Record of Ragnarok: Whatever the hell happened to this verse

[Regidian]

His character loves fighting, pain, is masochistic, and sadistic.

No, not really.

You're accusing me of wank? I could claim you're just trying to downplay Zeus and Adam with backwards and inconsistent logic.

You're using multiple fallacious arguments, there's no reason for you to claim wank other than your bias against it.

No reason except you use a feat that have like 10k way of being interpreted? With thing we doesn't know? Prove me that he can live in the void before the universe to even be able to tank the big bang, prove me that he was not in heaven except just by tell he love fighting when well how he will even had fight the big bang? Like i don't even know that using as argument that a guy love fight is enough to prove that he have do a thing that like infinitely beyond everything show in the verse for now without legit proof

And using no is not an argument my logic is still better than someone who thing that a guy that has thrill because of an big bang was because he took the big bang directly, when we have no proof except assumption (we don't know if they can even live outside an universe except if you tell that he have tank the atk from heaven but it's like tell that all the people that lived at that time have tanked it)


But i stop it's not like you will change your mind because of that

 

[Axxtentacle]

You're using burden of proof fallacies, making claims then telling me to prove them wrong. I've given my arguments against all of these points already, do you want me to point out every little fallacy you've used?

You're not changing my mind because you're not making good points, and you're using fallacies.

 

[Regidian]

You're using burden of proof fallacies, making claims then telling me to prove them wrong. I've given my arguments against all of these points already, do you want me to point out every little fallacy you've used?

You're not changing my mind because you're not making good points, and you're using fallacies.

Your only point is litteraly "he love fight and he is maso" so well not real argument for me, when you still don't have show how he will even be able to do this

 

[Axxtentacle]

Yes, making the assumption of him being there for the big bang more logical, and he literally compares the fight to the Big Bang.

That's not my only point, nice strawman fallacy.

Why do I need to show you how he would tank the big bang?? That makes literally no sense. If he does it, he does it. It doesn't matter how.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

Looking back over the Shiva stuff, if we are taking the “sustains the Ganges” as a literal feat, will be doing the same with Shiva’s introduction as Bhairava of the Cosmos (Bhairava translating to “he who creates, sustains and destroys”)?

Edit: Speaking of sustaining feats, doesn’t the recent thread on them make the Ganges null since we now need a bunch of proof that it will be immediately destroyed without X sustaining it?

@Axxtentacle Any thoughts on this?^

 

[Regidian]

Yes, making the assumption of him being there for the big bang more logical, and he literally compares the fight to the Big Bang.

That's not my only point, nice strawman fallacy.

Why do I need to show you how he would tank the big bang?? That makes literally no sense. If he does it, he does it. It doesn't matter how.

He compare the thrill he had felling in the fight at the thrill he had feeling from the big bang si yeah for me scaling them just based if that, it's a pure non-sense.

 

[Axxtentacle]

He compare the thrill he had felling in the fight at the thrill he had feeling from the big bang si yeah for me scaling them just based if that, it's a pure non-sense.

It's a supporting argument. Why would he compare the thrill of a fight to seeing the Big Bang if it's just a cool thing to see, which is your argument? That's complete nonsense.

@Axxtentacle Any thoughts on this?^

I'm not sure about the whole sustaining thing, tbh. It's iffy in general. My only comment would be that his base could scale maybe, a tier or so below his Tandava Karma if we don't put his base at country level for this sustaining feat? I'm not really sure on this though.

 

[Regidian]

It's a supporting argument. Why would he compare the thrill of a fight to seeing the Big Bang if it's just a cool thing to see, which is your argument? That's complete nonsense.


I'm not sure about the whole sustaining thing, tbh. It's iffy in general. My only comment would be that his base could scale maybe, a tier or so below his Tandava Karma if we don't put his base at country level for this sustaining feat? I'm not really sure on this though.

Supporting arguments of what?

 

[Axxtentacle]

Supporting arguments of what?

That he tanked the Big Bang, or else he wouldn't compare the fight and the Big Bang.

 

[Regidian]

That he tanked the Big Bang, or else he wouldn't compare the fight and the Big Bang.

That not what called a supporting arguments, it's your main argument bruh

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Surviving in the Big Bang isn't a Low 2-C feat lmao.

It's like Tier 6 for a guy as small as Zeus. You can't prove he was in the epicenter.

