General DC Comics Discussion Thread

[Deagonx]

Guidebooks aren't comic book material written by authors either, yet they are accepted

Guidebooks do have authors, and they are officially published material, but even so, they are evidentially on a much lower rung than actual comics and should generally only be used for supporting evidence.

What other interpretation could "may pay the price" refer to?

Literally any negative consequences could be described as "paying the price."

"If we don't stop the Joker, Gotham will pay the price." Doesn't necessarily mean Joker is going to literally wipe Gotham off the map. It could just mean a murder spree.

No, the Phantom Stranger survived attacks from Rebirth Supes.

I haven't seen any scans indicating that, but the current scan in the profile is from the Trinity of Sin Phantom Stranger run which predates Rebirth Superman. So the current scaling is to N52 Superman. If we added additional scaling with Rebirth Superman, we would need to further explore whether or not Phantom Stranger needs an additional profile for Rebirth.

 

[Transcending]

Guidebooks do have authors

By that logic, so does a blurb since that's an article.

and they are officially published material, but even so, they are evidentially on a much lower rung than actual comics and should generally only be used for supporting evidence.

That's how the wiki currently deals with things, if you disagree with the wiki's Editing Rules, making a CRT to change it first.

Literally any negative consequences could be described as "paying the price."

"If we don't stop the Joker, Gotham will pay the price." Doesn't necessarily mean Joker is going to literally wipe Gotham off the map. It could just mean a murder spree.

Sure but a murder spree doesn't fit the context here, I am asking for an example that fits the context of the fight here. Give an example of those "negative consequences".

I haven't seen any scans indicating that

I was wrong, it was New 52, mb. I do think Spectre scales above Superman in Rebirth too, however.

 

[Deagonx]

By that logic, so does a blurb since that's an article.

Someone wrote it, sure, but there's no indication that it's an actual author.

Do you intend to waste several pages arguing about the evidentiary validity of a promotional blurb on a website?

That's how the wiki currently deals with things, if you disagree with the wiki's Editing Rules, making a CRT to change it first.

The editing rules do not say that at all. They do, however, say this:

We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera.

So the statement is unusable.

Sure but a murder spree doesn't fit the context here, I am asking for an example that fits the context of the fight here. Give an example of those "negative consequences".

Are you under the impression that if I do not propose an alternate theory, that yours wins "by default?" Because if so, you're mistaken. The phrase "pay the price" is vague, that much is objectively true. Your assertion that it means "the destruction of the universe and/or Orrery" is unsubstantiated. The statement by itself is not tierable.

 

[Transcending]

Someone wrote it, sure, but there's no indication that it's an actual author.

The guidebook wasn't written by someone who writes DC's comics either. Whether something is written by a comics' author is not what makes it canon. it's whether the material is official.

The editing rules do not say that at all. They do, however, say this:

We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera.

So the statement is unusable.

Why are you not showing the full quote?

Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable.

This is specifically a reference to WoG, not guides. The rules had this to say about guides-

When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used.

The guides aren't used when they contradict what happens in the series, not when they don't contradict it. It's not WoG and it's not limited to supporting evidence.

Are you under the impression that if I do not propose an alternate theory, that yours wins "by default?" Because if so, you're mistaken. The phrase "pay the price" is vague, that much is objectively true. Your assertion that it means "the destruction of the universe and/or Orrery" is unsubstantiated. The statement by itself is not tierable.

You realize there's something called the process of cancellation? You are making a claim that there are alternative interpretations, if you cannot provide these interpretations there's no reason to assume they exist.

 

[Deagonx]

The guidebook wasn't written by someone who writes DC's comics either

You've changed the subject. They don't need to write comics to be a DC author, if they are the author of an official guide book. Regardless, guidebooks are still low-tier evidence.

This is specifically a reference to WoG, not guides. The rules had this to say about guides-

If your contention is that "maybe" phrases are unacceptable for WoG, but acceptable for Guidebooks, simply because the page didn't explicitly say that this problem is universal, then you're just refusing to use common sense in order to perpetuate a pointless argument.

The guides aren't used when they contradict what happens in the series, not when they don't contradict it. It's not WoG and it's not limited to supporting evidence.

I never said they aren't used at all. They are simply lower-tier evidence, and since the phrase is vague six ways to sunday, it's completely unusable.

You are making a claim that there are alternative interpretations, if you cannot provide these interpretations there's no reason to assume they exist.

I am not concerned with whether you "assume they exist." The phrase is vague, and proposing a theory doesn't change that. I do not need to compete with an alternative theory. Yours is not accepted by default, it must be proven with actual evidence.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we do generally use guidebooks as less conclusive evidence than actual stories, yes, but they can be used as clarifying supporting evidence if it is consistent with the stories.

