Establishing rules for Varies ratings

[Armorchompy]

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

 

[LordTracer]

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

100% agreed.

 

[Lonkitt]

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

I share the same sentiment. We‘be been far too lenient with “Varies” ratings and it’s only made for cluttered and unnecessary profile statistics

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yes agreed, and I already still stand that "The character fights using toon force" to also be a weak reason. "Style over substance" isn't generally agreed to be good practice as cartoony animations are a style and not a substance like lore based descriptions for how a character's power level actually fluctuates.

 

[Eficiente]

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

It is acknowledged. But there is a difference between being having

• inconsistent feats & anti-feats and
• having relatively consistent feats & anti-feats on top of off the charts feats that are jokes in part meant to be ridiculous based off what the characters' regularly shown limits are or just the sheer ridiculousness of the feats.

As I said before, it is an extremist approach, all Toon Force users in fiction aren't like this in that everything's just consistency & inconsistency building up to what they can regarly do. They bend logic to a degree in many ways that are often times not explained and partially doing 1-time things that they don't remember they can do or simply can't do in the future even if it would useful. It makes literally 0 sense that stats would be an exception to this and that only P&A count, because there is no meaningfull, fundamental difference between stats and P&A, they're just things characters do. Yes, it could get out of hand and be wanked into oblivion if not covered properly by our rules, but that's not a reason to say that this is how things are when they are explicitly not. Yes, even among reliable users, there can be disagreements on what counts as ridiculous Toon Force feats not meant to be part of a character's overall consistency and what is in fact part of their consistency, but that's an issue on cartoons in Vs Debates.

and I already still stand that "The character fights using toon force" to also be a weak reason.

See that's why I wanted you to talk, I have no idea what you mean by this. Part of the note reads:

"The feats of these increased stats should also be clarified, particularly how long they last, as it should not be assumed that the characters can always sustain having those stats indefinitely, which could make them useless in a prolonged battle."

So I would assume you don't mean "in Vs threads". But then how could you be refering to that happening in-universe, if no one is claiming that they do so unless it's shown or implied? Do you mean to say that you believe the higher feats & stats would be present during fights in-canon? If so then no, that is not what we are advocating for.

"Style over substance" isn't generally agreed to be good practice as cartoony animations are a style and not a substance like lore based descriptions for how a character's power level actually fluctuates.

I also don't know what this means in the context of this thread and have no clues about it.

 

[KLOL506]

bump

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

It is acknowledged. But there is a difference between being having

• inconsistent feats & anti-feats and
• having relatively consistent feats & anti-feats on top of off the charts feats that are jokes in part meant to be ridiculous based off what the characters' regularly shown limits are or just the sheer ridiculousness of the feats.

As I said before, it is an extremist approach, all Toon Force users in fiction aren't like this in that everything's just consistency & inconsistency building up to what they can regarly do. They bend logic to a degree in many ways that are often times not explained and partially doing 1-time things that they don't remember they can do or simply can't do in the future even if it would useful. It makes literally 0 sense that stats would be an exception to this and that only P&A count, because there is no meaningfull, fundamental difference between stats and P&A, they're just things characters do. Yes, it could get out of hand and be wanked into oblivion if not covered properly by our rules, but that's not a reason to say that this is how things are when they are explicitly not. Yes, even among reliable users, there can be disagreements on what counts as ridiculous Toon Force feats not meant to be part of a character's overall consistency and what is in fact part of their consistency, but that's an issue on cartoons in Vs Debates.

See that's why I wanted you to talk, I have no idea what you mean by this. Part of the note reads:

"The feats of these increased stats should also be clarified, particularly how long they last, as it should not be assumed that the characters can always sustain having those stats indefinitely, which could make them useless in a prolonged battle."

So I would assume you don't mean "in Vs threads". But then how could you be refering to that happening in-universe, if no one is claiming that they do so unless it's shown or implied? Do you mean to say that you believe the higher feats & stats would be present during fights in-canon? If so then no, that is not what we are advocating for.

I also don't know what this means in the context of this thread and have no clues about it.

@Armorchompy @DarkDragonMedeus

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

See that's why I wanted you to talk, I have no idea what you mean by this. Part of the note reads:

"The feats of these increased stats should also be clarified, particularly how long they last, as it should not be assumed that the characters can always sustain having those stats indefinitely, which could make them useless in a prolonged battle."

So I would assume you don't mean "in Vs threads". But then how could you be refering to that happening in-universe, if no one is claiming that they do so unless it's shown or implied? Do you mean to say that you believe the higher feats & stats would be present during fights in-canon? If so then no, that is not what we are advocating for.

I do not get out that changes any points. And what rules for what we should do for Vs threads involving variable tier threads is a different issue. But I'll suppose I'll need to again explain the other issues.

I also don't know what this means in the context of this thread and have no clues about it.

