Frankenstein's Monster debunking and upgrades part 2

[Walker66]

I must say I found myself pleasantly surprised that the previous thread was closed before I could reply (Seriously it was almost a month before someone replied yet I'm not given a chance for less?). But now that I noticed it I'm going to reply to the original thread here.

I think it's super NLFy to just grant him 9-A based on a quote, which is unsupported to begin with (If I in frusturation say I'll burn down an orphanage, doesn't mean I'm 9-A) I already proved it he wasn't going to burn it. And by your logic he shouldn't be wall level since he stated he could teat people limb from limb. And once again, what makes the Monster's claim not valid?

The descending down the mountain quote is unreliable itself, since it definitely isn't his travel speed because gravity is a factor It wasn't like the Mountain is on the 90 degree angle for that to be a huge contributor. And he was mostly likely running down the mountain At best, the feat is his mountaneering skills I don't think any normal mountaneer would be faster than an eagle going don the mountain.

Second quote you literally state as a feat for speed is bogged down by factors like exaggeration, Victor's exasperation, darkness, and delirium. The lightning part maybe, but the bullet part not so much. I already explained why.

Since this thread was brought back up. Here's a character that destroyed a much larger building than Frankenstein's Monster by crushing it. She's 9-B And you don't already see a problem with this? How can you crush an even bigger house and not be 9-A? And if you actually look at the feat the house was DAMAGED not destroyed.

 

[Buttersamuri]

I wanna add, why genius intelligence. Learning multiple languages in a few months certainly doesn't support genius. I could pull the same if I put my mind to it. And I ain't no genius. That should be an above average to gifted at best depending on how many languages and which ones

 

[Walker66]

Considering that he went from an infant level intelligence to an articulate philosopher in only a couple of months I think it can count as genius.

 

[Buttersamuri]

Ok. That sounds far more intelligent. Can that be noted on his intelligence. Cause how it's currently worded is weak

 

[Cropfist]

He should be 9-A again.

 

[Walker66]

Most definitely. They use him saying he could tear a person limb from limb as proof if him being 9B, yet when the same is applied to destroying a cottage they don't think it matters.

 

[Keeweed]

If your wondering why I hadn't replied to this thread it was because the original argument was just going in circles and most people had agreed with the downgrade. I didn't even want to close the original thread, it was staff that suggested it be closed.

This is probably a terrible time for me to debate this since I don't want this lingering over my head again, but since people are saying he should be 9-A again, I want to repeat why I think he shouldn't be.

Frankenstein's Monster has possibly one 9-A feat and a crap ton of anti feats. He can be hurt by people throwing stones at him, regular people hurt him with punches and other basic melee weapons, the wife Frankenstein made for the monster could be easily chopped to pieces with an axe, and the monster was hurt by a gun shot and could die from fire. In the version of the story I read he did die from fire, but apparently that's non canon and he's already is drowning in anti feats anyways. All his other 9-B feats are extremely low on the tier, he at most scales to bears and other than that he's mostly baseline scaling from wolves and being able to tear people apart. None of these feats are ever treated as causal.

Finally we have his 9-A 'feat'; it has zero time frame or method which is important for a feat like this since a 9-B can effortlessly destroy a cottage in a variety of different ways. A 9-B ramming through one or two of the walls would collapse the place almost instantly; its the same reason why SCP 682 was downgraded to 9-A despite destroying multiple skyscrapers on accident (destroying a skyscraper is usually 8-A).

I still disagree with 9-A Frankenstein, even more so than before.

 

[Walker66]

For someone who complains that things were going in circles you sure repeat a lot of arguments so to every argument I responded on the previous I'll just type "adressed".

He can be hurt by people throwing stones at him, regular people hurt him with punches and other basic melee weapons Adressed

the wife Frankenstein made for the monster could be easily chopped to pieces with an axe Adressed

and the monster was hurt by a gun shot and could die from fire Adressed

None of these feats are ever treated as causal And niether are they treated as his limit

A 9-B ramming through one or two of the walls would collapse the place almost instantly; its the same reason why SCP 682 was downgraded to 9-A despite destroying multiple skyscrapers on accident He definitely didn't phrase it like that in the sentence.

 

[Keeweed]

Just because you address them doesn't mean you're argument is right. That also applies to me as well, its up to what the majority agree with.

When it comes to the gun shot all you said was it didn't hurt that bad and was an outlier, but the monster literally ran away in fear from that. Also he has no feats to not make it an outlier.

