[MCU] Scarlet Witch, put her back at Low- 2C

[Ayrandros]

Like, what are we doing?

[MCU] Scarlet Witch Downgrade - Darkhold Destruction Feat Removal

Currently, Scarlet Witch is scaled to Low 2-C for destroying an uncountably infinite number of Darkholds across the multiverse. This CRT was created to remove that feat and consequently downgrade her. Premise I think it's important to begin by acknowledging that this feat is highly unusual. Not...

vsbattles.com

We are taking threads like this just because that guy wants to talk semantics, when THE OFFICIAL BOOK OF THE MOVIE explicitly says Wanda destroyed the darkhold thanks to HER OWN power. Like...

 

[Arkansalter2]

This is not how a CRT works. You gotta drop scans summarize why she should be back at Low 2-C.

 

[Ptumri9]

My CRT wasn’t solely based on that one book statement… even though it was an important piece of evidence. Low 2-C Scarlet Witch just doesn’t work.

As Arkan pointed out, this isn’t the proper way to present an argument or format a CRT.

 

[Hixkaryana]

But I'm confused, we know the Darkhold is High 3-A via its possibility to self-destruct infinite copies of itself — there's no changing that, so how come Wanda did not use its full power when she was wielding it?

 

[Ptumri9]

But I'm confused, we know the Darkhold is High 3-A via its possibility to self-destruct infinite copies of itself — there's no changing that, so how come Wanda did not use its full power when she was wielding it?

Honestly… I’m pretty sure the Darkhold shouldn’t be H3-A or L2-C at all…

Wanda was using the Darkhold, amplified by it, and drawing on its stored chaos magic. The Darkhold’s redirected energies acted on the multiversal well of evil, the shared source of its power. All Wanda really did was sever the link to that source. That’s why we treated it as a hax feat rather than a High 3-A Darkhold showing, because otherwise anyone who used the Darkhold would scale to that and that would cause a ton of scaling issues

 

[Hixkaryana]

Honestly… I’m pretty sure the Darkhold shouldn’t be H3-A or L2-C at all…

Wanda was using the Darkhold, amplified by it, and drawing on its stored chaos magic. The Darkhold’s redirected energies acted on the multiversal well of evil, the shared source of its power. All Wanda really did was sever the link to that source. That’s why we treated it as a hax feat rather than a High 3-A Darkhold showing, because otherwise anyone who used the Darkhold would scale to that and that would cause a ton of scaling issues

I don't think we can contest the H3-A rating because it's factually impossible to discard the fact the Darkhold released an infinite amount of energy to destroy itself, but with that Wanda change, The Darkhold's AP should change as well; it shouldn't be H3-A with Magic but rather with Hax or the previously put Fire Manipulation.

 

[Ptumri9]

I don't think we can contest the H3-A rating because it's factually impossible to discard the fact the Darkhold released an infinite amount of energy to destroy itself, but with that Wanda change, The Darkhold's AP should change as well; it shouldn't be H3-A with Magic but rather with Hax or the previously put Fire Manipulation.

H3-A with energy manipulation (hax) is the most accurate one.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Aren't there an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds?

 

[Ptumri9]

Aren't there an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds?

Yes

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Also not a fan of this argument:

“This is the only direct statement we have regarding the mechanics of the feat, and it clearly says that Wanda "turned the Darkhold’s dark magic against itself." In other words, she used the Darkhold’s own power to destroy all copies of it. While the phrasing remains somewhat vague, one thing is clear: the destruction wasn’t accomplished through Wanda’s own raw power or magic. What she did, essentially, was redirect the Darkhold’s magic. Based on the surrounding context and supporting evidence, the most viable interpretation is that she triggered, somehow, a self-destruction mechanism.

Because Wanda wasn't the originator of the energy that performed the feat, it shouldn't be counted as an AP feat to begin with.”

Wanda is manipulating the energy. Even if you argue that she herself can’t produce that much energy on her own, she can affect and control that much energy when she is given access to it.