Pretty sure I linked this article on the basics of what it means. But's it's a common criticism for mediocre or worse artists who are perhaps good at tricking audiences into thinking their art is much fancier or more valuable than their art actually is. And the metaphor here is if I made a fancy sculpture out of dirt, it won't change the fact that it's still dirt and thus cannot match the value of gold.

As for why it's relevant to this thread, it's because cartoony animations and gag feats are style and not a substance. And changing our variable tiers based on those styles instead of having substance is the main gripe I and several others have with your proposal. Hulk does have a lore based Physiology where, "There angrier he gets, the stronger he gets" which is a substance for why he qualifies as a variable tier. As does Seiya's power of friendship or Green Lantern's Willpower, those are also substances. But saying that "The verses are cartoonish and nature and full of inconsistencies" are style arguments with no substance for why characters like Mario, Earthworm Jim, Klaymen, Bugs Bunny, Spongebob, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Homer Simpson, or Timmy Turner would all qualify for variable tiers.

 

[Armorchompy]

It is acknowledged. But there is a difference between being having

• inconsistent feats & anti-feats and
• having relatively consistent feats & anti-feats on top of off the charts feats that are jokes in part meant to be ridiculous based off what the characters' regularly shown limits are or just the sheer ridiculousness of the feats.

As I said before, it is an extremist approach, all Toon Force users in fiction aren't like this in that everything's just consistency & inconsistency building up to what they can regarly do. They bend logic to a degree in many ways that are often times not explained and partially doing 1-time things that they don't remember they can do or simply can't do in the future even if it would useful. It makes literally 0 sense that stats would be an exception to this and that only P&A count, because there is no meaningfull, fundamental difference between stats and P&A, they're just things characters do.

P&A can (usually) not be outliers, statistical feats can. Just because a character that's otherwise 9-B has a massive outlier as a gag, rather than as part of the story, that shouldn't change how we portray it, especially because it'd force us to start guessing what the author intent behind such a scene is, and that's never something you want to try to have a debate about. I recognize the difference between the two but I just think it doesn't matter for VSBW purposes.

Yes, it could get out of hand and be wanked into oblivion if not covered properly by our rules, but that's not a reason to say that this is how things are when they are explicitly not.

You say "explicit", when my issue is that there isn't any verse mechanic backing this up. It in fact is the definition of implicit, which is the whole problem - You're inferring a mechanic.

Mario, Earthworm Jim, Klaymen, Bugs Bunny, Spongebob, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Homer Simpson, or Timmy Turner would all qualify for variable tiers.

I respect bringing up a bunch of mostly extremely famous series and then putting Neverhood in the middle of them

 

[Eficiente]

I do not get out that changes any points. And what rules for what we should do for Vs threads involving variable tier threads is a different issue. But I'll suppose I'll need to again explain the other issues.

The issue is that the moment you talk about what you're arguing against you say something strange that likely doesn't show that you know what you're arguing against. I believe it's reasonable for me to be dissatisfied with your performance, even if you don't believe it changes any point you could be not having a clear picture here before saying that and then after saying that nothing could have been incited to change, you just needed to say that that bit changes nothing.

Pretty sure I linked this article on the basics of what it means. But's it's a common criticism for mediocre or worse artists who are perhaps good at tricking audiences into thinking their art is much fancier or more valuable than their art actually is. And the metaphor here is if I made a fancy sculpture out of dirt, it won't change the fact that it's still dirt and thus cannot match the value of gold.

I know full well what the saying means by itself.

As for why it's relevant to this thread, it's because cartoony animations and gag feats are style and not a substance. And changing our variable tiers based on those styles instead of having substance is the main gripe I and several others have with your proposal. Hulk does have a lore based Physiology where, "There angrier he gets, the stronger he gets" which is a substance for why he qualifies as a variable tier. As does Seiya's power of friendship or Green Lantern's Willpower, those are also substances. But saying that "The verses are cartoonish and nature and full of inconsistencies" are style arguments with no substance for why characters like Mario, Earthworm Jim, Klaymen, Bugs Bunny, Spongebob, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Homer Simpson, or Timmy Turner would all qualify for variable tiers.

That's a flawed comparison. The "substance" is more complex than just "The verses are cartoonish in nature and full of inconsistencies", that's an oversimplification. If the substance was that then yeah it would be sh*t and applicable to more characters that deserve it. The way I see it the substance is more like

• There is a difference between realistic feats & the consistency in stats they propose, and feats in scenes that have nonsensical aspects to them and/or are portrayed as funny, which can be with stats being portrayed wildly higher than what the realistic feats show. The first feats may be normal, the latter may be Toon Force.
  • Fittingly, the same characters may display other forms of Toon Force (abilities) in ways that may not display a consistent part of their arsenal, or that they may play fast & loose with how consistent it is. The fact that they can use this abilities "because Toon Force" supports how they may display higher stats "because Toon Force", since in both cases we're calling out how they're breaking logic, something that can obviously happen by way of showing higher stats, in a way that interpreting those as a valid additions to the consistency of their stats would go against common sense.