Edit: Specially if you wanna argue that Zeus is older than the universe, then time already existed before the Big Bang because Chronos is even older than Zeus.

 

[Axxtentacle]

That not what called a supporting arguments, it's your main argument bruh

No, it supports my point that he tanked the big bang. Things like him being masochistic, comparing the fight to the big bang, and etc are just supporting arguments.

You still have done nothing but repeat the same fallacious points, and pretty blatantly shown your bias against it. I believe this portion of the discussion is finished.

Anyway, is that all that was left to discuss?

 

[Axxtentacle]

Surviving in the Big Bang isn't a Low 2-C feat lmao.

It's like Tier 6 for a guy as small as Zeus. You can't prove he was in the epicenter.

That's why I asked if we should change it to 3-A, and asked to get other knowledgeable members on the verse to give opinions.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Also, Shiva's profile is wanked he should only be Planet level in his final form.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

I was more so referring to him being “the one who creates and destroys” parts since those would definitely scale.

The 6-B sustaining of the Ganges I feel won’t hold up since we now need evidence that shows the river’s existence will be destroyed the moment (or very close to it) the god stops sustaining it. Without said feat, aren’t we on course for basically everyone dropping back to Tier 7 (TK Shiva obviously staying at Tier 5)?

 

[Regidian]

No, it supports my point that he tanked the big bang. Things like him being masochistic, comparing the fight to the big bang, and etc are just supporting arguments.

You still have done nothing but repeat the same fallacious points, and pretty blatantly shown your bias against it. I believe this portion of the discussion is finished.

Anyway, is that all that was left to discuss?

And you repeat the same assumption thing that are not proved. I don't recall that you can up a profile with just assumption that can't be proved.

 

[Axxtentacle]

I was more so referring to him being “the one who creates and destroys” parts since those would definitely scale.

The 6-B sustaining of the Ganges I feel won’t hold up since we now need evidence that shows the river’s existence will be destroyed the moment (or very close to it) the god stops sustaining it. Without said feat, aren’t we on course for basically everyone dropping back to Tier 7 (TK Shiva obviously staying at Tier 5)?

No idea, tbh.

 

[Axxtentacle]

And you repeat the same assumption thing that are not proved. I don't recall that you can up a profile with just assumption that can't be proved.

You can't prove your assumption either, but mine makes more sense with context, the character, and the direct statement.

Also, Shiva's profile is wanked he should only be Planet level in his final form.

I said "possibly" because the technique is said to destroy the universe in actual mythology, and the gods are based on their mythologies, and the narrator says Shiva is going to destroy "the world", which is vague. I'm not saying 100% he should be 3-A, i'm arguing that it's not unreasonable to give a possibly 3-A rating.

 

[Regidian]

I said "possibly" because the technique is said to destroy the universe in actual mythology, and the gods are based on their mythologies, and the narrator says Shiva is going to destroy "the world", which is vague. I'm not saying 100% he should be 3-A, i'm arguing that it's not unreasonable to give a possibly 3-A rating.

For this i remember staff telling that we can't use real mythology feat for fiction even if their are based of.

Don't know if this still like that.

 

[Axxtentacle]

All I remember is that you can't use mythology to give characters completely unwarranted tiers, but this has a bit of evidence, and could definitely be interpreted that way, given the vagueness of the statement from the narrator.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

The narrator states that Shiva would destroy the world and then recreate it from the ashes of his body. Shiva was previously titled as the creator and destroyer of the cosmos. Seeing as cosmos means universe, so long as the kanji for world can mean universe, it doesn’t make sense to not scale him to that level with TK.

 

[Axxtentacle]

Yeah, that's why I believe "At least 5-B, possibly 3-A" is completely reasonable.

For his base form, I don't really know where to scale him.

 

[Regidian]

The narrator states that Shiva would destroy the world and then recreate it from the ashes of his body. Shiva was previously titled as the creator and destroyer of the cosmos. Seeing as cosmos means universe, so long as the kanji for world can mean universe, it doesn’t make sense to not scale him to that level with TK.

For that if the universe was created by the big bang how could he have created it for the title part

 

[Axxtentacle]

I mean, it wouldn't really matter if he caused the creation of this universe, as multiple characters and gods get the title of "Creator", especially in the mythology he's from.

Also, Shiva would be able to rebuild the universe anyway, since he'd re-create it from the ashes of his body.

 

[Regidian]

I mean, it wouldn't really matter if he caused the creation of this universe, as multiple characters and gods get the title of "Creator", especially in the mythology he's from.