 

[Naeem0304]

Also not a fan of this argument:

“This is the only direct statement we have regarding the mechanics of the feat, and it clearly says that Wanda "turned the Darkhold’s dark magic against itself." In other words, she used the Darkhold’s own power to destroy all copies of it. While the phrasing remains somewhat vague, one thing is clear: the destruction wasn’t accomplished through Wanda’s own raw power or magic. What she did, essentially, was redirect the Darkhold’s magic. Based on the surrounding context and supporting evidence, the most viable interpretation is that she triggered, somehow, a self-destruction mechanism.

Because Wanda wasn't the originator of the energy that performed the feat, it shouldn't be counted as an AP feat to begin with.”

Wanda is manipulating the energy. Even if you argue that she herself can’t produce that much energy on her own, she can affect and control that much energy when she is given access to it.

What about the arguments in regard to her just severing the links?

Also, didn't Wanda only become the "Scarlet Witch" after reading the Darkhold? Only after that point did she get Low 1-C range.

Anyway, if she truly (by herself) had Low 2-C AP there wouldn't be a movie. She could've simply used that power to kill Strange and steal America Chavez, but that didn't happen. She was clearly struggling to keep up with Strange and Chavez. Let me ask you: how does it make sense for her to have Low 2-C AP when it meant she could've just turned Doctor Strange into dust particles? All it'd take is a second, then she could go right back to Dreamwalking and taking Chavez.

Plus, her overcoming the Darkhold's magic and using that power against itself fits the narrative of the story, as she breaks free of its influence. That's no different than Thanos' "I used the stones to destroy the stones", but we're not going to make that some Multiversal durability feat for Thanos. Similarly, it's like how Vision said in Infinity War that Wanda's connection to the Mind Stone granted her the ability to actually shatter it.

Her connection to the Darkhold, and the range that comes with its power allowed her to perform the feat. It doesn't help an official MCU book in 100 Artifacts makes it clear it was the Darkhold's magic that did the job. Low 1-C with energy manipulation simply means she binded that power to every Darkhold, and destroyed them.

The Darkhold should scale to destroying uncountably infinite copies (H3A or Low 2-C), but it's extremely limited in the usage of that power.

 

[Ptumri9]

Wanda is manipulating the energy. Even if you argue that she herself can’t produce that much energy on her own, she can affect and control that much energy when she is given access to it.

You cannot upscale a character with a feat like Wanda’s, where the character did not originate the energy but instead channeled and redirected it through an external reservoir. This is further limited by the fact that the feat can only be accomplished once, since it also causes the reservoir itself to be permanently destroyed. Lastly, the character cannot output or affect this level of energy in their normal attacks, as it is tied solely to that specific mechanic.

It simply doesn’t work.

 

[KaramcaS]

Summary, are you okay with Low 2-C Doctor Strange? (bcz of wanda)

 

[Naeem0304]

Summary, are you okay with Low 2-C Doctor Strange? (bcz of wanda)

Strange Supreme cries in Low 1-C, and is now a living universe that can solo all The Watchers;

We’ve already got a better one

 

[darkphantom9805]

Summary, are you okay with Low 2-C Doctor Strange? (bcz of wanda)

Yes because dr strange fought and clashed with the full power of the infinity stones and didn’t get instantly negged

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

You cannot upscale a character with a feat like Wanda’s, where the character did not originate the energy but instead channeled and redirected it through an external reservoir. This is further limited by the fact that the feat can only be accomplished once, since it also causes the reservoir itself to be permanently destroyed. Lastly, the character cannot output or affect this level of energy in their normal attacks, as it is tied solely to that specific mechanic.

It simply doesn’t work.

Isn't the darkhold a spell book that people use to cast spells? Are there any statements that people are channeling it's powers when they cast spells from it?

Also, the statement is, "turned the Darkhold’s dark magic against itself." Can one argue that she can turn the dark magic against other people.

From your arguments you're making it sound that there is a explicitly mentioned and shown self destruct spell when I don't remember there being so in the film or the tv shows.

 

[Ptumri9]

Isn't the darkhold a spell book that people use to cast spells? Are there any statements that people are channeling it's powers when they cast spells from it?

