Revising Our Standards for "Varies Tier"

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Hey all. Been a while since I've done this or made any thread in general as I've been extremely busy IRL as of recently because of work, school, blah blah blah responsibilities. So I haven't been very active for one reason or another. Something however came up to me that I wanted to make a thread for, and because it's probably pretty important as part of the tiering standards, it's being made in the staff forum. You all can decide whether "Staff only" or not should apply here, but here we go.

Now, as the title gives away, this thread concerns our rules / standards, for characters who receive a "Varies" rating from X tier to Y tier. The concept of varies itself is totally fine with me, so this thread isn't to remove it. However, revising how it's applied or what actually qualifies for it is more of what's on the table, as I was presented with things that currently apply for a varies rating that doesn't make sense to me, and hence, here we are.

Variable Category​

According to this page, here's our definition for the category on the variable tier:

These are characters, weapons, etcetera, whose power levels are heavily inconsistent and/or subject to change. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member.

Obviously, "varies" applies in a decently big number of different ways that are very case by case dependent, like races or species as already pointed out, and thats fine. But one such method that we seem to accept as a varies tier for characters is for characters that, say, restrain their levels of power and actively weaken themselves down. Like for example, if they create avatars of themselves and those avatars are as weak or as strong as the true being desires them to be for whatever particular matter. Oblivion is one such example of this.

Varies up to Low Outerverse level (Its manifestations and avatars can be as weak as Deathurge - who is just a squirrel, or as powerful as the Chaos King)

This is where the issue starts to come up.

While the basic concept of making yourself, or some avatar, as weak or as strong as you want can seem like varies....how exactly is this really any different from a character just simply holding their own power back on purpose because of [insert here] reasoning? Much less meaning their power can change on a whim or fluctuate? I know varies doesnt apply to only one thing or another, so things like races, species or transformations that have their own power sets are something I won't yet touch on this. But when it comes to the matter of individual characters, I don't understand how its any different from someone not going at full power, or how holding back from using your real power means your power naturally changes from one tier or another on a dime (the latter I'll explain more below).

Any number of characters in a certain tier are able to hold back their power, or lower their strength, on purpose for a particular reason. Goku for instance can most certainly walk up to an opponent he wants to take it easy on and not use Low 2-C levels of strength against them. But would this mean he gets a varies tier between that and his real power? Of course not. And the list of what character to use as an example after him goes on, and on, and on, and on. No character should be getting a varies rating just for holding themselves back, which is something that over 97% of our sites characters would be in the realm of qualifying for based on this logic. Not without an actual real differentiation at the very least, and if there is one, I'd like for it to be explained please.

To comment on the matter of avatars specifically when comparing their situation to characters holding themselves back, as I was told this is something that should be different from one another, I don't even see what difference there is between these 2 things other than the methods between them being different. Using Goku again, take him and lower his KI / Power level down to whatever extent he wants to fight at when facing someone he wants to go easy on. Then take Oblivion, or any character that is capable of forming Avatars to fight with, and have them set that avatars power to [insert here] level to fight at. Other than the clear difference being Goku is fighting as himself and is directly setting the level of his power, and the avatar making character making a whole avatar that fights at the level of power the true being desires them to be at, what real difference is there between these 2 cases other than one case being glossed over with a fancy method of avatar creation? Both are still weakening themselves on purpose, purposely choosing to use less power than what they can operate at. And at that point, it begs the question on whether this should legitimately count as a varying tier and not just someone holding back in a particular instance separate from the power they normally use.

Which brings us to the point earlier about characters who's power, say, fluctuate or change levels on a dime. Or to add to this if we want, characters who's power under certain circumstances are fixed and are unchangeable in certain ways. These would be perfectly acceptable forms of varying tiers since the tiers would actually vary and are naturally set to be at different tiers.

A perfect example of a varies tier is Ditto from Pokemon. Ditto's tier isn't set at one tier, but several different tiers. His tier is completely dependent on the pokemon he turns into. He can become anything from a Magikarp and be 9-A, a Togepi and be 8-C, or a Pikachu and be High 7-A. And what he can't do is, say, become a Pikachu but take the 8-C level of power from Togepi and use it to be a 8-C Pikachu. Whatever Pokemon he becomes, he becomes their tier and STAYS at that tier until he becomes a different pokemon.