You can't assume a feat is causal unless it is stated otherwise, especially since people have hurt the monster with their punches, stones, and other basic weapons. An outlier is a one off thing that is vastly different from everything else but the monster is consistently hurt by people all the time.

The upgrade revolves around the monster being capable of destroying a house in a way that can get 9-A results, but the feat is too vague. Scp-682 was also stated to have violently destroyed large structures like bridges (stone highway bridges) and buildings. We rate him as 9-A because we count him as destroying the support of the structures, not the entire structure. Same thing here, the monsters feat is vague so we should go with the low end, which is 9-B.

At the very best he should be 9-B possibly 9-A since characters with vastly better justifications for 9-A like Beowulf (Myth) are rated like that. But that's also a stretch.

And finally, I repeated my points for the new thread. It wasn't supposed to be a new argument, it was a recap. It was supposed to be a repeat of everything I had already said, and I'm sorry if I came off as rude in the first comment. I just have a lot of stuff going on this week and I didn't want to join this thread before it was to late (though I may have jumped the gun).

 

[Walker66]

Just because you address them doesn't mean you're argument is right It means I debunked your arguments

When it comes to the gun shot all you said was it didn't hurt that bad and was an outlier, but the monster literally ran away in fear from that. I never mentioned anything about an outlier.

You can't assume a feat is causal unless it is stated otherwise, especially since people have hurt the monster with their punches, stones, and other basic weapons If we look at the context, he never wanted to fight back in those instances. If he did he probably would have steeled himself and powered through. Sorry, but that's not evidence against him.

The upgrade revolves around the monster being capable of destroying a house in a way that can get 9-A results, but the feat is too vague The way he phrases it implies crushing the entire structure Scp-682 was also stated to have violently destroyed large structures like bridges (stone highway bridges) and buildings. We rate him as 9-A because we count him as destroying the support of the structures, not the entire structure From what I read the reason that he is on small building level is because he actually destroyed a small building.

At the very best he should be 9-B possibly 9-A since characters with vastly better justifications for 9-A like Beowulf (Myth) are rated like that. The 9-B, possibly 9-A suggestion was an idea I already presented. And what justifications are for Beowulf? The page doesn't give any text to put it in context.

And finally, I repeated my points for the new thread Yeah, that's all you did. You just repeated yourself without justifying any of those points.

 

[Keeweed]

" If we look at the context, he never wanted to fight back in those instances. If he did he probably would have steeled himself and powered through. Sorry, but that's not evidence against him."

It doesn't matter if he powered through them, it matters that they hurt him in the first place. A 9-A can't be hurt by a musket, a 9-B can. A 9-A wouldn't be hurt by people punching and throwing rocks at it, while a 9-B can.

His 9-A feat is destroying a cottage, but that can be, and most the times is, 9-B. 9-A is the highest interpretation of that feat.

Frankenstein's Monster doesn't have a time frame or method behind how he destroyed the cottage meanwhile Beowulf does. Beowulf was doing it from the after effect of his fight and it would have all collapsed in on itself, meanwhile all we know is that Frankenstein's monster was going to destroy a cottage.

Beowulf can tank fire that melts iron and tanks hits from something that obliterates armed soldiers. Frankenstein's Monster gets hurt from fire, people, rocks, and guns.

Frankenstein constantly tries to punch the monster throughout the story, and he considers a flint lock as a viable option to defend himself from the Monster. Both of these options make sense if the monster was 9-B, they wouldn't make any sense if the monster was 9-A.

Also I feel like this is probably a repeat from before, but I'm just going to say sorry for bringing it up earlier and sorry for being rude. Because I now realize there is nothing left to say, we both have an opinion on certain things and we both probably know what those opinions are by now.

This last comment was probably meaningless in the grand scheme of things because I know I'm not convincing you and your not convincing me; if others really want Frankenstein's Monster at 9-A, fine, but I'm explaining why I personally don't think he should be 9-A.

Note: I'm not leaving this revision, this conversation has just hit a point where everything that could be said has been said and I'm sorry for contributing to that: I'll be watching the thread.

Have a great day (I mean that seriously, have a good time).

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Keeweed. We have an unknown timeframe and method for the possibly 9-A feat, and the rest are anti-feats. We rate from the energy output of a single strike, not a prolonged series of attacks, and you do not need to be above 9-B to destroy a cottage. My apologies, but this likely isn't going to be accepted.