Shigeo Kageyama High 6-C upgrade

[Andytrenom]

@Ryu

I need to clear up certain things,

I am not opposing this upgrade because in my mind the correct interpretation is ONE not knowing the characters' power level. I'm opposing this because given how much detail actually is in the answer I cannot dismiss it in favor of the High 6-C Mob interpretation and say one is correct and the other is not. This situation isn't just about finding out which the most likely interpretation of a piece of information is, it's also about deciding whether that piece of information should be used to begin with or not.

You brought up Occams razor but that doesn't really apply here. Occam's razor says that you shouldn't accept a conclusion that makes too many assumptions even if it technically can't be disproved. This isn't about making someone accept a particular conclusion it's about showing that the statement we are using isn't straightforward or clear enough that we can reasonably use it as evidence.

In short I don't think this is good enough justification and without it being explicit in its meaning I don't think it should be used as evidence

Also.

"The context behind the answer is what is important rather than just citing some broad blanket rule."

I'm willing to hear more on this. If there really is a reason to make an exception, I'm fine with that.

As for your arguments, there are only a few I have issues with

>he obviously wrote them having a similar power level in mind

Mob and Tatsumaki are from different stories, ONE would have no reason to keep the power level of one in mind when writing the other since it would not have actual relevance in the story if they did or not.

>Read how he's phrasing the question. Regular Mob's power definitively loses, yet at his highest power is uncertain.

He didn't say "highest power" he said "if he gets serious" and for the record this isn't semantics. The latter implies a conscious decision to use his power while the former doesn't have to. When the form you claim he's referring to is a powerup not available to Mob at will and is triggered only external circumanstances, this is an important distinction to make.

>Okay so when Mob is using all of his strength, not holding anything back due to his mental barriers being removed and is emotionally at his most serious isn't serious for some reason? That doesn't make sense.

>Also the whole "he can't obtain it under normal means" is irrelevant. Both 100% and ???% are special forms Mob only gets pushed into during extraordinary circumstances. Just because one of them is more rare does not suddenly mean that ONE just had to have been referring to 100%.

Read above. My point is that ???% isn't consciously activated like the statement suggests, not that it isn't serious.

>Not that for some reason even though ONE is certain regular Mob's power is weak enough to definitively lose to her, he isn't sure that a serious Mob would lose her even though it's thousands of times weaker than a super casual feat of hers

You do not have to be sure how a stronger version of your characters fares against someone to know how his weaker version does. Also does ONE even know how high the bullet feat is?

>that "serious" does not actually mean Mob being serious rather when he's less serious and that the outcome is again uncertain even though he has form ridiculously weaker than the one that already makes the outcome uncertain.

I am sorry but I do not see enough details in the statement to agree with his conclusion.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Andytrenom. My apologies Ryukama.

 

[Ryukama]

"Mob and Tatsumaki are from different stories, ONE would have no reason to keep the power level of one in mind when writing the other since it would not have actual relevance in the story if they did or not."

It doesn't matter if they are different stories. If ONE cannot tell which one of these characters he wrote is stronger, than that means he worte them being at similar power levels in mind. Mob is powerful enough to give ONE doubt if Tatsu is actually capable of defeating him.

"He didn't say "highest power" he said "if he gets serious" and for the record this isn't semantics. The latter implies a conscious decision to use his power while the former doesn't have to. When the form you claim he's referring to is a powerup not available to Mob at will and is triggered only external circumanstances, this is an important distinction to make."

All he said is "gets serious". You know when he gets serious? When he undergoes the form in which he's using all of his power, is no longer holding back due to his mental barriers and literally becomes as serious he can get. He never mentions anything about how Mob needs to get serious at will. 100% isn't at will normally either. Mob's whole thing is supressing his emotions so he won't go 100%. And again if even his 100% form is questionable

"You do not have to be sure how a stronger version of your characters fares against someone to know how his weaker version does. Also does ONE even know how high the bullet feat is?"