Also, the statement is, "turned the Darkhold’s dark magic against itself." Can one argue that she can turn the dark magic against other people.

From your arguments you're making it sound that there is a explicitly mentioned and shown self destruct spell when I don't remember there being so in the film or the tv shows.

What I said is not made up. I specifically asked staff and they confirmed it cannot be scaled.

The Darkhold is a repository of magic (a reservoir, storage, however you want to call it). It enables its practitioners to access energy from other dimensions and serves as an amplification totem. The Darkhold is not simply a “spell book.” By definition, when you use it you are channeling its power, its magic, and its energy.

There is also a self-destruct function. The Darkhold ignites in flames when damaged or interfered with, even a simple knife caused it to burst into fire.

The Darkhold’s Low 2-C AP is tied to that specific mechanic. She can’t turn the darkhold’s magic upon others.

I am sorry, but right now it is accepted, and has been accepted by many people and staff members, that this is not an applicable feat and does not fit logically in context.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

The Darkhold is a repository of magic (a reservoir, storage, however you want to call it). It enables its practitioners to access energy from other dimensions and serves as an amplification totem. The Darkhold is not simply a “spell book.” By definition, when you use it you are channeling its power, its magic, and its energy.

The Darkhold’s Low 2-C AP is tied to that specific mechanic. She can’t turn the darkhold’s magic upon others.

These two sentences are contradictory. If people are channeling it's power, then they can turn the darkholds magic upon others.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

There is also a self-destruct function. The Darkhold ignites in flames when damaged or interfered with, even a simple knife caused it to burst into fire.

So in order to activate the self-destruct function, one must do some form of damage, albeit minor damage? Wanda doing minor damage to an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds would be a low 2-C AP feat.

By your own logic, the self destruct function must be activated by attacking the book. Wanda used the book's own magic to attack it self. There is nothing stating that she can't use its power to attack someone else and we have seen her use the darkhold to do so.

 

[Ptumri9]

So in order to activate the self-destruct function, one must do some form of damage, albeit minor damage? Wanda doing minor damage to an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds would be a low 2-C AP feat.

By your own logic, the self destruct function must be activated by attacking the book. Wanda used the book's own magic to attack it self. There is nothing stating that she can't use its power to attack someone else and we have seen her use the darkhold to do so.

You are missing something. Wanda induced the self-destruction by redirecting the Darkhold’s dark magic to tamper with the “multiversal well of evil” and the “singular source of evil.” Wanda simply cut off the links to this well that connects all the Darkholds and, more than likely, powers them too. The destruction of the Darkholds is an indirect effect of what Wanda made the Darkhold do.

The best way I can currently think to explain this is to imagine unplugging the main server that powers hundreds of devices. You didn’t personally shut them down; they just depended on the server. You only severed the connection, and the shutdown is an indirect side effect. Even if we did want to consider it an AP feat, the amount of energy necessary to cut off the links is unquantifiable, as you aren’t destroying something physically. It’s more of a “metaphorical” closure of the well and severing of the links that connect the Darkholds to it.

Even if we completely ignored everything I said, and we assume what you are claiming is correct, it causes a chain of scaling issues:

• Agatha with the Darkhold gets upgraded to Low 2-C AP.
• This means that Endgame/Pre-SW Wanda has Low 2-C physical durability since she was able to survive her blasts easily.
• Doctor Strange and Christine Palmer would have Low 2-C physical durability, as they survived amplified Wanda energy blasts on multiple occasions.
• The Kamar-Taj students would have an uncountably infinite amount of energy and could thus power a shield capable of surviving uncountably infinite energy attacks. Any Kamar-Taj student should then be upgraded to Low 2-C AP and durability.
• Sinister Strange would get upgraded to Low 2-C AP for being amplified by the Darkhold, which means Base Doctor Strange would also get upgraded to Low 2-C base AP for overpowering Sinister Strange.
• Thanos was able to easily send flying, damage, and render unconscious Endgame Wanda, who now would have Low 2-C durability. This implies that Thanos has Low 2-C physical AP, which in turn means he must have Low 2-C durability.
• We can thus upscale Strange, Spider-Man, Thor, Iron Man, Captain Marvel, and about three-quarters of the MCU verse to some form of Low 2-C, either AP, durability, or both. Average MCU verse tier being Low 2-C is crazy.

