So since i've two agreements, is it fine to apply?
When the 48 hrs are over
New chapters. Erma busts up a chain which is stated to have at one point restricted a mountain busting dragon
As per this, that's the minimum destruction value for busting a mountain. So yeah, the rating is fine.
Worse case scenario, maybe a likely rating?
What's the difference between crush and fragment? To make an object made of solid rock be flattened from pressure (which is what crushing is) you'd need fragmentation since rock isn't ellastic in any way and it would snap under pressure and shatter.
Ok so for a proper reply now, i see no real reason for that. I am willing to link what's needed but at the same time the only that is in plural here is mountains. People usually don't say "crush mountains" and imply that it needs multiple hits. It's crushing in the first place, it is done via applying pressure until something is crushing so it would be done with pressure applying attacks rather than several hits or punches. I understand your concern, we don't give 5-B to those who bust the world/universe and such since it could be done overtime, but this isn't often the case for mountains, especially considering they were "crushed" and not just destroyed, there were several, and, as I've mentioned in the High 7-C explanation, there are already mountain toppling creatures out there introduced.
because this isn't a "destroying the world" type feat but a "crush worlds" type feat. if someone said they'd crsuh a planet, you would very clearly understand that they wouldn't punt the planets many times to crumble them but rather that they would apply pressure to them until they'd crack.
Yet, if I crush grapes to make wine, I do so in several steps.
By stomping on it several times?
Because wine making specifically has multiple steps? What kind of analogy is that? You crushed the grapes in one go already.
because there are many grapes. This dragon ain't making wine bro this dragon is crushing mountains. He doesn't need extra steps. At most it's a show of strength.
why would he? And it isn't a mountain he is crushing either, it's "mountains", plural, so do we have to assume he just goes up to a random mountain and starts stomping on it again and again like a dumbass? I think it is a far bigger stretch to interpret "capable of crushing mountains" as a dragon going up to every mountain individually and stomping on it for whatever reason again and again than it is to just say he crushed a few mountains as a show of strength in one go. When a writer writes that someone crushed a mountain they aren't gonna have the dragon stomping on it again and again in mind, that'd be weird as hell.
But there are also multiple mountains that get crushed here? Like, why would he not crush multiple mountains in multiple steps? I could easily see this being about a dragon that rampaged around and left a big area devastated.
You... are making assumptions on why the dragon was crushing those mountains, which we don't know. Nobody said it's random mountains. We don't know the dragons motivations or which means it decided to crush them by. Fundamentally, I don't see the difference to "can destroy x" statements, where we also don't assume that it definitely was done in one attack.
and? You don't crush grapes bit by bit, you take whatever tool you use, you apply pressure once and boom, their juice is out. Why are you saying that the assumption that the uncommon narrative of crushing a mountain in one hit is worse than the assumption that it's crushed in multiple hits? It specifically states crushing, him rampaging would imply he'd also hit them around. Meanwhile the word "crush" was used here, not "destroy".
Crushing can only be done via applying pressure, aka, not hitting them, not splitting them, not vaporizing or pulverizing ect. Narratively, someone crushing something with a single attack is far more likely than a specific implication that you did it in multiple attacks.