If both forms are actually orders of magnitude weaker than this character, there is no reason why the stronger form makes the outcome uncertain. Also does Toriyama know how strong half Goku's feats are? Doesn't mean we don't powerscale Goku's feats to those stated to be stronger than him.

 

[Antvasima]

The problem is that these are different stories/fictional settings, and we have rules against scaling between them, as the writers usually have limited understanding of their comparative demonstrated power levels.

 

[Ryukama]

Plus even Tatsu's High 6-C feat in the first place was super casual. She didn't struggle in the slightest and there was absolutely no doubt that she was able to pull this off. And very easily at that. Yet there is doubt that she can overpower Mob? That would logically mean that overpowering Mob is a greater challenge than overpowering these shells were.

This point is the most important. This is really just basic powerscaling.

Let's say Jim overpowers Bob with absolutely no effort whatsoever. Does it super casually, doesn't break a sweat, there is zero doubt that he can overpower Bob. However when it comes to whether or not Jim is capable of overpowering Max, there is so much doubt that he can do that even person who gave Jim and Max their powers is uncertain of the outcome. And it's not like this guy just doesn't know Max's power well, as he just proclaimed that Max's previous state of power would undoubtedly get overpowered by Jim. Yet this version of Max's power made it uncertain.

This obviously means at the very least that Jim overpowering Max is deemed as more of a challenge than him overpowering Bob. Heck let's just be super lowballing and assume that Bob is somehow 3 times more powerful than Max. But saying that Jim is thousands and thousands of times stronger than Bob is just too much.

 

[Ryukama]

The problem is that these are different stories/fictional settings, and we have rules against scaling between them, as the writers usually have limited understanding of their comparative demonstrated power levels.

This is so arbitrary. Why can we accept what the author says about their own characters when they're in the same story but not when they are in 2 different stories that the author still wrote themself?

What magical force suddenly makes an author's words completely unreliable once he's dealing with 2 characters from 2 stories he wrote when he knew what he was talking about when dealing with 2 characters from 1 story he wrote? "Oh this guy had a perfect grasp on how powerful his own character was and was properly able to compare the power of another character he wrote before. But now this other character of his he's comparing them to was in a different story, so now he lost the ability to properly compare the power of his own characters. If only this character happened to be in the same story, then he'd suddenly be able to properly know how they compare to each other."

The whole "well the author might not know about the feats each character has done when comparing them" can easily be said if he's talking about characters in his own series as well. If we can accept one instance of WoG comparing 2 characters together with nothing contradicting it, there's no reason we can't accept this one.

 

[Antvasima]

Because for a single story we have a hierarchical power structure to compare with, that is independent of author intentions, whereas different stories usually have entirely different scale of feats that the author has almost never taken the time to measure or keep consistent.

We would end up with gut feelings and personal favouritism from the writer to replace the defined measured facts about the demonstrated scale that we prefer to use for increased reliability.

In addition, this would set a bad precedent for whenever some of our members find offhanded author statements regarding which character he or she thinks is stronger from different franchises that the author in question has worked on, in cases far more unreliable than this one. That is the way that this community unfortunately tends to work.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

Btw, i'd just like to add that ONE is one of the most accurate and trusty WoG out there.

And i also agree with Ryu here.

 

[Ryukama]

You mean the hierarchical power structure that the author wrote? Also what if in this same story the characters have otherwise never been compared to one another or have any similar feats outside of WoG stating they're on par? Can the WoG still be used then?

Again, why is WoG when he's comparing his own characters from the same story he wrote fine and dandy but then suddenly transformed into "gut feelings and personal favouritism" once he compares his own characters from 2 different stories he wrote?

Sure if one character demonstrably isn't as strong as the other and this is clearly disproven within the stories that's fine. But if nothing contradicts the statement we should be able to use it, just like we can use WoG statements comparing 2 characters from the same story if nothing contradicts it.

 

[Schnee_One]

I'm fine with Possibly High 6C Mob and Possibly Sub Rel for Tats at least

If it becomes solidly High 6C and Solidly Sub Rel, it seems fair.