It's not the same as your average mechanic for a Variable tier, sure, in part because it may not even be something that they can replicate, but that doesn't mean they didn't do it and it follows the meaning of the word variable. On the examples you gave

• Mario seems inconsistent more than anything. If the Yoshi feat where he sends an enemy flying and they become a constellation were to be valid as in, that's a precise description of what happened, then that's so nonsensical that I would attribute it as "up to 4-C environmental destruction", not at all applicable to what Yoshi can regularly do physically, in a pretty useless way as it's not like he can do that with anyone at will, and this just being a recognition that he has done this & could theoretically replicate it, immensely unlikely as that might be, with the 4-C part just being the enemy transforming rather than Yoshi attacking that hard.
• Idk Earthworm Jim, I would take a guess and bet that the Universe level durability feat must not be consistent, with everyone in the universe who didn't survive that not being far bellow him as they should.
• Idk Klaymen
• I don't even want to look at Bugs Bunny and Spongebob's profiles.
• Courage the Cowardly Dog definitely deserves the varies he has right now, even if I don't agree with some of his feats.
• Homer Simpson is just inconsistent within reason.
• Timmy Turner definitely deserves the varies he has right now. He has an insane amount of feats but he's not something superhuman in between an average kid and his best feats that everyone would scale to (Say, 8-C, and every adult and kid scales via harming him), he is an average kid at times, and in other times he could do feats higher than that. Pretty much every time others scale to him, they scale to an average kid.

P&A can (usually) not be outliers, statistical feats can. Just because a character that's otherwise 9-B has a massive outlier as a gag, rather than as part of the story, that shouldn't change how we portray it, especially because it'd force us to start guessing what the author intent behind such a scene is, and that's never something you want to try to have a debate about. I recognize the difference between the two but I just think it doesn't matter for VSBW purposes.

I like where this is going, even if you don't agree with me yet. See, there is a logical flaw there;

• Yes "P&A can (usually) not be outliers, statistical feats can", however this refers to how common they result to be, it's not a meaningful point of ref. When talking about Toon Force, I challenge the idea that P&A can just be used always & in-character and that all feats sum to what we know of the regular statistics of the characters. So using how common P&A and statistical feats result to be in general already has as a premise that I'm wrong to begin with [Which you can believe, but as an argument against me doesn't do much].
• I want to touch on "force us to start guessing what the author intent behind such a scene is" and "that's never something you want to try to have a debate about"
  • On the first one, something like that, I say that we can reasonably, based on standards (not force us) guess what the logic is behind the scene & how that impacts everything else we know of a series (not the author's intent, per say).
  • I say that not doing so limits how accurate are our takes on what happens in fiction by forcing us to never interpret when cases like that might happen, which is not how people react to cartoons & such. As such, "that's never something you want to try to have a debate about" is wrong, that's something you would want to try to have a debate about because of the wonky logic around, it just so happen that in most other context of Vs Debates this is something we don't have to deal with, which is an issue on Toon Force being dumb, not the debate itself being wrong. You may possibly even say it because that debate would "feel bad", which doesn't remove how necessary it is.
  • For example: If a character that's otherwise 9-B has a massive outlier as a gag, rather than as part of the story, then sure, in this context that shouldn't change how we portray it, the gag is just a gag and not something they could do. You could say that this is getting behind the author's intent by portraying what happened as not something that happened or a goof in reality itself, rather than something the character was capable of, you could say that debate got us to understanding that.

You say "explicit", when my issue is that there isn't any verse mechanic backing this up. It in fact is the definition of implicit, which is the whole problem - You're inferring a mechanic.

1 case at a time, yes, it is inferable / presumptive, not explicit (This doesn't matter on the premise of being the more likely conclusion). But I meant the topic in general, and how it is "explicit" that this is something that can & has happened with Toon Force characters created by people.

 

[Armorchompy]

Yes "P&A can (usually) not be outliers, statistical feats can", however this refers to how common they result to be, it's not a meaningful point of ref. When talking about Toon Force, I challenge the idea that P&A can just be used always & in-character and that all feats sum to what we know of the regular statistics of the characters. So using how common P&A and statistical feats result to be in general already has as a premise that I'm wrong to begin with [Which you can believe, but as an argument against me doesn't do much].

If P&A exists only as a joke and is clearly not something that exists in the verse then it shouldn't be indexed either, so while I get where you're going here it doesn't really work.

"and that all feats sum to what we know of the regular statistics of the characters" - Unfortunately, they do, unless you can prove they don't.