If all Darkhold users have Low 2-C AP, it causes even more inconsistencies. 616 Scarlet Witch would have to equal Sinister Strange, yet 616 Strange defeated and overpowered Sinister Strange. 838-possessed Wanda is confirmed to be weaker than 616 Wanda, and both have overpowered 616 Doctor Strange on multiple occasions.

Are you still sure this works? You can’t just consider the feat itself in a vacuum while ignoring several statements, you also have to consider the context and the implications of the scaling.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

You are missing something. Wanda induced the self-destruction by redirecting the Darkhold’s dark magic to tamper with the “multiversal well of evil” and the “singular source of evil.” Wanda simply cut off the links to this well that connects all the Darkholds and, more than likely, powers them too. The destruction of the Darkholds is an indirect effect of what Wanda made the Darkhold do.

The best way I can currently think to explain this is to imagine unplugging the main server that powers hundreds of devices. You didn’t personally shut them down; they just depended on the server. You only severed the connection, and the shutdown is an indirect side effect. Even if we did want to consider it an AP feat, the amount of energy necessary to cut off the links is unquantifiable, as you aren’t destroying something physically. It’s more of a “metaphorical” closure of the well and severing of the links that connect the Darkholds to it.

I haven't heard of this well of evil. Is there a source where I can find out more about it?

Even if we completely ignored everything I said, and we assume what you are claiming is correct, it causes a chain of scaling issues:

• Agatha with the Darkhold gets upgraded to Low 2-C AP.
• This means that Endgame/Pre-SW Wanda has Low 2-C physical durability since she was able to survive her blasts easily.
• Doctor Strange and Christine Palmer would have Low 2-C physical durability, as they survived amplified Wanda energy blasts on multiple occasions.
• The Kamar-Taj students would have an uncountably infinite amount of energy and could thus power a shield capable of surviving uncountably infinite energy attacks. Any Kamar-Taj student should then be upgraded to Low 2-C AP and durability.
• Sinister Strange would get upgraded to Low 2-C AP for being amplified by the Darkhold, which means Base Doctor Strange would also get upgraded to Low 2-C base AP for overpowering Sinister Strange.
• Thanos was able to easily send flying, damage, and render unconscious Endgame Wanda, who now would have Low 2-C durability. This implies that Thanos has Low 2-C physical AP, which in turn means he must have Low 2-C durability.
• We can thus upscale Strange, Spider-Man, Thor, Iron Man, Captain Marvel, and about three-quarters of the MCU verse to some form of Low 2-C, either AP, durability, or both. Average MCU verse tier being Low 2-C is crazy.

If all Darkhold users have Low 2-C AP, it causes even more inconsistencies. 616 Scarlet Witch would have to equal Sinister Strange, yet 616 Strange defeated and overpowered Sinister Strange. 838-possessed Wanda is confirmed to be weaker than 616 Wanda, and both have overpowered 616 Doctor Strange on multiple occasions.

Are you still sure this works? You can’t just consider the feat itself in a vacuum while ignoring several statements, you also have to consider the context and the implications of the scaling.

I don't think this chain scaling issue arises. Agatha didn't affect an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds so why would she be low 2-c? Are you also saying that Agatha or anyone with the darkhold could do Wanda's feat? The narrative didn't seem to imply that in anyway.

Also hasn't wanda not been shown in the mcu since her final showing with the darkhold? Why would anyone scale to that feat? And with the nature of magic, it wouldn't be right to say that every spell casted is low 2-c.

 

[Ptumri9]

I haven't heard of this well of evil. Is there a source where I can find out more about it?




I don't think this chain scaling issue arises. Agatha didn't affect an uncountably infinite amount of darkholds so why would she be low 2-c? Are you also saying that Agatha or anyone with the darkhold could do Wanda's feat? The narrative didn't seem to imply that in anyway.