 

[Antvasima]

I am extremely busy to the point that I will likely have to work 15 hours today, so I won't be able to focus much on this, but each fiction should be treated as a self-contained unit. Our defining principle is that we mainly use what has been clearly defined or is measurable in the released material connected to it to scale from.

"Death of the author intent" is a very real possibility if their views contradict what has been defined within the stories themselves, and if different fictions are involved we have no way to ascertain whether or not the author in question seems to have a sufficiently good knowledge to properly compare the different fictions, rather than having just spent a casual stray thought on a fan question.

For Garou and Boros we have a structure in place, and there are no apparent contradictions for the statement. For Mob and Tatsumaki we have nothing in place to evaluate whether or not the statement is reliable, as the two stories have a very different scale of feats.

 

[Antvasima]

In addition, as high-ranking staff members, we have to try to use extreme caution regarding the consequences of setting potentially destructive precedents.

 

[Ryukama]

"Death of the author intent" is a very real possibility if their views contradict what has been defined within the stories themselves"

How about when it is absolutely in no way contradicted?

"and if different fictions are involved we have no way to ascertain whether or not the author in question seems to have a sufficiently good knowledge to properly compare the different fictions"

The author himself wrote these fictions. If he can properly compare the characters he himself wrote in the same story, there's no reason why he can't properly compare the characters he himself wrote from 2 different stories he wrote.

And again, what about when the 2 characters from the same story he wrote aren't otherwise compared to each other in that story? Wouldn't we also technically not be able to ascertain if the author is knowledgeable enough to compare the power's of these 2 characters? But no in this case we just trust what the author said about his own characters since nothing contradicted it. Same should be done here.

 

[Antvasima]

I updated my last replies previously. Please hit reload to take a look.

 

[Ryukama]

"For Garou and Boros we have a structure in place, and there are no apparent contradictions for the statement. For Mob and Tatsumaki we have nothing in place to evaluate whether or not the statement is reliable, as the two stories have a very different scale of feats."

Garou's AP feats aren't anywhere remotely close to as good as Boros's and these 2 characters are never compared to each other in the story itself. By your logic there's no way of knowing if ONE actually knows how powerful these 2 are in comparison to each other. But since these are ONE's characters and nothing contradicted it it's accepted. Same should be done.

And please stop fearmongering the fact that I have a different opinion than you. Nothing dangerous is going to come from the fact that I'm simply making a suggestion on how to rank a certain manga character.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, my point is that it is common with authors who work on different fictions with a completely different demonstrated scale, who still feel that the characters are comparable. If we accept this, it would set a very bad precedent for highly unreliable cross-fiction scaling based on casual replies.

Regarding Boros and Garou, as far as I understand, they have also both been officially classified as beyond dragon level threats, and Saitama had to somewhat exert himself against both of them, so the pattern fits with ONE's statement. However, if we use different fictions with characters of a completely different demonstrated scale, we have nothing reliable to compare with. All that we have is a casual remark, with no knowledge if ONE took considerable time evaluating the demonstrated peaks of the characters.

 

[Antvasima]

I am not fearmongering. I am just generally cautious about how bad precedents get out of control. It is part of how I have tried to keep this wiki stable for several years now.

 

[Ryukama]

But in this case nothing contradicts these 2 being comparable to one another, so there shouldn't be an issue here.

Garou has no official ranking. Saitama used a Serious Headbutt yet explicitly had no intention of killing or even severely injuring him, which even then that's just Garou's dura. The only thing going for Garou's AP is ONE's statement. But then again, it's just a casual remark and we have no knowledge if ONE actually took time comparing their feats, of which Boros's are ridiculously higher.

 

[Ryukama]

Anyways I'm going to bed now I'll continue tomorrow.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, but if so, all that you are making a case for is that it might be unreliable to scale Garou from Boros, not that we should use even more unreliable scaling between Mob and Tatsumaki because of it.

As I mentioned, the demonstrated scale of OPM and Mob Psycho is very different, regardless of author intentions, and this would set a precedent for considerably more unreliable scaling between other fictions, based on characters rescaled to each other in crossovers such as Dissidia, or via author opinions about Marvel and DC characters. We shouldn't ignore the rules we have in place to avoid inaccuracies.