• On the first one, something like that, I say that we can reasonably, based on standards (not force us) guess what the logic is behind the scene & how that impacts everything else we know of a series (not the author's intent, per say).
  • I say that not doing so limits how accurate are our takes on what happens in fiction by forcing us to never interpret when cases like that might happen, which is not how people react to cartoons & such. As such, "that's never something you want to try to have a debate about" is wrong, that's something you would want to try to have a debate about because of the wonky logic around, it just so happen that in most other context of Vs Debates this is something we don't have to deal with, which is an issue on Toon Force being dumb, not the debate itself being wrong. You may possibly even say it because that debate would "feel bad", which doesn't remove how necessary it is.
  • For example: If a character that's otherwise 9-B has a massive outlier as a gag, rather than as part of the story, then sure, in this context that shouldn't change how we portray it, the gag is just a gag and not something they could do. You could say that this is getting behind the author's intent by portraying what happened as not something that happened or a goof in reality itself, rather than something the character was capable of, you could say that debate got us to understanding that.

I'm sorry, get to the point. I can barely understand you so please just say what you want to say rather than try to make complex arguments.

1 case at a time, yes, it is inferable / presumptive, not explicit (This doesn't matter on the premise of being the more likely conclusion). But I meant the topic in general, and how it is "explicit" that this is something that can & has happened with Toon Force characters created by people.

The most likely conclusion is "the writers didn't care and just wanted a joke", absolutely by no means should we infer that a power system exists because of that.

Also you do realize that nothing you're saying counters the logistical issues behind varies ratings I brought up?

 

[Eficiente]

If P&A exists only as a joke and is clearly not something that exists in the verse then it shouldn't be indexed either, so while I get where you're going here it doesn't really work.

"and that all feats sum to what we know of the regular statistics of the characters" - Unfortunately, they do, unless you can prove they don't.

It could be that the P&A are like that, but it can also be that they are consistent enough & be recognized in-universe to have them while being inconsistent, wacky, and not part of the basic physiology & powerset the characters have.

I say that we can judge if that happens by common sense, which can be worded properly, not that this is something that needs to be prove with hard statements, because that's broken as most verses don't leave it that way.

I'm sorry, get to the point. I can barely understand you so please just say what you want to say rather than try to make complex arguments.

Well, it's a complex argument because it's a complex topic to debate when facing disagreement. Please have it patience.

The most likely conclusion is "the writers didn't care and just wanted a joke"

There is no context to what this might refer to so I'm gonna ignore it.

absolutely by no means should we infer that a power system exists because of that.

I imagine DarkDragonMedeus thinks the same. It's not a power system, they're just the stats being able to be altered (they vary) on how they're shown, and that this is really happening rather than a meaningless joke, even if it is a joke.

Also you do realize that nothing you're saying counters the logistical issues behind varies ratings I brought up?

Not sure which one but I believe I would have done so at the time if I replied to it, which I likely did.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

It could be that the P&A are like that, but it can also be that they are consistent enough & be recognized in-universe to have them while being inconsistent, wacky, and not part of the basic physiology & powerset the characters have.

I say that we can judge if that happens by common sense, which can be worded properly, not that this is something that needs to be prove with hard statements, because that's broken as most verses don't leave it that way.

Well, it's a complex argument because it's a complex topic to debate when facing disagreement. Please have it patience.

There is no context to what this might refer to so I'm gonna ignore it.

I imagine DarkDragonMedeus thinks the same. It's not a power system, they're just the stats being able to be altered (they vary) on how they're shown, and that this is really happening rather than a meaningless joke, even if it is a joke.

Not sure which one but I believe I would have done so at the time if I replied to it, which I likely did.

@Armorchompy

 

[Armorchompy]

There is no context to what this might refer to so I'm gonna ignore it.

... If I'm going to have to sit down and parse through your writing the least you could do is try return the favor. Regardless it seems like you understood the meaning anyways given it's what you acknowledged afterward.

I imagine DarkDragonMedeus thinks the same. It's not a power system, they're just the stats being able to be altered (they vary) on how they're shown, and that this is really happening rather than a meaningless joke, even if it is a joke.

If you say that the characters' stats vary then it IS an in-verse mechanic. There is literally no two ways about it, either it's something that's genuinely happening in the series (and therefore a mechanic), or they don't vary. But they don't because it's an inconsistency and it's literally just an inconsistency. What is the difference between a character's stats varying for a gag, and a character's stats varying for plot convenience, as far as we're concerned? If we're going down this road then everyone should have Varies ratings.

Not sure which one but I believe I would have done so at the time if I replied to it, which I likely did.

You most definitely did not.

Also with the way Varies works 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.

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".

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.

If you're going with the assumption that "these characters' stats vary without any discernible reason" then there is absolutely no way to ignore all of these logical conclusions that come from that assumption other than arbitrarily putting your foot down and saying "no, it works a different way". Which is all you've been doing so far. Quite frankly if your arguments are just going to be "this is how things go" without even looking at the big picture then I think we can consider this discussion closed.