Another example that can be used for this is, say, Ichigo Kurosaki from Bleach. There was a point in Bleach where Ichigo's tier of power would fluctuate and become either fodder or very powerful at its highest and lowest. During his first battle against Ulquiorra and Yammy, Ichigo's power fluctuated wildly due to being incapable of controlling his inner hollow inside of him. And as Ulquiorra put it, Ichigo was no stronger than Chad or Orihime at his lowest, going as far as to say the lowest level of his spiritual pressure is "garbage". But when his spiritual pressure is at its highest, it even surpasses Ulquiorras. This isn't the best example for this since this happened only briefly for Ichigo in the series, and has long stopped being a thing once getting Hollowification, but the general message is what is supposed to be sent from this. His power became weak or strong on a dime against his control.

Now, we can play devils advocate and say that setting your own level of power to whatever extent you want lower than your real power can be considered a "varies" rating. Even if we can consider this a varies tier, and give it to the characters in question, what exactly is the point in doing this for a rating? Characters weakening themselves down happen only for very specific scenarios that are quite rare in the series they originate from, where 98% of the time, they are in battles or confrontations that they normally take seriously. Coming across an opponent you want to take it easy on isn't exactly an everyday thing, and our character pages are supposed to document the normal capabilities of the characters. If im normally a 5-B, can use 5-B power whenever I want to, and only very rarely use less than 5-B power against people I don't want to fight seriously against, why would I say I often vary my strength to something lower than 5-B to precisely as 5-B? And for what purpose?

And with that, there you have it. Others here can probably explain this better than me or mention better examples, so I'll leave it up to anyone who wants to take part in this, but this particular part of what we consider a varies tier is something that doesn't sit right with me right now and I wanted to bring this up. To reiterate, the concept of a varying tier is perfectly okay. My aim with this thread is have us look over what should and what shouldn't qualify for a varies tier.

 

[Eficiente]

To note, the tiering system doesn't have Varies there explained, meaning that one can read it and not know it as an option to add in a profile. So we should add it later.

It would be more clear if you add this to its description's wording "These are characters, weapons, abilities, etcetera, whose power levels are heavily inconsistent and/or subject to change. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member."

Something like Ditto "Varies" but not Ditto itself, its ability to transform is what varies and not by its own willl, with Ditto itself having durability, speed and even AP. When the transform is done it stays like that, yes, but that doesn't remove the fact that the transform itself varied and that's what one faces when going up against Ditto.

Characters who create avatars may make them vary by what may be their own will, and yes you can technically say it's like someone holding back their power, but that's too much of a technicality, if the being who made the avatars is never going to make the weaker ones stronger or the stronger ones weaker then it's more practical to say they vary. Even if the being who made the avatars can change them on a whim it still doesn't change how they were created unevenly and so it's still more practical to say they vary, if we're covering them in 1 key rather than some separately.

In those cases the targets of the "Varies" were Transformation and Avatar Creation, any other power may get a Varies if deemed practical or more convenient to portray the character.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Something like Ditto "Varies" but not Ditto itself, its ability to transform is what varies and not by its own willl, with Ditto itself having durability, speed and even AP. When the transform is done it stays like that, yes, but that doesn't remove the fact that the transform itself varied and that's what one faces when going up against Ditto.

I think you missed the point on why I brought Ditto up as an example. Ditto was to point out a case where varies is perfectly applicable. Ditto and other similar characterbeing a varies is fine.

Characters who create avatars may make them vary by what may be their own will, and yes you can technically say it's like someone holding back their power, but that's too much of a technicality, if the being who made the avatars is never going to make the weaker ones stronger or the stronger ones weaker then it's more practical to say they vary.

Can I ask how this would be a technicality? Because other than a normal character weakening themselves and a character forming a weaker avatar to be the one weakened, both still fall under the same principle as lowering one’s power without a real clear difference.

That, and the making of their avatars wouldn’t need to have the weaker one be stronger or the stronger one be weaker since they’re supposed to be able to make freely made avatars at a whim at any desired power set. Unless I missed the point of what you were saying here.

Even if the being who made the avatars can change them on a whim it still doesn't change how they were created unevenly and so it's still more practical to say they vary, if we're covering them in 1 key rather than some separately.