Good night in any case. I have to continue to work now. We will see if I have the energy to continue later.

 

[Andytrenom]

Will just address a couple of points and also resign from the thread till tomorrow.

>It doesn't matter if they are different stories. If ONE cannot tell which one of these characters he wrote is stronger, than that means he worte them being at similar power levels in mind. Mob is powerful enough to give ONE doubt if Tatsu is actually capable of defeating him.

You just repeated the same thing I disagreed with. You gave no actual argument against this point beyond "It doesn't matter if they are from different stories", or explained your viewpoint more thoroughly than the first time.

>He never mentions anything about how Mob needs to get serious at will

He doesn't really need to. "this character got serious" usually will just mean he stopped playing around or holding back, it doesn't have to refer to the character becoming his strongest version possible. He never makes actual mention of ???% and I cannot see why this statement is taken to be about that apart from it being the form where the rating won't be an outlier.

>What magical force suddenly makes an author's words completely unreliable once he's dealing with 2 characters from 2 stories he wrote when he knew what he was talking about when dealing with 2 characters from 1 story he wrote?

It doesn't make it "completely unreliable" if he is shown to have given enough thought about how the two characters compare then his statement has credibility. And as for what magical force it is, it is how the author's opinion on two characters in the same universe will directly impact how they interact with other in any given scenario and what's true or false about a single verse has to align with what the author says when he's explaining the relation between things specific to that verse.

But if he compares two characters from two different stories not even in the same universe then his opinion should not dictate facts in both stories to the same extent nor is it as important that the author know how the two will interact with each other or whether they can challenge each other or not. In this case known facts about the characters should take precedence over the author's opinion.

>Oh this guy had a perfect grasp on how powerful his own character was and was properly able to compare the power of another character he wrote before. But now this other character of his he's comparing them to was in a different story, so now he lost the ability to properly compare the power of his own characters.

We do not expect an author to have perfect grasp on how strong their characters are be they from the same story or not, do you think if we showed some of the tier 7 characters who are there for KE, Vaping or earthquake feats to the author they would say "Yes this is exactly how powerful i though he was". We do not think the author loses his ability to analyze his characters when they are not from the same story, it just doesn't matter as much when he is talking about just one story and he gets to decide if one character may have the feat of defeating another.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree wih Andytrenom.

 

[DMUA]

In addition, this would set a bad precedent for whenever some of our members find offhanded author statements regarding which character he or she thinks is stronger from different franchises that the author in question has worked on, in cases far more unreliable than this one. That is the way that this community unfortunately tends to work.

This seems rather overly paranoid

People aren't going to just turn their brains off and throw unreliable WOG around using actually good WOG as justification for it. And even if they do, anyone with common sense would toss it out the window harder then a computer that just showed Ghandi getting nukes in Sid Myer's Civilization.

This seems like it's just shutting down something okay for fear that a completely non equatable bad thing will happen

 

[Antvasima]

It is not paranoia, but rather long experience of this wiki. Plenty of our members tend to use bad precedents to push for getting more extreme similar cases accepted.

 

[Antvasima]

In addition, this is explicitly against our regulations, and I have already explained other downsides.

 

[Ciruno_Fortes]

On the first place, how many WoG statements between franchises made by the same creator has happened? I just want to ask.

Keeping a careful watchful eye over any sort of these and analyzing them greatly would really just help too on preventing these. And it's not as if the 'possibly lvl' tier can't be restricted or outright ignored.

 

[Antvasima]

A lot of Marvel and DC creators who have worked for both companies are regularly asked "who would win" questions by fans.

 

[Nico-v11]

That's not nearly comparable to One Punch Man and Mob Psycho 100. Marvel and DC have tons of different writers and have a huge history of different eras.

Unlike One who is describing two of his own stories, with two characters that have similar powers, and one that we truly don't actually know the full potential off since his highest feat was one of casually walking.

If the two characters weren't so similar then there would be more of an argument however because they share so many traits it makes it that much more believable.