 

[Eficiente]

If you say that the characters' stats vary then it IS an in-verse mechanic. There is literally no two ways about it, either it's something that's genuinely happening in the series (and therefore a mechanic), or they don't vary. But they don't because it's an inconsistency and it's literally just an inconsistency. What is the difference between a character's stats varying for a gag, and a character's stats varying for plot convenience, as far as we're concerned? If we're going down this road then everyone should have Varies ratings.

Sure, call it a mechanic. The point was that calling it "a power system" is meant to be a ridiculisation of by comparing it by more clear mechanic where stats vary that are stated & shown in a clear way. If the characters can't control it and aren't fully aware of it or aren't aware at all then then calling it a power system is like a joke, it's a meta thing that not only the audience would know, but only the part of the audience into Vs Debates. It's something you say because it feels wrong to call it a power system, and I agree, but that has nothing to do with what I argue being wrong.

If you're going with the assumption that "these characters' stats vary without any discernible reason" then there is absolutely no way to ignore all of these logical conclusions that come from that assumption other than arbitrarily putting your foot down and saying "no, it works a different way". Which is all you've been doing so far. Quite frankly if your arguments are just going to be "this is how things go" without even looking at the big picture then I think we can consider this discussion closed.

That's on you to not even consider a "discernible reason" the impossibility of the feats next to other feats and anti-feats shown and their ability to ignore logic via Toon Force. You keep portraying it indignation with things like

arbitrarily putting your foot down and saying "no, it works a different way"

"this is how things go" without even looking at the big picture

What big picture are you talking about? You're the one to interpret things to be like this always in this cases, by that logic then I guess all the people I know who would interpret this impossible feats a display of Toon Force not consistent with the characters' regular stats are also not looking at the big picture rather than having a valid interpretation of what's going on, all the times that may happen. It's arrogant in my opinion.

If you want to consider this discussion done then so be it, but closed? The agreement and disagreement was pretty even before and we have no idea if anyone (Aside from you and Medeus) changed their mind or if any new staff wants to add a new opinion. If the thread ends here I'm not gonna change the Varies in for example Timmy Turner nor I am going to work in the future pretending like Toon Force can't give a Varies, the wording we use doesn't tell me that I should.

 

[Armorchompy]

Sure, call it a mechanic. The point was that calling it "a power system" is meant to be a ridiculisation of by comparing it by more clear mechanic where stats vary that are stated & shown in a clear way. If the characters can't control it and aren't fully aware of it or aren't aware at all then then calling it a power system is like a joke, it's a meta thing that not only the audience would know, but only the part of the audience into Vs Debates. It's something you say because it feels wrong to call it a power system, and I agree, but that has nothing to do with what I argue being wrong.

If it's a meta thing, then it's not something that's actually happening in the verse and thus not something we should rate.

It'd be like giving every Marvel character a Varies rating based off that Stan Lee clip where he says that if a writer wants Spider-Man to beat the Thing, Spider-Man will beat the Thing (and vice-versa). Obviously every verse's powerscaling is dependent on author intent and nothing else, that doesn't mean that we should make that intent part of our reasoning.

That's on you to not even consider a "discernible reason" the impossibility of the feats next to other feats and anti-feats shown and their ability to ignore logic via Toon Force. You keep portraying it indignation with things like

I'm tired of repeating the same point. "Ignoring logic via Toon Force" is not something that the characters do. It's just the show not being interested in consistency. I will refuse to respond to this argument being repeated again- you've been dragging this out for too long.

What big picture are you talking about? You're the one to interpret things to be like this always in this cases, by that logic then I guess all the people I know who would interpret this impossible feats a display of Toon Force not consistent with the characters' regular stats are also not looking at the big picture rather than having a valid interpretation of what's going on, all the times that may happen. It's arrogant in my opinion.

Yes, we do need standards, and unfortunately just pretending a character has a mechanic because they're inconsistent will and should always be against them.

The big picture I mention is that the logical conclusion of a character's stats varying via toon force are: Being rated only by their absolute highest and lowest showing, scaling to other characters' feats being nearly impossible, characters being completely unusable for matches since they cannot control their stats, and setting a very strong precedent for giving the exact same treatment to any character that is inconsistent enough.

If you want to consider this discussion done then so be it, but closed? The agreement and disagreement was pretty even before and we have no idea if anyone (Aside from you and Medeus) changed their mind or if any new staff wants to add a new opinion.

8 agreements (Lonkitt agreed) & 2 disagreements (counting you) for my side vs 5 agreements (Propellus is now a thread mod) & 4 disagreements (not counting @DarkDragonMedeus or @Agnaa) for yours. It's also without going into the fact that DT never actually confirmed his disagreement with things. That's not even at all, and your arguments haven't shifted the needle much or at all. If you want to tag people, go ahead, but I'm not going to entertain stonewalling forever.