But, is it really uneven if the tier they can be normally at can be re-aquires at any given moment?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I recall someone else made a thread for this a long time ago, but to put it short. It normally should apply to characters who actually have canon information for how their powers fluctuate; and characters simply being notoriously infamous for being inconsistent should not qualify for a variable tier.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I recall someone else made a thread for this a long time ago, but to put it short. It normally should apply to characters who actually have canon information for how their powers fluctuate; and characters simply being notoriously infamous for being inconsistent should not qualify for a variable tier.

I agree with all of this. Actual canon details from within the series that confirms there's a change or fluctuation of their powers should be what lets them apply for varies.

And inconsistent characters having it really doesn't seem like anything more than a quick excuse to keep the tiering people accuse them of being too inconsistent for in the first place (if you ask me).

 

[Antvasima]

Medeus makes sense to me.

 

[Eficiente]

And how do you deal with characters notoriously infamous for being inconsistent without them having a variable tier? Lobo from DC for example varies in power and at one point they justified this in-canon with a reason that would solidly give him a variable tier by that rule, except nothing really changed with that justification, it didn't changed anything people who know the character doesn't already know about Lobo, one would think he should have a variable tier since before that justification.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

And how do you deal with characters notoriously infamous for being inconsistent without them having a variable tier? Lobo from DC for example varies in power and at one point they justified this in-canon with a reason that would solidly give him a variable tier by that rule, except nothing really changed with that justification, it didn't changed anything people who know the character doesn't already know about Lobo, one would think he should have a variable tier since before that justification.

DarkDragon sorta answered this already. If a character has an in canon reason or explanation of their power not always being constant, then they having a varied tier makes sense even if inconsistent.

I think the point more or less is that being inconsistent by itself shouldn’t justify a varies rating.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Characters who have no canon reason for why they're so inconsistent are more so case by case; it's the existence of Outliers, PIS, CIS, Game Mechanics, ect are the next thing to tackle if there's no canon reason such as "The angrier they get, the stronger they get" or "Power comes from having friendship that telepathically enhances them astronomically" and what not. But if it's a cartoon character where some episodes portray them as typical blue collar workers one day, but the dominant Superhero the next and no statement about them getting stronger or weaker other than just the writers having no consistency. We usually just go off mid ends; which is going off feats that have a healthy balance between impressive and frequency. But even then, it's still more of a case by case and different verses should be judged separately.

 

[Eficiente]

If by "characters simply being notoriously infamous for being inconsistent should not qualify for a variable tier." you meant cases of Outliers, PIS, CIS, Game Mechanics, ect then sure, but if cartoon characters and cases like that Lobo example I gave too shouldn't have a variable tier then that's not alright.

 

[Confluctor]

The thing with Oblivion is, he can control how much power to give his avatars. On top of that, it can go up and down in various ways. Like malestrom was granted extra power by Oblivion to fight infinity powered Quasar but that power was later removed from him or reduced off-panel.

These are characters, weapons, etcetera, whose power levels are heavily inconsistent and/or subject to change. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member.

Anyway, this should be changed to this;

These are characters, weapons, etcetera, whose power levels are subject to change/fluctuations due to its story/lore. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member.

Inconsistent part should be removed

 

[Antvasima]

Medeus makes sense to me.

Never mind. I am not certain anymore.

@AKM sama @Promestein @DontTalkDT

What do you think?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Didn't Eficiente say Lobo is an example where he did have a canon explanation for why he varies? I am not certain what that explanation is, but the same thing could be said for all of Marvel and DC, but we don't go all out with the variables and say things like "Varies between Tier 9 and tier 1" to every single Avenger or Justice League Herald.

Most of them are rated by relatively mid points such as varies between Tier 5 and Tier 4. Which Tier 9 to Tier 8 showings far outnumber those, but Tier 5 and 4 are still quite numerous combined with them having their own destruction feats and/or their piers having their own destruction feats. Where as most alleged Tier 2 and Tier 1 "feats" either aren't actually tier 2 to tier 1 feats as opposed to them fighting avatars of said upper dimensional beings, briefly absorbing some substance that contains some degree of essence but not actually combat applicable power, required heavy amounts of outside help and/or prep time to actually perform, comes from taking details out (Such as thinking it's a universe when it's just a small pocket dimension), involves some kind of chain reactions, or comes from simply unreliable hyperboles and metaphors. But in Lobo's case, a lot of his lower end showings are often due to him liking to toy with his opponents. And while he has been shown anti-feats in durability such as being vulnerable to ordinary bullets, that is also lazy writing that extends to other characters like Wonder Woman and Hulk.