 

[Transcending]

You've changed the subject. They don't need to write comics to be a DC author, if they are the author of an official guide book.

And whoever wrote the blurb is an author of DC's official website.

If your contention is that "maybe" phrases are unacceptable for WoG, but acceptable for Guidebooks, simply because the page didn't explicitly say that this problem is universal, then you're just refusing to use common sense in order to perpetuate a pointless argument.

That's not how it works, if this is how you see it, make a CRT and change the Editing Rules, or if you think guidebooks being applicable to the rule is obvious, add the word guidebooks to that rule.

WoG is not official, it's something stated by the author without the interference of DC. Guidebooks however, are official licensed books by the company.

I never said they aren't used at all. They are simply lower-tier evidence, and since the phrase is vague six ways to sunday, it's completely unusable.

They are lower relative to comics, which doesn't mean they are any sort of bad evidence. And it's not vague, it explicitly expressed a probable possibility of the PS having infinite power, which was definitively confirmed by the blurb.

I am not concerned with whether you "assume they exist." The phrase is vague, and proposing a theory doesn't change that. I do not need to compete with an alternative theory. Yours is not accepted by default, it must be proven with actual evidence.

I have proven my interpretation by the process of cancellation. It's very explicit, if someone says "He can destroy the Universe" there's no room for error, there's no room for interpreting it as something other than the person saying the guy can actually destroy the Universe. This is explicit as such and if it's vague, it's your job to provide alternate interpretations and prove so.

 

[Transcending]

Well, we do generally use guidebooks as less conclusive evidence than actual stories, yes, but they can be used as clarifying supporting evidence if it is consistent with the stories.

I agree they aren't as great of an evidence as comics, but the guide here isn't contradicted by the comics. There's no reason to not use it.

 

[Antvasima]

Can you remind me what it says exactly? We cannot use it as standalone evidence, especially if it may have been worded as hyperbolic flowery language in a less seriously handled information blurb within a publication that mixes stories and very brief information, rather than as more matter-of-fact schematic logic.

 

[Deagonx]

That's not how it works, if this is how you see it, make a CRT and change the Editing Rules, or if you think guidebooks being applicable to the rule is obvious, add the word guidebooks to that rule.

Whether or not the page is updated to address this edge case, the statement is still unusable. You can perpetuate the argument if you see fit, but it will never be used for tiering.

And it's not vague, it explicitly expressed a probable possibility of the PS having infinite power, which was definitively confirmed by the blurb.

Possibility is explicitly vague, and blurbs on a website are unusuable as evidence.

I have proven my interpretation by the process of cancellation

You mean "process of elimination."

Also, no. Process of elimination refers to a finite number of possibilities where one can be confirmed by proving the others wrong. That does not apply here. There are not a finite number of possibilities, and you have not ruled any of them out. Once again, your theory is not going to be accepted by default simply because someone else has not come up with an opposing theory.

It's very explicit, if someone says "He can destroy the Universe" there's no room for error, there's no room for interpreting it as something other than the person saying the guy can actually destroy the Universe. This is explicit as such and if it's vague, it's your job to provide alternate interpretations and prove so.

He says "may pay the price" not "will be destroyed." That is vague, because we are given no information as to what that "price" is. This phrase is unusable for tiering. How much more time do you intend to waste on this subject?

Can you remind me what it say exactly? We cannot use it as standalone evidence, especially if it may have been worded as hyperbolic flowery language in a less seriously handled information blurb within a publication that mixes stories and very brief information, rather than as more matter-of-fact schematic logic.

He linked a guide book quote which said: "The immortal Phantom Stranger's powers are mysterious and may be without limit."

He also linked a description of a comic from DC's website which says "The Stranger's powers know no limit!"

Any reasonable person would have immediately dismissed the idea of using these to tier a charcter.

 

[Antvasima]

He linked a guide book quote which said: "The immortal Phantom Stranger's powers are mysterious and may be without limit."

He also linked a description of a comic from DC's website which says "The Stranger's powers know no limit!"

Any reasonable person would have immediately dismissed the idea of using these to tier a charcter.

Yes, that seems far too unreliable (hyperbolic, speculative, and unspecific) to use. My apologies.

 

[Transcending]

Yes, that seems far too unreliable (hyperbolic, speculative, and unspecific) to use. My apologies.

Okay, but-

We still need well-considered input regarding this issue.

 

[Transcending]

Also, no. Process of elimination refers to a finite number of possibilities where one can be confirmed by proving the others wrong. That does not apply here. There are not a finite number of possibilities, and you have not ruled any of them out.

You haven't proved they are any other possibility or that there are infinite possibilities, you have just claimed there are other interpretations without anything to support that. So far my interpretation is the only one presented.

