Varies with clear visual evidence (of a character making themselves stronger) = Acceptable.

 

[Antvasima]

Please try to be polite towards each other.

Anyway, can somebody list all of the staff members who have actively helped out in this thread, so I can send a notification to them please?

Also, which of our rules needs to be modified here, and in what manner, more specifically?

 

[Eficiente]

Brother, shut up. I and several others have made our views crystal clear. Your refusal to accept them as valid to stall the thread and make them seem illegitimate just makes you come off as an unbearable, condescending pedant.

But I'm going to make mine as clear as I possibly can. Toon force/inconsistency Varies with no backing = Bad. Toon force Varies with lore/acknowledgment = Good. Toon force Varies with clear visual evidence (of a character making themselves stronger) = Acceptable.

Please understand from where I'm coming from:

• I already know what your views are.
• My "refusal to accept them as valid" is...disagreeing with them.
• Ok how come I "stall the thread and make them seem illegitimate" when I left the thread for a long time and express to be willing to do so again? Your side could have put their stance into rules when given the chance, you have nothing to complain. In the times I did talk, you give no reason as to how I'm stalling the thread rather than debating like anyone else would, you defame me for free there.
• I admit that my comment of "possibly because that would require paying attention to the topic, I suspected" was pretty harsh. However, it is something I felt was needed to be said: I genuinely believe that some people here were not fully on board with the mechanics of what they were implying to agree on. If definitely not you. You think I'm wrong and that I'm arrogant for saying that? Perfectly valid, it's a risk I run by saying that. But I genuinely, honestly believe that and think that it helps the debate to say so. So please take it for what it is and leave it as that.
  • Beyond that harsh sentence I wouldn't think I was "unbearable, condescending pedant."

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, can somebody list all of the staff members who have actively helped out in this thread, so I can send a notification to them please?

Also, which of our rules needs to be modified here, and in what manner, more specifically?

Is somebody here willing to help out with this please? It is currently hard to get a proper overview of this discussion.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Is somebody here willing to help out with this please? It is currently hard to get a proper overview of this discussion.

@Eficiente @Armorchompy

 

[Antvasima]

Have we reached any conclusions here? Eficiente seems to be taking a long break from this community currently.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

Have we reached any conclusions here? Eficiente seems to be taking a long break from this community currently.

@IdiosyncraticLawyer

Which staff members have responded to this discussion thread earlier? I should probably call for them so we can conclude this topic afterwards.