I do not know what other details indicate Lobo's lower tiers, but he also has his own Tier 4 feat via pulling a star with a chain. And while I can't seem to find it; it saw the image on Screwattack Forums a long time ago which has since been nuked. But I saw comic page where Lobo decapitated both of Superman's arms via ripping them off with his hands. Solomon Grundy is also similar to Hulk in which his power level is often dependent on how angry he is. And I heard something about Doomsday also has a variable tier because when he's killed and resurrected, it sometimes takes time for him to fully regenerate; though he is even getting stronger than his previous peak once he does.

 

[Antvasima]

We actually have set "holding back"/standard tier and high performance/"not holding back" tiers to many of our Marvel characters, since the scaling chains would turn impossible to manage otherwise, so I don't mind the practice when it is genuinely necessary and cannot be avoided without resulting serious misleading information.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yeah, the "Holding back" aspect is a different can of worms from the character's "Main power level being actually variable". Since the former is just the character is more than capable of using much higher levels of character but doesn't want and/or need to as opposed to the latter just having restraints that they simply cannot at the moment.

But my other point still stands, characters who have lore based definitions for why they fluctuate aren't to be mixed up with characters who simply "Aren't portrayed as X tier" in every game entry/episode they make appearances in simply because the writers aren't paying attention how impressive some of these feats are while exaggerating how dangerous simple hazards such as sharp weapons, freefalls, or climate changes that should otherwise be harmless to most superhuman characters.

 

[Antvasima]

That is a good point, although in the case of Marvel Comics, the characters are mainly just so insanely inconsistent that we had to try to take it into account to a degree. That several of them canonically "hold back" is not really a good narrative justification by the writers for going down from 3-C to High 6-C, or lower.

 

[Antoniofer]

Personally, I would leave the "Variable"/"Varies" rating when the Stat of the character depends of external factors (i.e. The opponent's stats, environment, etc.), and no upper limit is known (otherwise, one use "Up to" or "At most").

It can also works when the Stat varies depending if the ability/weapon/artifact used, although in these cases one rather break down the elements individually. This also applies to species.

I woul not use "Variable"/"Varies" if the character simply hold himself, as holding down is not a key that should be separated, nor when the character's feats are simply inconsistent (as is the case with Marvel/DC)

 

[Eficiente]

Didn't Eficiente say Lobo is an example where he did have a canon explanation for why he varies? I am not certain what that explanation is, but the same thing could be said for all of Marvel and DC, but we don't go all out with the variables and say things like "Varies between Tier 9 and tier 1" to every single Avenger or Justice League Herald.

I do not know what other details indicate Lobo's lower tiers, but he also has his own Tier 4 feat via pulling a star with a chain. And while I can't seem to find it; it saw the image on Screwattack Forums a long time ago which has since been nuked. But I saw comic page where Lobo decapitated both of Superman's arms via ripping them off with his hands.

It's not the same as Outliers, PIS and CIS, which was already clear we're not talking about, the point I wanted to make with Lobo is that his canon explanation (This and this, idk the source) is pretty redundant, it gives lore and makes it that there is a reason in canon for his inconsistency, but why does it matter? Why would it let to a profile having a "Varies from something to something" but lacking that explanation prevents that? It doesn't make any sense, we already knew he's inconsistent and can be at different power levels while he will not remain consistent in the future. If we have it as a rule that a Varies can't go for inconsistencies then that's looking things in black and white way, inconsistency can be used as a way to vary the power characters have, no explanation is needed to properly have things be that way, we just apparently had some cases where inconsistency didn't give a Varies and went off to say that all inconsistency shouldn't too.

Use a "Up to" or "At most" for inconsistent characters w/ no explanation to it is not wrong, since is pretty much the same, but is too oddly specific as it is pretty much the same.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Well yes, Lobo could qualify as a variable tier since he actually has a lore based description in that case, but not every character has that. Plenty of character have in game portrayals of people being stopped by simple barriers despite their final bosses basically putting them at god tier level. The At least blank, likely/possibly blank is not entirely the same thing as a variable tier. It just means at least as strong as someone or something that was the former tier but the likely/possibly could refer to some likelihoods of being capable of much more and/or being seemingly almost as strong as someone a lot stronger than the former scaling.