Once again, your theory is not going to be accepted by default simply because someone else has not come up with an opposing theory.

When a CRT doesn't get opposition it generally gets accepted(as long as it has enough agreements). You haven't provided a valid counter-argument yet.

He says "may pay the price" not "will be destroyed." That is vague, because we are given no information as to what that "price" is. This phrase is unusable for tiering. How much more time do you intend to waste on this subject

There's nothing else it can refer to. It's a price creation pays when PS and Spectre fights. Once again, you haven't even given possibilities of what else it could mean.

 

[Deagonx]

You haven't proved they are any other possibility

I don't need to. Your theory doesn't win by default in the absence of someone else proposing another theory. You must provide evidence from the comics.

When a CRT doesn't get opposition it generally gets accepted(as long as it has enough agreements). You haven't provided a valid counter-argument yet.

Yes I have. The definitive counter argument is this: pay the price is a vague phrase that can refer to any negative consequences. Your theory about what those consequences would be are purely speculation, and speculation doesn't suffice as evidence.

 

[Transcending]

I don't need to. Your theory doesn't win by default in the absence of someone else proposing another theory. You must provide evidence from the comics.

I provided valid evidence, and the only interpretation to "might pay the price" here that can fit the context is that they are destroying creation-

There's nothing else it can refer to. It's a price creation pays when PS and Spectre fights. Once again, you haven't even given possibilities of what else it could mean.

Yes I have. The definitive counter argument is this: pay the price is a vague phrase that can refer to any negative consequences. Your theory about what those consequences would be are purely speculation, and speculation doesn't suffice as evidence.

Simply saying it is vague is not enough, you need to expand on that. It would be vague if it could refer to multiple things, but you haven't proved there are other things it could refer to, you haven't provided alternatives.

 

[Deagonx]

I provided valid evidence

The phrase "pay the price" is not being contested. Your unsupported theory about its meaning is.

Simply saying it is vague is not enough, you need to expand on that. It would be vague if it could refer to multiple things, but you haven't proved there are other things it could refer to, you haven't provided alternatives.

I don't need to provide alternatives. As I said, your theory isn't correct by default simply because an opposing theory hasn't been presented.

 

[Transcending]

The phrase "pay the price" is not being contested. Your unsupported theory about its meaning is.

My "theory" isn't unsupported, it's the only possible interpretation here which I even explained. I then quoted that portion for you to see. You ignored both times. I don't understand why you take a portion of my post and throw away the rest of it.

I don't need to provide alternatives. As I said, your theory isn't correct by default simply because an

Sure, but it is correct if there cannot be any alternative. "Pay the price" could mean different things in other contexts, but not here

The issue is, you claimed it's vague, and so it's your job to prove it's vague by providing alternative interpretations. If you cannot prove it's vague, your claim gets cancelled via Hitchen's Razor.

 

[Transcending]

I think Post-Crisis Trigon can be downgraded.

likely Multiverse level+ (The Monitor ranked his full power on par with that of Jim Corrigan)

The Monitor didn't exactly say Trigon was on par with Spectre, he said both of their powers were above 8000. This doesn't necessarily mean they are on par with each other, just that they are both above those with power levels below 8000.

Also, may I ask why Jim Corrigan is stated to be above Nabu? Nabu matched an Unbound Spectre once.

 

[Deagonx]

My "theory" isn't unsupported, it's the only possible interpretation here which I even explained

Simply claiming that your theory is "the only possible interpretation" isnt evidence.

If you cannot prove it's vague, your claim gets cancelled via Hitchen's Razor.

You are the one making the claim. Until you have evidence for your theory, it's meaningless. You can perpetuate this argument for as long as you like, but it will not be a substitute for evidence.

"Pay the price" could mean different things in other contexts, but not here

Prove that with evidence. Not just your opinion.

 

[Antvasima]

I also find the evidence for this intended upgrade too vague and open to interpretation.

 

[Transcending]

Simply claiming that your theory is "the only possible interpretation" isnt evidence.

Prove that with evidence. Not just your opinion.

It's a price creation pays when PS and Spectre fights. Once again, you haven't even given possibilities of what else it could mean.

 

[Beyond_transcending]

I also find the evidence for this intended upgrade too vague and open to interpretation.

Can you give an alternative interpretation then, please?

 

[Antvasima]

If a very reliable statement regarding the specific extent of the resulting destruction involved had been outlined that had been a different issue, but pay the price doesn't really tell us anything specific regarding what was intended.

 

[Antvasima]

Can you give an alternative interpretation then, please?

That is not required. We do not accept diffuse statements, period, according to our rules.

And creation can also mean anything from the local universe to all of reality combined.

All of this is far too vague for our purposes. Your suggestion will not be accepted, and you are wasting our time by continuing to argue and be unreasonable.