 

[Antvasima]

Eficiente does seem to make some good points here. For example, I am personally not sure how we should rate some characters from Marvel Comics that can differ between tier 9-C and High 1-A depending on the story, and some toon force gag characters seem to have similar inbuilt inconsistencies, although to a lesser degree.

@ImmortalDread

Is there mostly a consensus for applying Agnaa's note at least?

Establishing rules for Varies ratings

It would be equivalent, but it'd be a pretty weak anti-feat. It just seems like plot-induced stupidity. It'd be on the same level as an anti-feat where a character who has demonstrated incredible running speed doesn't chase after a car, or chooses to ride a car, or something like that. While I...

vsbattles.com

Also, @DontTalkDT can you clarify your views regarding this issue please?

 

[Armorchompy]

For example, I am personally not sure how we should rate some characters from Marvel Comics that can differ between tier 9-C and High 1-A depending on the story

We find one consistent rating and we stick with it. Like we've been doing so far. We all know that those ratings are extremely infrequent outliers, and that they should not affect how we rate a profile. Unless you want to add a "Varies from High 8-C up to 2-C" to Spider-Man's profile for beating up Firelord, we should continue doing things how we do them.

Is there mostly a consensus for applying Agnaa's note at least?

I would like the note to specify that it must be clear in the showing itself that some form of Statistics Amplification is happening, rather than inferred.

 

[ImmortalDread]

@ImmortalDread

Is there mostly a consensus for applying Agnaa's note at least?

No, there are not. Only OP's draft note (mines) got most consensus and it got applied.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I still have not changed and think toon force alone should not qualify for varies. But I don't want to argue like a broken record.

 

[Antvasima]

So which staff members currently think what here then?

 

[Propellus]

I still agree with Eficiente here as Varies makes sense for most Toon Force users. As Varies doesn't necessarily need to have overcomplicated custom explanations just for its rating which is pretty arbitrary.

 

[Armorchompy]

I find myself pretty frustrated with the fact that nobody who disagrees with me has made any effort to actually explain why my reasoning is wrong.

As Varies doesn't necessarily need to have explanations

(It does)

 

[Propellus]

I find myself pretty frustrated with the fact that nobody who disagrees with me has made any effort to actually explain why my reasoning is wrong.

(It does)

Honestly, at the moment I don't feel like writing a counter argument to your doubts right now due to my current responsibilities that I am facing. But I'll still work on it when I have the right time for it

 

[Antvasima]

We find one consistent rating and we stick with it. Like we've been doing so far. We all know that those ratings are extremely infrequent outliers, and that they should not affect how we rate a profile. Unless you want to add a "Varies from High 8-C up to 2-C" to Spider-Man's profile for beating up Firelord, we should continue doing things how we do them.

The statistics for quite a lot of Marvel Comics characters tend to regularly be all over the place though.

I would like the note to specify that it must be clear in the showing itself that some form of Statistics Amplification is happening, rather than inferred.

Well, given how fundamentally unsuitable the entire Marvel Comics narrative is for powerscaling, I personally think that it seems more honest of us to state minimum, average/usual/regular, and maximum power levels for its characters, but it may or may not be realistic to do so in practice.

Al Ewing even let Thor make an official statement about this issue in a recent story:

Power-scaling Rules for Marvel and DC Comics

There are several massive problems with using power-scaling for these two prominent franchises that have shared hundreds of different authors over several decades. Said writers naturally tend to have highly differing opinions and interpretations, which is reflected in their stories. Quite often...

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I still have not changed and think toon force alone should not qualify for varies. But I don't want to argue like a broken record.

I still feel the same.

Also, definitely against using “Varies from 9-C to High 1-A” for Marvel/DC characters. That’d make the profiles a lot worst.

 

[Armorchompy]

Well, given how fundamentally unsuitable the entire Marvel Comics narrative is for powerscaling, I personally think that it seems more honest of us to state minimum, average/usual/regular, and maximum power levels for its characters, but it may or may not be realistic to do so in practice.

That is just nearly completely impossible to do, yes. It would also just look really stupid, as Maverick points out

Al Ewing even let Thor make an official statement about this issue in a recent story:

I saw that and if there's a mechanism for that, then it's totally fine. But otherwise no.

 

[Antvasima]

That is just nearly completely impossible to do, yes. It would also just look really stupid, as Maverick points out

I think that it wouldn't take up too much space with three ratings, and it seem much more honest and informative.

I saw that and if there's a mechanism for that, then it's totally fine. But otherwise no.

It has long been an officially stated narrative principle from the writers and editors, and now it is official in-universe as well.