 

[Eficiente]

I just said we're not talking about things like Game Mechanics and that we might looking things in black and white way. The point was how arbitrary it was for a character such as Lobo to only be allowed a variable tier based on that description since, if you remove it, nothing really changes about the character, and so one would imagine the way a profile should be made would be structured the same way. Yes other characters don't recognize in-canon that they vary in power, but if they do so anyway then why do we need it to be stated for we to acknowledge it? That's like saying that we need statements to recognize any number of things, it's a weird standard to have.

I get it, inconsistency alone doesn't = a variable tier, but I'm clearly not talking about your average, regular inconsistency on characters, Outliers, PIS, CIS, Game Mechanics, etc., but the most wild, easily perceivable cases out there.

I do know At least something, likely/possibly something should not be used for variable or too inconsistent characters, but "Up to" or "At most" is not the same as that peak is not always there, and so anyone harming them at a random time wouldn't scale to that peak.

 

[Nierre]

I'd like to see the end result of this thread so BUMP.

To note, the tiering system doesn't have Varies there explained, meaning that one can read it and not know it as an option to add in a profile. So we should add it later.

It would be more clear if you add this to its description's wording "These are characters, weapons, abilities, etcetera, whose power levels are heavily inconsistent and/or subject to change. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member."

Also if we could add this to the tiering system that would be great too..

"These are characters, weapons, etcetera, whose power levels are subject to change/fluctuations due to its story/lore. As well as for profiles of races/species whose power levels vary depending on the member." - @Confluctor

Confluctor's version looks fine to me

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Damage3245 @Confluctor @Eficiente

What do you think that we should do here?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm not sure what else needs to be said other than what has already been said. But I already agree that true variable tiers should mostly apply to characters who actually have in depth lore for their powers fluctuating. Such as the Hulk having "Angrier he gets the stronger he gets" or characters like Pegasus Seiya having power coming from telepathic power of friendship. But most cartoon characters who are just typical blue collars or puzzle solvers one moment and dominant superheroes going toe to toe with various demi-gods should just have other things to take notes. We might often times either go off mid end portrayals, or in more inconsistent cases we have the At least low end portrayals, possibly high-end portrayals.

Though not sure how to organize the rule on the page.

 

[Confluctor]

Yes, we need remove the inconsistent thing and the character must have a proper in canon reason for their varied power levels. I am also not opposed to absorption characters having a varied tier. Like depending on how much a character abosrbs, their power levels changes with it - not like superman, but moreso like, Parasite.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Characters who are normally weaker, but can become top tier via energy absorption powers would qualify as another canon/lore detail to get variable yes.

 

[Antvasima]

So what do our standards currently say, and do they need to be changed in order to fit with what Medeus said above?

 

[Nierre]

I'm not sure what else needs to be said other than what has already been said. But I already agree that true variable tiers should mostly apply to characters who actually have in depth lore for their powers fluctuating. Such as the Hulk having "Angrier he gets the stronger he gets" or characters like Pegasus Seiya having power coming from telepathic power of friendship. But most cartoon characters who are just typical blue collars or puzzle solvers one moment and dominant superheroes going toe to toe with various demi-gods should just have other things to take notes. We might often times either go off mid end portrayals, or in more inconsistent cases we have the At least low end portrayals, possibly high-end portrayals.

Though not sure how to organize the rule on the page.

Yes, we need remove the inconsistent thing and the character must have a proper in canon reason for their varied power levels. I am also not opposed to absorption characters having a varied tier. Like depending on how much a character abosrbs, their power levels changes with it - not like superman, but moreso like, Parasite.

Judar from Magi has a set "level of power" but his power tends to fluctuate depending on how much Black Rukh (aka despair, sadness, anger or hopelessness) is in the area that he's in. Would that be grounds to give him a Varies tier? (Example: At least Low 6-B, Varies (His power fluctuates depending on how much Black Rukh is in the environment))

 

[The_Impress]

So what do our standards currently say, and do they need to be changed in order to fit with what Medeus said above?

To bump this if it's still not applied, yes I disagree with the "inconsistency" clause, although there is an issue with what DDM says, which is with respect to cartoon characters.

