General DC Comics Discussion Thread

[Deagonx]

You'd have to ask the writer.

 

[Deleted member 2530]

First of, I am not sure what the first scan is supposed to be from? An article? Using a tiny crop with no citations is just weird. The second scan is clearly talking about his powers and its not even definitive just "maybe without limit". Not sure what you're expecting to get from these.

 

[Transcending]

First of, I am not sure what the first scan is supposed to be from? An article? Using a tiny crop with no citations is just weird.

WONDER WOMAN #758 | DC

Wonder Woman puts herself on the line to save Warmaster from an ancient power-the Phantom Stranger! But Diana is out of her depth, and the Stranger’s power knows no limit! Is our hero prepared to break eternal law to save her former friend? Or is the...

www.dc.com

The second scan is clearly talking about his powers

Yes and so am I.

and its not even definitive just "maybe without limit".

That's why I gave the first scan which is more definitive

 

[Beyond_transcending]

You'd have to ask the writer.

Why is it flowery?

 

[Deleted member 2530]

WONDER WOMAN #758 | DC

Wonder Woman puts herself on the line to save Warmaster from an ancient power-the Phantom Stranger! But Diana is out of her depth, and the Stranger’s power knows no limit! Is our hero prepared to break eternal law to save her former friend? Or is the...

www.dc.com

Yes and so am I.

That's why I gave the first scan which is more definitive

So, your proof is a blurb.

 

[Transcending]

So, your proof is a blurb.

I don't see what's wrong with that, especially since a guidebook somewhat supports it.

 

[Deagonx]

Another waste of time based on an incredibly generous interpretation of a promotional blurb.

 

[AndrewBennet]

Phantom stranger has literally zero feats on par with Spectre even according to Jm demattis stories and cosmology. He got effortlessly steam rolled by unbound spectre in days of vengeance.

 

[Deleted member 2530]

Phantom stranger has literally zero feats on par with Spectre even according to Jm demattis stories and cosmology. He got effortlessly steam rolled by unbound spectre in days of vengeance.

Yeah. Them being equal is weird. He has to bring a team to try subduing Spectre.

 

[Transcending]

Phantom stranger has literally zero feats on par with Spectre even according to Jm demattis stories and cosmology. He got effortlessly steam rolled by unbound spectre in days of vengeance.

That's Post-Crisis. In Post-Flashpoint PS matched Spectre more than once.

 

[Transcending]

I personally think "possibly" is the way to go, but I am not against that

 

[Antvasima]

Hmm. Maybe "At least Extraordinary Genius" for Lex and "Extraordinary Genius" for Batman then? Or should Lex also just get a regular "Extraordinary Genius" rating, with him sometimes holding his own against Brainiac or TBWL being considered as plot-induced stupidity?

I personally think "possibly" is the way to go, but I am not against that

We still need well-considered input regarding this issue.

 

[Deagonx]

That's Post-Crisis. In Post-Flashpoint PS matched Spectre more than once.

"Matched" or "didn't immediately get killed in a confrontation?" Fighting someone for a few panels without dying doesn't scale you to them.

If you have feats, post feats, instead of relying on non-evidence like a blurb from DC's website written by some intern.

 

[Transcending]

"Matched" or "didn't immediately get killed in a confrontation?" Fighting someone for a few panels without dying doesn't scale you to them.

Matched, Phantom Stranger clearly tanked a lot of hits from Spectre and also hurt Spectre back. He has also made Spectre bleed- https://media.**********.net/attachments/946141853504385144/1070361154431496323/image0.jpg

If you have feats, post feats, instead of relying on non-evidence like a blurb from DC's website written by some intern.

The blurb is from DC's official website and supported by a guidebook. I don't see the problem with using it.

As for feats, I already mentioned it, he threatened all creation along with Spectre.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems fine to scale the Post-Flashpoint version of the Phantom Stranger from The Spectre then.

 

[Deagonx]

The blurb is from DC's official website and supported by a guidebook. I don't see the problem with using it.

DC's website is not canon material, guidebooks are shaky at best, and even if it were a statement from an actual comic or character, the phrase "may be without limit" or "limitless power" is not tierable. It doesn't matter if you "don't see the problem with using it." It isn't usable at all.

Matched, Phantom Stranger clearly tanked a lot of hits from Spectre and also hurt Spectre back.

It seems fine to scale the Post-Flashpoint version of the Phantom Stranger from The Spectre then.

I would hold off. I read that comic run and I strongly got the impression that Stranger is a lot weaker than Spectre. I'll review it to see what the circumstances were and if there are any more clear comparisons of their power.