Also hasn't wanda not been shown in the mcu since her final showing with the darkhold? Why would anyone scale to that feat? And with the nature of magic, it wouldn't be right to say that every spell casted is low 2-c.

Everything I’ve been talking about has already been linked in the original CRT that downgraded her, which was accepted.

And yes, technically anyone with the Darkhold should be capable of performing Wanda’s feat.

But even then, you’re admitting that the supposed Low 2-C AP is only tied to this specific feat, and it only works under a very specific mechanic. By our standards, feats like that cannot be considered for AP, and this has already been confirmed by staff members.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Everything I’ve been talking about has already been linked in the original CRT that downgraded her, which was accepted.

And yes, technically anyone with the Darkhold should be capable of performing Wanda’s feat.

But even then, you’re admitting that the supposed Low 2-C AP is only tied to this specific feat, and it only works under a very specific mechanic. By our standards, feats like that cannot be considered for AP, and this has already been confirmed by staff members.

No my logic is that every feat done with the darkhold isn't going to be a low 2-C feat, and that characters may not be able to perform all the spells from the dark hold if they lack the power to do so. So you can't scale agatha is she doesn't have any feats to match wanda's feat.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

‘Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness’: Demystifying the Darkhold and Book of Vishanti

Understanding the mystic tomes at the center of the blockbuster.

www.marvel.com

A lot of things from this source is very interesting:

During the film, while The Scarlet Witch is distracted performing a spell from the back pages of the Darkhold, Sara, a sorcerer at the Kamar-Taj, rushes up to the Darkhold and destroys it, destroying herself in the process as well. Enraged, Wanda tortures Wong, who reveals that the destroyed Darkhold was only a mere copy. The original Darkhold had its spells etched into the walls of Mount Wundagore by the evil entity Chthon. It is at Mount Wundagore that Wanda discovers a throne for The Scarlet Witch with massive demons protecting the location — the source of the Darkhold’s powers.

Wanda didn't just destroy every copy, she destroyed the very source of the dark hold's power. This is the source of power for all uncountably infinite copies. So Wanda manipulated a multiversal power source.

She also destroyed the Book Vashanti:

“Wanda destroyed both,” continued Palmer. “There was one pure source of good, the Book of Vishanti, which lived in the space between each universe, and one pure source of evil, the Darkhold. At the end of the movie, Wanda destroyed the Darkhold in all universes.”

The book of the Vashanti is equal to the darkhold. So Wanda has two feats of the same calibur.

This makes sense because that source also states:

Upon learning Wanda’s ascension as The Scarlet Witch, Wong explains, “The Scarlet Witch is a being of unfathomable magic. She can rewrite reality as she chooses and is prophesied to either rule or annihilate the cosmos.”

Also, your "self destruction component" doesn't add up in my opinion:

None of the sources you gave say that the book self-destructed. They specifically say that Sara destroyed it. Sara isn't just a normal person, she is a wizard and a skilled one either at or near Wong's level. These wizards have enchanted items so its possible that the dagger she has could be enchanted or normal. But the fact we do know is that, the direct sources stated that she destroyed it. There is no statement that she caused it to self destruct.

Wanda doesn't activate a self destruction sequence in all the spell books. She destroys the very source of all the spell books powers. And this is a feat that wouldn't scale to anyone but her.

 

[Hixkaryana]

Yeah this all seems kinda iffy, especially because they've kept on saying in the official articles that Wanda destroyed the Darkhold. Never was a self-destruction mechanism introduced or mentioned, and denying Wanda's capabilities because of a theory appears improper.

 

[Cropfist]

I disagree, it is clearly a magical mechanic when she never indicates the energy to destroy infinite physical matter under her own power otherwise.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I disagree, it is clearly a magical mechanic when she never indicates the energy to destroy infinite physical matter under her own power otherwise.

Upon learning Wanda’s ascension as The Scarlet Witch, Wong explains, “The Scarlet Witch is a being of unfathomable magic. She can rewrite reality as she chooses and is prophesied to either rule or annihilate the cosmos.”