How cartoon characters, traditional ones anyways, work is that each story unless stated otherwise is a singular canon, so essentially a cartoon character has a key for every episode. This is how there are stories that resolve in, for example of Tom and Jerry, Tom dying in many episodes and coming back the same, or some episodes randomly being set in different periods of time like the French Revolution, or some having certain events that cannot really be reconciled like Tom redeeming himself fully. This isn't an A->B->C narrative, A, B and C don't limit each other, there can be rare instances of C->D but the core point is we cannot say for certain the chain of episodes is always B->C->D, where B has to be an existent episode within the series.

I think Varies is valid to use in THIS case, where it's justified by narrative limitations and serves as an alternative to excessive keying (precedent regarding this is admittedly in discussion within the Mario thread)

Also another fix I feel should be, Toon Force should be considered as a valid mechanic to grant a Varies tier as well, as many times a character's capability can be exceptionally higher or lower if it FITS the gag. To limit exploitation we can say it applies only to characters that show consistent fluctuations for humorous purposes.

 

[Antvasima]

To bump this if it's still not applied, yes I disagree with the "inconsistency" clause, although there is an issue with what DDM says, which is with respect to cartoon characters.

How cartoon characters, traditional ones anyways, work is that each story unless stated otherwise is a singular canon, so essentially a cartoon character has a key for every episode. This is how there are stories that resolve in, for example of Tom and Jerry, Tom dying in many episodes and coming back the same, or some episodes randomly being set in different periods of time like the French Revolution, or some having certain events that cannot really be reconciled like Tom redeeming himself fully. This isn't an A->B->C narrative, A, B and C don't limit each other, there can be rare instances of C->D but the core point is we cannot say for certain the chain of episodes is always B->C->D, where B has to be an existent episode within the series.

I think Varies is valid to use in THIS case, where it's justified by narrative limitations and serves as an alternative to excessive keying (precedent regarding this is admittedly in discussion within the Mario thread)

Also another fix I feel should be, Toon Force should be considered as a valid mechanic to grant a Varies tier as well, as many times a character's capability can be exceptionally higher or lower if it FITS the gag. To limit exploitation we can say it applies only to characters that show consistent fluctuations for humorous purposes.

I think that these seem to be good points.

@DarkDragonMedeus @Confluctor @Eficiente @Antoniofer

What do you think about this?

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Andytrenom @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Damage3245

Your help would also be appreciated here.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

Impress' points make sense to me.

 

[Damage3245]

Those points make sense to me as well.

 

[Andytrenom]

I agree with varies being given when a character's power canonically fluctuates depending on circumstances, and isn't just writing inconsistency

 

[Confluctor]

Yes, I agree.

 

[AKM sama]

I agree with those points.

 

[Armorchompy]

To bump this if it's still not applied, yes I disagree with the "inconsistency" clause, although there is an issue with what DDM says, which is with respect to cartoon characters.

How cartoon characters, traditional ones anyways, work is that each story unless stated otherwise is a singular canon, so essentially a cartoon character has a key for every episode. This is how there are stories that resolve in, for example of Tom and Jerry, Tom dying in many episodes and coming back the same, or some episodes randomly being set in different periods of time like the French Revolution, or some having certain events that cannot really be reconciled like Tom redeeming himself fully. This isn't an A->B->C narrative, A, B and C don't limit each other, there can be rare instances of C->D but the core point is we cannot say for certain the chain of episodes is always B->C->D, where B has to be an existent episode within the series.

I think Varies is valid to use in THIS case, where it's justified by narrative limitations and serves as an alternative to excessive keying (precedent regarding this is admittedly in discussion within the Mario thread)

If these are effectively all separate characters, then P&A would also be affected by this, and a varies rating doesn't acknowledge that, we can't just composite half of a character while splitting the other half

 

[Armorchompy]

Also another fix I feel should be, Toon Force should be considered as a valid mechanic to grant a Varies tier as well, as many times a character's capability can be exceptionally higher or lower if it FITS the gag.

That's just something that us viewers observe though, it's not necessarily a mechanic for the verse.

To limit exploitation we can say it applies only to characters that show consistent fluctuations for humorous purposes.

That is a fully subjective denotation, I could argue someone like Saitama or Edward Elric fit in that category given they get hurt by human level (or below) stuff in comedic moments a lot, almost every verse with physical gags in it has "fluctuations".