Also, Shiva would be able to rebuild the universe anyway, since he'd re-create it from the ashes of his body.

The narrator say would and talk about the world, so no really universe not because the kanji is interchangeable that it's justify the universe thing, and since the title is just a title...

 

[Regidian]

And for the Big bang thing, i just saw that he had no rapport with the adam fight, he talked about the show of ragnarock. So he just compared the thrill of the big bang to the thrill of the ragnarock.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

Hermes has also seen this form before (dude knows everything in the verse lol) ergo Shiva would have destroyed/created ”the world” before (which can refer to a universe) and the Titanomachy apparently caused the destruction of a universe.

You can’t just say a title is just a title. If there are two interpretations and one of them has more support, we go with that interpretation. Seeing as another event involving a bunch of weaker gods (since people don’t want to attribute it to Zeus) have caused the destruction of a universe, this is hardly improbable considering Shiva is among the 13 strongest gods and is called the destroyer and creator of the universe.

 

[Regidian]

Hermes has also seen this form before (dude knows everything in the verse lol) ergo Shiva would have destroyed/created ”the world” before (which can refer to a universe) and the Titanomachy apparently caused the destruction of a universe.

You can’t just say a title is just a title. If there are two interpretations and one of them has more support, we go with that interpretation. Seeing as another event involving a bunch of weaker gods (since people don’t want to attribute it to Zeus) have caused the destruction of a universe, this is hardly improbable considering Shiva is among the 13 strongest gods and is called the destroyer and creator of the universe.

Where do even the titanomachy had a thkng with a destruction of an universe

The title is just a title when he litteraly just contradict a thing we know (creation of the universe made by the big bang) and like Axx tell many god have the creation title.

Where the another event that involved weaker god had tell to destroy an universe or even tell to happen???

 

[Regidian]

I really stop since now it seem talk about thing that never ever be mentionned lol and i really need to sleep, i will just see if staff accept this and if they accept it seem that i have a big amount of verse i can easily up.

 

[Nilverse]

I can agree with 5-B Shiva in his final form, but the evidence for 3-A seem a bit lacking, it basically came from a multiple interpretation statements without proper feat, i don't think i can agree with a huge upgrade like that just with the evidence in this thread.

 

[Axxtentacle]

I mean, it's just a different interpretation of the same statement, which is why I believe a "possibly" is ok.

 

[RoyGundam]

The absolute lack of any feats higher than Tier 7 is still a sticking point. IMO anything above Tier 7 should be qualified with possibly

 

[Antvasima]

Surviving in the Big Bang isn't a Low 2-C feat lmao.

It's like Tier 6 for a guy as small as Zeus. You can't prove he was in the epicenter.

Edit: Specially if you wanna argue that Zeus is older than the universe, then time already existed before the Big Bang because Chronos is even older than Zeus.

This makes sense to me. "5-B, possibly higher" seems enough, given that we do not know how close Zeus was to the epicentre of the big bang.

 

[Antvasima]

Do you suggest we change the profiles to possibly 3-A? If so, we might want to get other members who are knowledgeable on the verse to give their opinions, as that was a pretty big deal iirc.

I was never involved in that discussion, I just remember it being a big discussion.

Which members should I ask to come here?

 

[Axxtentacle]

I'll look at the supporting members of the verse, as I'm not sure who all to call. A few I can think of off the top of my head are Ion, Creaturemaster, Overlord, and Infiniteday.

 

[Axxtentacle]

Antoniofer, Oblivion, SomebodyData are all supporters of the verse. There's Jvando, but they seem to be inactive.

 

[Axxtentacle]

I have a quick question.

Would Zeus having type 2 immortality be justified? He did survive having his neck completely broken after all, and fought for roughly 6 minutes after this happened.

 

[InfiniteDay]

Which members should I ask to come here?

3-A seems a bit iffy, can I have some scans?

 

[Axxtentacle]

3-A seems a bit iffy, can I have some scans?

It was just based on mythology stuff, Tandava Karma in the mythology being stated to destroy the universe, them being heavily based on the mythology, etc.

 

[InfiniteDay]

It was just based on mythology stuff, Tandava Karma in the mythology being stated to destroy the universe, them being heavily based on the mythology, etc.

No scans, didn't happen. Just because a 3-A feat can happen in mythology doesn't mean something based off it will have that feat happening.