 

[Transcending]

I think Post-Crisis Trigon can be downgraded.


The Monitor didn't exactly say Trigon was on par with Spectre, he said both of their powers were above 8000. This doesn't necessarily mean they are on par with each other, just that they are both above those with power levels below 8000.

Also, may I ask why Jim Corrigan is stated to be above Nabu? Nabu matched an Unbound Spectre once.

@Antvasima; What do you think?

 

[Antvasima]

I also do not think that Post-Crisis Trigon had any feats remotely of the same scale as The Spectre and that it seems like a vague and inconsistent statement to base his entire scaling on.

I think that classic Nabu Doctor Fate was shown to be inferior to the Spectre in a flashback during John Ostrander's Spectre run, but may misremember.

 

[Transcending]

I think that classic Nabu Doctor Fate was shown to be inferior to the Spectre in a flashback during John Ostrander's Spectre run, but may misremember.

Nabu fought Unbound Spectre.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, the Day of Vengeance feat should also be very relevant. Nabu is weaker, but apparently not overwhelmingly so.

 

[Transcending]

Yes, the Day of Vengeance feat should also be very relevant. Nabu is weaker, but apparently not overwhelmingly so.

So do we give Nabu a "possibly higher" and remove Trigon's "likely Multiverse level+"?

 

[Antvasima]

I think that it seems like very reasonable suggestions at least, but we preferably need further input from our staff and knowledgeable members.

 

[Transcending]

I think that it seems like very reasonable suggestions at least, but we preferably need further input from our staff and knowledgeable members.

Do we need a new CRT or can we do it here?

 

[Antvasima]

A new CRT is probably best.

 

[Deagonx]

but pay the price doesn't really tell us anything specific regarding what was intended.

That is not required. We do not accept diffuse statements, period, according to our rules.

Exactly.

Can you give an alternative interpretation then, please?

I am refusing the request for an alternative theory because it's a red herring. It is not my job to put forth an alternative and then argue about which one is more likely. It is your job (or the job of whomever is providing an interpretation) to back it with specific evidence. Blindly claiming "this is the only possible interpretation of this vague idiomatic expression!" is not sufficient.

I also do not think that Post-Crisis Trigon had any feats remotely of the same scale as The Spectre and that it seems like a vague and inconsistent statement to base his entire scaling on.

Trigon is extremely wanked, but I have found that people tend to be extremely resistant to that notion. In reality he doesn't even have universe busting feats or reliable universe-busting scaling in the form of actual fights. It's all vague statements like the Spectre one.

Yes, the Day of Vengeance feat should also be very relevant. Nabu is weaker, but apparently not overwhelmingly so.

If I am not mistaken there was some sort of amp going on. I know of at least one fight against Spectre where his opponent was super charged by a lot of magicians but I am not sure if it was this fight.

 

[AndrewBennet]

It would be pretty inconsistent to rate The Phantom stranger and The spectre to 2A ;high 1C- 1B based on single statement.
jim corrigan Spectre has consistently shown to be weaker than Hal Jordan Spectre and Unbound Spectre . He got bodied by parllax and Antimonitor.

Hal Spectre was the only version who could use the power of logos without getting overwhelmed and considered to be the stronger than any Green lantern entities like Parallax.

Unbound Spectre is the strongest Spectre . He destroyed the lord of orders and chaos.

 

[AndrewBennet]

Nabu is the strongest lord of order . He has said to have power to reverse zero hour event.( I dont have the scan)

Even the likes of Kismet is not comparable to him in Power.
kismet is 2A -higher.

lord of chaos and order are low 1C entities from sphere of gods . They existed before the physical multiverse
2

 

[Deagonx]

What makes them Low 1-C? I'd argue even his 2-A rating is a bit generous.

 

[Transcending]

It would be pretty inconsistent to rate The Phantom stranger and The spectre to 2A ;high 1C- 1B based on single statement.

We never argued for such a high rating tho

jim corrigan Spectre has consistently shown to be weaker than Hal Jordan Spectre and Unbound Spectre . He got bodied by parllax and Antimonitor.

That's Post-Crisis, not Post-Flashpoint

Unbound Spectre is the strongest Spectre . He destroyed the lord of orders and chaos.

Nabu explicitly matched him, and Spectre was amped too iirc

 

[Transcending]

What makes them Low 1-C? I'd argue even his 2-A rating is a bit generous.

In JLD, Nabu and the other Lords of Order were destroying the Sphere

 

[Vondoom]

In JLD, Nabu and the other Lords of Order were destroying the Sphere

I think i once saw a Nabu upgrade thread.

 

[Transcending]

I think i once saw a Nabu upgrade thread.

I think I once saw one by Confluctor, though iirc he didn't use this feat.