 

[The_Impress]

If these are effectively all separate characters, then P&A would also be affected by this, and a varies rating doesn't acknowledge that, we can't just composite half of a character while splitting the other half

List core P&A in one tabber which is common for the character across every episode, and then make a separate tabber listing "Additional abilities shown" while listing with proper references what power comes from where. Think that should mostly fix the issues, I don't mind P&A splitting inherent since yeah otherwise cartoon characters get wanked immensely in their capabilities and being these magic indestructible haxlords they aren't within their own stories, my only issue is with respect to how we should index it.

That's just something that us viewers observe though, it's not necessarily a mechanic for the verse.

I feel like it is though, certain characters being able to substantially shift their own relation to the verse if it is humorously convenient for them.

And I'll assert it is a change we'll have to induce for our own purposes too, since as a wiki I feel like this is the only feasible way to list characters like these without gross misrepresentation.

That is a fully subjective denotation, I could argue someone like Saitama or Edward Elric fit in that category given they get hurt by human level (or below) stuff in comedic moments a lot, almost every verse with physical gags in it has "fluctuations".

It should be subjective imo tho, I think any objective criteria is arbitrary in its place :V

If enough people agree that yes Saitama should be a gag character given (supposedly) enough instances then I think treating him as a varies isn't problematic.

If you'd prefer we can discuss certain precedents on what we'll consider as a gag character and what we won't so the wiki has some metric to gauge with respect to :v

 

[Armorchompy]

List core P&A in one tabber which is common for the character across every episode, and then make a separate tabber listing "Additional abilities shown" while listing with proper references what power comes from where. Think that should mostly fix the issues, I don't mind P&A splitting inherent since yeah otherwise cartoon characters get wanked immensely in their capabilities and being these magic indestructible haxlords they aren't within their own stories, my only issue is with respect to how we should index it.

Seems reasonable though possibly difficult to apply. Still I don't mind it, I suppose

I feel like it is though, certain characters being able to substantially shift their own relation to the verse if it is humorously convenient for them.

I think this is a slippery slope, it's not just comedic characters whose power shifts around, almost anything with a long-running history has a great variation in power level, even for more realistic stuff. Characters like Batman or James Bond, for example, are going to have both a lot of superhuman feats and a lot of human-level anti-feats by nature of their character, and it is just as important for their portrayal as a cartoon character's power level shifting because of gags. So while it is most evident with cartoon characters it is absolutely not exclusive to them

If you'd prefer we can discuss certain precedents on what we'll consider as a gag character and what we won't so the wiki has some metric to gauge with respect to :v

I think that would be necessary yeah, if we're not careful with this we'll end up with people being able to very easily discount anti-feats that happen under any sort of comedic light. But I'm not still sure I agree with the concept

 

[The_Impress]

I think this is a slippery slope, it's not just comedic characters whose power shifts around, almost anything with a long-running history has a great variation in power level, even for more realistic stuff. Characters like Batman or James Bond, for example, are going to have both a lot of superhuman feats and a lot of human-level anti-feats by nature of their character, and it is just as important for their portrayal as a cartoon character's power level shifting because of gags. So while it is most evident with cartoon characters it is absolutely not exclusive to them

Batman and Bond's power-shifts don't come from narrative flexibility usually, they come from the writer's misinterpretation of these characters' power levels, in gag characters' scenario, it DOESN'T stem from the writer not knowing, it is done on purpose for comedic effect, since it is gross unreality represented.

I think the only other comparable case might be surrealist stories, but correct me if I'm wrong, we don't list any verses with that specific type of storytelling.

I think that would be necessary yeah, if we're not careful with this we'll end up with people being able to very easily discount anti-feats that happen under any sort of comedic light. But I'm not still sure I agree with the concept

K, sure, I don't mind getting a precedent for it.

 

[Armorchompy]

Batman and Bond's power-shifts don't come from narrative flexibility usually, they come from the writer's misinterpretation of these characters' power levels, in gag characters' scenario, it DOESN'T stem from the writer not knowing, it is done on purpose for comedic effect, since it is gross unreality represented.

I don't believe that's true, I think the writers have an understanding of the power levels (maybe DC isn't the best example here, but I'm generally talking about human action characters here), it's just that those power levels, as paradoxical as it sounds, are "peak human guy that can pull off superhuman feats". Which in my opinion isn't too different from "character that can be strong or weak based on comedy".

I think the only other comparable case might be surrealist stories, but correct me if I'm wrong, we don't list any verses with that specific type of storytelling.

Depending on your definition, but regardless nothing notable enough to affect standards.