 

[Armorchompy]

I'm sorry, we can't start talking about Marvel six pages into a thread- those verses have their own special powerscaling rules anyways, so it wouldn't really go into the general rules to begin with.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I think that it is a good example of inconsistent statistics, but okay then.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

@Armorchompy @Antvasima @Eficiente Could we wrap this up?

 

[Eficiente]

It would be best of more staff could give their takes based on the arguments and views given above. It's unlikely to happen since it asks for too much work but that it's still the best.

Maybe some can add it to their to-do list and see if they can do it some day.

 

[Antvasima]

Which are the main members who have handled each side of the arguments here? Maybe I can ask them to write single posts that explain their respective viewpoints in easy to understand manners, after which I can summon our administrators to evaluate it?

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Which are the main members who have handled each side of the arguments here? Maybe I can ask them to write single posts that explain their respective viewpoints in easy to understand manners, after which I can summon our administrators to evaluate it?

@Armorchompy @Eficiente

 

[Armorchompy]

I've explained my viewpoints pretty thoroughly already.

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.

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.

More has been tacked on but the core is the above.

If you say that the characters' stats vary then it IS an in-verse mechanic. There is literally no two ways about it, either it's something that's genuinely happening in the series (and therefore a mechanic), or they don't vary. But they don't because it's an inconsistency and it's literally just an inconsistency. What is the difference between a character's stats varying for a gag, and a character's stats varying for plot convenience, as far as we're concerned? If we're going down this road then everyone should have Varies ratings.

The big picture I mention is that the logical conclusion of a character's stats varying via toon force are: Being rated only by their absolute highest and lowest showing, scaling to other characters' feats being nearly impossible, characters being completely unusable for matches since they cannot control their stats, and setting a very strong precedent for giving the exact same treatment to any character that is inconsistent enough.

8 agreements (Lonkitt agreed) & 2 disagreements (counting you) for my side vs 5 agreements (Propellus is now a thread mod) & 4 disagreements (not counting @DarkDragonMedeus or @Agnaa) for yours. It's also without going into the fact that DT never actually confirmed his disagreement with things. That's not even at all, and your arguments haven't shifted the needle much or at all. If you want to tag people, go ahead, but I'm not going to entertain stonewalling forever.

(Note that I was very stringent regarding votes for my side and very generous regarding votes for Eficiente's in the above tally- for example I'm not really sure DT agreed with anything in this thread)

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

I've explained my viewpoints pretty thoroughly already.


More has been tacked on but the core is the above.


(Note that I was very stringent regarding votes for my side and very generous regarding votes for Eficiente's in the above tally- for example I'm not really sure DT agreed with anything in this thread)

@Eficiente

 

[Eficiente]

The "Varies" explanation in the Tiering System would also have this:

"Users of [[Toon Force]] may have that ability increase their regular stats, which can happen on numerous occasions without necessarily showing stats that the characters could hold on a regular basis. While this can be a valid justification for a "Varies" rating (If many statistics are indexed within that variation, or if they're able to maintain the increased stat for long periods of time), the use of "up to", depicting only their highest achieved stat, should be considered. The feats of these increased stats should also be clarified, particularly how long they last, as it should not be assumed that the characters can always sustain having those stats indefinitely, which could make them useless in a prolonged battle. Likewise, [[Powerscaling|scaling]] to this characters simply means scaling to their regular stats, not their increased ones (unless those are literally happening at the time the scaling takes place)."

I disagree with not using inconsistencies [for Varies, in the context of Toon Force users], the reasoning is flawed and the way the Tiering page now presents it is incomplete.

Toon Force is a reason by itself, saying that inconsistencies don't count may only feel right if you only count inconsistencies that don't make it legit changes in the tier of characters, changes that are outliers. I believe many here draw from that logic to think that it makes sense, but don't actually acknowledge that now it leads to nonsense like a Toon Force user being most consistently at X tier with anti-feats against anything higher, thus having a profile only at X tier, yet having higher feats at Z tier that are not outliers yet are not a display of their consistent stats; just their genuine Toon Force. Heck Toon Force can lead to characters doing any other ability, yet to Stats Amp now? It's arbitrary. You can for example have Elasticity if you stretch your arm meters to grab something while never showing Elasticity again, yet now you gain nothing if you grab & toss a huge boulder as a gag in a way that's clearly canon yet clearly against one's regular stats, again it's arbitrary. Worst of all, it normalizes malpractice as some users will look at cases like that and tier the characters at Z tier (the higher one) to compensate, not giving a damn about consistency & anti-feats.

Now, what do I mean by this? Note that I talk about 2 different things when I say "inconsistency";

• A basic outlier. A feat higher than what's common by a character's stats and contradicted by their other feats. Something to be ignored when indexing the character's stats.
• An interpreted use of Toon Force in which the character makes a feat higher than what's common by their stats and contradicted by his other feats (in which Toon Force isn't interpreted to be used). Something that should be listed when indexing the character.