 

[DMUA]

Marvel and DC has an absolute ton of writers while OPM and Mob Psycho 100 is made by one guy. One guy who hasn't gone on the record to say "The author decides who wins". Not really equatable.

Oh yeah? And in what experience has something that's actually wrong been passed off due to something else right?

If the regulations lead to unnecessary shutdown purely because "Regulations", they shouldn't be there.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I suppose that you have a point about his particular case. I am just worried about the various issues that I mentioned in my discussion with Ryukama, and prefer to use caution and stay on the safe side.

Actually getting rid of the regulations as a whole, rather than make an exception, would be a very bad idea though, as they prevent people from using very mismatched crossover scaling, and unreliable author comments in settings with lots of writers as well.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Do we have examples of crossover statements from the sole author of two series being unreliable? It seems most of the concern here is with series like Marvel and DC who we clearly establish to have various authors with different viewpoints.

 

[DragonEmperor23]

Do we have examples of crossover statements from the sole author of two series being unreliable? It seems most of the concern here is with series like Marvel and DC who we clearly establish to have various authors with different viewpoints.

I don't think there are many crossover statments of a single author with two series in general.

 

[Antvasima]

This is the only one that I can think of, yes, so I suppose that we could make an exception.

 

[DMUA]

Reinhard Heydrich has this to a degree

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Rather than an exception, I think the rule just should be reworded. Using WoG statements for characters across series should be entirely fine as long as it's reasonable and consistent with both stories. We can't hold nearly anything to the standards of flip flopping mega giants like DC and Marvel. This would be just the same tried and true "if it contradicts the story, throw it out" which is already bread and butter here.

 

[Schnee_One]

I don't think there are many crossover statments of a single author with two series in general.

Reinhard Heydrich is scaled to Yakuo Madara's 4A feat as they were stated as equals by Masada.

I don't see a problem with this knowing that tbh

 

[Ryukama]

You have 2 characters that the author wrote. These characters have never interacted with each other, never been compared to each other within the story and one of them has much higher AP feats than the other. However the author stated these characters are on par. Since the author wrote these characters and nothing ever contradicts this statement we accept it.

There is no reason why this idea suddenly should change just because these 2 characters are now from 2 different stories the author still wrote. It's a completely arbitrary distinction. If we've decided that WoG comparing 2 characters he wrote who've never otherwise been compared to each other in the same story is fine as long as there's no contradiction, there's no reason we now should suddenly not accept WoG comparing 2 characters he wrote who've never otherwise been compared to each other in 2 different stories he wrote.

So again you have to give an actual reason why the characters being from 2 different stories the author wrote instead of the same story the author wrote actually changes it now. "The author might not know the scale of the feats these characters did when comparing" doesn't cut it. By that logic the exact same thing could be said when he compared 2 characters in the same story with much different feats. But again in that case we've decided it's fine as long as nothing contradicts it, so that should be the case here.

 

[Ryukama]

@Andy "He doesn't really need to. "this character got serious" usually will just mean he stopped playing around or holding back"

And ???% is when he is no longer playing around or holding back. Yeah he doesn't like going into this state and it's brought about by special circumstances. So is 100%. So are Mob's emotions and use of power in general. But Mob still gets serious in ???%. And again, if 100% was already questionable then Mob would certainly win with ???%. ???% is logically what is being referred to.

You keep insisting "Oh well ONE said gets serious so get serious would have to mean he's doing this at will and under normal circumstances" which no it doesn't. Get serious means just that. Get serious. It's never said that he has to get serious at will and under special circumstances. 100% again also isn't done at Mob's will and is brought about by special circumstances.

??% is by all accounts Mob when he's serious. Both in terms of no longer holding back and in terms of him emotionally being his most serious. The fact that he doesn't become serious at will or under normal circumstances is irrelevant. Especially when the exact same is true about 100%.

 

[Schnee_One]

At first I wasn't sure and thought a possibly at most would be better

With the examples I remembered above, I agree with Ryu

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

So we're in agreement for scaling to ???% Mob, then?