As for feats, I already mentioned it, he threatened all creation along with Spectre.

"Threatening" is not a feat. The Voice saying "all of creation might pay the price" is not tierable. Focus on actual feats and clear statements, not wanking vague non-evidence.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I also recall the post-Flashpoint version of The Phantom Stranger matching The Spectre blow for blow in a fight penned by J.M. DeMatteis. That said, The Spectre goes up and down in power an awful lot.

 

[Deagonx]

Well, I also recall the post-Flashpoint version of The Phantom Stranger matching The Spectre blow for blow in a fight penned by J.M. DeMatteis. That said, The Spectre goes up and down in power an awful lot.

That's true. I actually looked at their profiles and it turns out Post Flashpoint Stranger is already scaled to Jim Corrigan for that fight, so there's nothing that needs to be done for that. Both of them scale to Post-Flashpoint Superman but otherwise don't have any significant feats during that era.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That seems good then.

 

[Transcending]

DC's website is not canon material

Why so? Why wouldn't an official website be canon?

guidebooks are shaky at best

The wiki accepts them, that's all that matters.

and even if it were a statement from an actual comic or character, the phrase "may be without limit" or "limitless power" is not tierable.

Infinite power is High 3-A.

Threatening" is not a feat.

Again, by threatening I meant the "all creation might pay the price" thing.

The Voice saying "all of creation might pay the price" is not tierable

Why? It literally means all of creation would be destroyed. All of creation is a universe at the very least, but it has more consistently been used to refer to the Orrery(Final Crisis: Superman Beyond #2). Either way however, it's a Uni+-Multi+ feat.

 

[Transcending]

That's true. I actually looked at their profiles and it turns out Post Flashpoint Stranger is already scaled to Jim Corrigan for that fight, so there's nothing that needs to be done for that. Both of them scale to Post-Flashpoint Superman but otherwise don't have any significant feats during that era.

Isn't Post-Flashpoint Superman getting upgraded to Tier 2? If so, that would upgrade Spectre and PS, though scaling them to Superman is kek

 

[Deagonx]

Why so? Why wouldn't an official website be canon?
The wiki accepts them, that's all that matters.
Infinite power is High 3-A.

Promotional blurbs in the description of a comic on a website aren't actual comic book material written by authors. The wiki accepts guidebook statements for clarifying information and supporting evidence, but something vague like "power may be limitless" is unusable. Infinite power is not High 3-A without context to support it. There are numerous profiles on the wiki with statements of infinite power that are not H3-A. Focus on feats, and tangible evidence.

Again, by threatening I meant the "all creation might pay the price" thing.

Why? It literally means all of creation would be destroyed.

Either way however, it's a Uni+-Multi+ feat.

Yeah, and that's a nothing-burger as well. If he had said "all of creation will be destroyed" that would mean all of creation would be destroyed. Saying "may pay the price" is too vague to be usable, and even if he had said something more definite, it would only be supporting evidence that would need a concrete feat. Statements are not feats, feats are actual actions with tangible results.

Isn't Post-Flashpoint Superman getting upgraded to Tier 2?

No. The ongoing Heralds discussion doesn't apply to New-52, only Rebirth. The scaling for Superrman to these two characters comes from N52. Also, the thread hasn't even remotely reached a consensus yet, so I don't know why you're assuming it will be accepted.

 

[Transcending]

Promotional blurbs in the description of a comic on a website aren't actual comic book material written by authors

Guidebooks aren't comic book material written by authors either, yet they are accepted. Not everything has to be written by authors in comic books, it just has to be official.

The wiki accepts guidebook statements for clarifying information and supporting evidence, but something vague like "power may be limitless" is unusable.

This is wrong. WOG is only used for clarification and support, but guidebooks can be used by themselves as long as the source material doesn't contradict.

Yeah, and that's a nothing-burger as well. If he had said "all of creation will be destroyed" that would mean all of creation would be destroyed. Saying "may pay the price" is too vague to be usable, and even if he had said something more definite, it would only be supporting evidence that would need a concrete feat. Statements are not feats, feats are actual actions with tangible results.

What other interpretation could "may pay the price" refer to? And statements can be used by themselves as long as it's stated by a reliable source, which The Presence is- https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/S...racter CAN be upgraded by word of mouth alone.

No. The ongoing Heralds discussion doesn't apply to New-52, only Rebirth. The scaling for Superrman to these two characters comes from N52.

No, the Phantom Stranger survived attacks from Rebirth Supes.

 

[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.