As far as the definition of the word goes, both can be called inconsistencies. Imagine the following;

• A character is always Wall level via many realistic feats at that level, minus 3 times Toon Force made them be City level, only in those specific occasions tho, and the feats were quite surreal.
• With my proposal, the feats w/o Toon Force and w/ it would be separated, we would just need to put on the work it reasonably interpret when Toon Force is or isn't used.
• Without my proposal:
  • The City level feats are outliers that ultimately still amount in the conversation of how the tier of how strong that character is at all that and for others to scale to.
  • Depending on the amount of feats and duration a series may have, a similar character may be "At least Wall level, likely City level", with anyone who can harm them scaling to the same, with we having never used the possibility that those higher feats do not speak of how strong the character is on a regular basis. Because we would not recognize the possibility that Toon Force, an ability that can do anything, might momentarily give the character higher stats in an untold manner.
  • Depending on the amount of feats and duration a series may have, a similar character may be "City level", with anyone who can harm them scaling to the same. This would be a case similar to the first one as much as reasonably possible, the series would be very inconsistent, but it wouldn't matter as all the higher feats would always be displays of how strong the characters are on a regular basis.

And to me, the latter scenario goes against common sense. I would even go as far as to say that I don't know any fellow adult that would interpret Toon Force users like this (If they were explained the basics of Vs Debates they would need to know and then came to their conclusions, since of course an uninformed opinion wouldn't matter). It would more or less be the equivalent of watching something wacky in a cartoon and someone rationalizing it as "It's funny/wacky because it's wacky/nonsensical. But there is no need to think about it as information to be keep in mind, like other things may be.". It's not that we should always use Toon Force & nonsense as something that momentarily amps what characters can do, but the possibility should be there, rather than the possibility being impossible to be there.

And yes, sometimes it will be a debatable, hard work to do, but I believe it to be correct, and that should be all that matters.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Which are the main members who have handled each side of the arguments here? Maybe I can ask them to write single posts that explain their respective viewpoints in easy to understand manners, after which I can summon our administrators to evaluate it?

@Antvasima They've both done that now.

 

[Armorchompy]

Putting it aside that I would recommend you to avoid your little appeals to what you perceive to be common sense ("I don't know any other fellow adult that would..."), this not only doesn't address the fact that you are simply assuming a change is happening with no in-verse mechanic, but it introduces an issue of its own in that it introduces another headcanon, that Toon Force is something that only sometimes comes into play rather than something that is an intrinsic part of the character.

That is completely unlike most actual showings of TF, which often happen suddenly or to the characters' surprise, with no visible change. You say "we would just need to put on the work it reasonably interpret when Toon Force is or isn't used" but that is completely impossible, there is no indicator at all other than inconsistency in statistics and effectively allows one to ignore anti-feats as they please under the pretense of the higher rating being an amp. It is not "a debatable, hard work to do", it is utter guesswork to avoid completely. (An exception to this is if a character does something like grow extra muscles out of nowhere, in that case this would be treated as Statistics Amplification, without a need for unnecessary headcanon standards to come into play)

 

[Eficiente]

Putting it aside that I would recommend you to avoid your little appeals to what you perceive to be common sense ("I don't know any other fellow adult that would...")

No, I won't. It's a way to communicate that. "Shame on me" if I'm on the wrong.

this not only doesn't address the fact that you are simply assuming a change is happening with no in-verse mechanic

You're unsatisfied with Toon Force not being a good enough mechanic, I'm not.

, but it introduces an issue of its own in that it introduces another headcanon, that Toon Force is something that only sometimes comes into play rather than something that is an intrinsic part of the character.

It may or may not be both rather than it that never "only sometimes coming into play". That's why I said that "It's not that we should always use Toon Force & nonsense as something that momentarily amps what characters can do, but the possibility should be there, rather than the possibility being impossible to be there."

That is completely unlike most actual showings of TF, which often happen suddenly or to the characters' surprise, with no visible change.

I fail to see why it "often happening suddenly or to the characters' surprise, with no visible change" changes anything. That's not wrong.

You say "we would just need to put on the work it reasonably interpret when Toon Force is or isn't used" but that is completely impossible, there is no indicator at all other than inconsistency in statistics and effectively allows one to ignore anti-feats as they please under the pretense of the higher rating being an amp. It is not "a debatable, hard work to do", it is utter guesswork to avoid completely.

I don't see it as impossible. The rest it's a problem of the feats themselves being portrayed in a nonsensical manner, not the people making sense of the situation in the larger context of a series.

(An exception to this is if a character does something like grow extra muscles out of nowhere, in that case this would be treated as Statistics Amplification, without a need for unnecessary headcanon standards to come into play)

I agree. I wish it was that simple.