Okay. I'm back. I read through the stories, and I think the information it provided was revealing.
I've decided that there
is a certain amount of logic in the
2-A argument that we've been hearing. I see what you three have been getting at.
Lines like these don't really mean much on their own, but when paired with
lines like these , they start to make a little more sense. When piecing all the information together, it looks like you could interpret this as saying that the
Necrosword (which is indisputably
2-A at its peak) is a difficult weapon to utilize in its fullest potential. Characters like
Ego,
Galactus,
Loki, etc are more adept at using the
Necrosword because they are used to manipulating vast amounts of energy, while
Gorr experienced a more gradual growth in strength because he was just a regular guy before finding the
Necrosword. He only became good at using it after bonding to it for thousands of years. That all makes sense. But unfortunately for us, it does still leave the answer somewhat undefined. Either everybody is using the
Necrosword at its full potential (except for
Gorr when he was first getting used to it) or various people are just using various portions of its potential depending on the host. The answer is unclear. In the case of the former,
Old King Thor would definitely be
2-A for matching
Gorr and
Loki, but in the case of the latter,
Old King Thor would only sit at
2-C by defaulting to his more regular feats. That means that as long as this ambiguity exists, we
cannot scale people using the
Necrosword. It cannot be used as a way of
upgrading people, and it cannot be used as a way of
downgrading people until we get more information on it. Instead, we need to use other feats to determine
Old King Thor's full power. The problem?
His only other two semi-quantifiable feats are putting up a fight against moderately fed
Galactus and putting up a fight against
Phoenix Force Wolverine. Two feats that are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum. One is
2-C while the other is
2-A. So which one do we treat as the outlier?
I propose the following solution: Seeing as
Odi is pretty consistently treated as a
2-C character and
Old King Thor is indisputably more powerful than him but not incomparable, we should treat his lineage as a third feat, tipping the scales in favor of
2-C until such a time as this relatively new
King Thor series gives us one or two solid
2-A feats. The results would look something like this:
Old King Thor: 2-C (Superior to Odin, held the divine power of Asgard for much longer than his father, put up a good fight against a moderately fed Galactus)
Gorr, The God Butcher: At Least 2-C (Signficantly superior to the likes of Old King Thor and comparable gods)
Old King Thor w/ the Necrosword: At Least 2-C (Much stronger than before, Significantly superior to a moderately fed Galactus)
And we add a note on the
Necrosword's page telling people that its full potential is difficult to tap into and its amp can vary depending on the host.
Then we keep an eye on the current
King Thor run, and if any more
2-A feats come up, we can consider revisiting this question and revising it again. Does that sound good?
