• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Should we allow Varies rating without an in universe mechanic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tllmbrg

Tllmbrg

VS Battles
Content Moderator
4,775
2,218
vsbattles.fandom.com

Ed, Edd and Eddy

Ed, Edd and Eddy is a Canadian-American animated comedy television series created by Danny Antonucci. It premiered on Cartoon Network on January 4, 1999. The series was designed to resemble classic cartoons from 1940's to 1970's, revolving around three adolescent preteen boys, Ed, Edd "Double...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Should we allow verses like this to have Varies due to "Cartoon logic" where they're inconsistent in their feats?
 
No. I am heavily against this.

Just find a consistent end.

"Oh but sometimes they're weak, and sometimes that strong!"

That happens all the time. Tally up the weak fights and the strong feats, and find out which one happens the most often. That's what we've had to do for a ton of serious verses, such as comics and Mario. Cartoon verses shouldn't be given a pass.
 
Isn't his case that it's different timelines or something?
But if not then that's bad too lol
 
Agree with Agnaa. See which feats happens the most and then chose one end.
 
Personally, I would only use Varies when the stats of a character depends of external factor, or alternatively, when the character itself represent a race with several different individuals (and yet, in such cases user tends to separate it in keys). I would not approve the Varies rating due a character being inconsistent.
 
Yes, a bunch of verses do this. Last I checked, Total Drama, Spongebob, Fairly Odd Parents, Simpsons, and Star VS all do this. Try to stay focused on the general case, only bringing up examples if they're particularly important.

People can have their tier with weapons vary because they have separate weapons which have different tiers, but each individual weapon only has one tier.
 
It depends on whether it is inconsistencies or part of the power's nature IMO.
Things like Toon Force are often inconsistent due to the nature of the power, since it's as strong as is most funny in the moment. It makes sense to give varies for that.
On the other hand, if the character is just inconsistent because the author didn't write consistent feats then we should just go with the usual consistent rating.
 
In several cartoons Toon Force is not present in quality of being a power, its more in quality of humor, call it Rule of Funny, something that everyone in the serie has access to, and you'll not get an explaination about it.
 
Sure, but we still list it as a power and stuff. Like, we do make a difference between random rule of cool and active toonforcers.
IMO if you have that kind of clearly inconsistent humor-based toonforce then varies is appropriate. One can't expect those characters to be able to output consistent levels of power IMO (and especially not scale them as if they did).
 
DontTalkDT said:
It depends on whether it is inconsistencies or part of the power's nature IMO.
Things like Toon Force are often inconsistent due to the nature of the power, since it's as strong as is most funny in the moment. It makes sense to give varies for that.
On the other hand, if the character is just inconsistent because the author didn't write consistent feats then we should just go with the usual consistent rating.
Click to expand...
This applies to 99% of fiction.

Characters are as strong as they need to be for the story. They get hurt by guns when that's needed by the story, they can't break through walls when that's needed by the story, they get hurt by bombs when that's what's needed for the story.

You should either acknowledge it everywhere, and make 98% of characters vary between 9-C/9-B and (highest feat), or acknowledge it nowhere.

Why would you create an exception only for comedic cartoons?
 
Agnaa said:
This applies to 99% of fiction.

Characters are as strong as they need to be for the story. They get hurt by guns when that's needed by the story, they can't break through walls when that's needed by the story, they get hurt by bombs when that's what's needed for the story.

You should either acknowledge it everywhere, and make 98% of characters vary between 9-C/9-B and (highest feat), or acknowledge it nowhere.

Why would you create an exception only for comedic cartoons?
Click to expand...
Because Toon Force is a superpower intended to be inconsistent. Not a character with regular superpower that just so happen to be portrayed inconsistently.

If a regular author writes a character with shrinking powers they will usually at least try to remember that the character can do that. It's not rare for them to fail at that, but generally, an attempt at consistency is made.

A Toon Force character is more canonically inconsistent. That they can do what is funny at the moment is the nature of their superpower. That they can't always consistently perform at peak output is an actual limitation, not caused by the author's negligence but due to the power working that way.

There are cases in fiction of powers with random outputs, even outside of Toon Force. If a power is "roll a dice and the higher the roll the stronger the attack" I won't pretend that the attack consistently performs at the level of rolling a 6.
I also won't pretend that a character that evidently gets stronger with hype/determination consistently performs at the same level.
Similarly, I won't pretend that a power which is based upon humour, and hence is inconsistent, will consistently perform at highest output.

There is no reason to purposefully misinterpret toonforce granted power, to be the same thing as just regular power produced by a regular magic system.Which is also why I would separate toon force and non-toon force stats for characters that have both.
 
We're explicitly talking about characters without an in-universe mechanic. Of course powers that are known to be random won't be assumed to have their best effect every time.

But you're just taking a trope, pretending that the piece of fiction uses it as a canonical superpower when it demonstrably doesn't, and defining your standards around that. It's just "cartoon characters are sometimes funny and inconsistent > being funny and inconsistent is a canonical ability > we should give a varies rating" which can be equally applied to ordinary characters with having limited or heightened abilities when the plot demands it.

EDIT: Essentially, I don't know how someone can watch the relevant series, and think that Mr. Burns has a canonical reality-warping ability that changes his durability, but think that no shounen MCs have main character luck unless it's explicitly stated. Any honest look at the story, the fanbase, and how other writers in the genre engage with and create works based off of those tropes should show that more characters are far more deserving of getting abilities from tropes than ones like Mr. Burns.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, cartoons are not at all consistent for most of the time, especially if they lack any form of continuity or rely on toon force/gags for their feats like 90% of the time. If they were ever shown to be depicted weaker than when they did the feat (IE. Can move a planet yet get hospitalized from a fall), it's most likely the result of gags for the sake of comedy. So, I'd be fine to keep the varies rating for inconsistent cartoon verses.

Also, that verse you linked in the OP only relied on if it was the explosion or pulverization for the feat.
 
Last edited:
To be honest with you, I think the calc was already evaluated until Amelia changed her username and all the comments for her calcs before then got wiped for some reason
 
I personally support using "Varies" tiers for verses that are almost completely dadaistic in terms of coherent story logic and powerlevel consistency.
 
Psychomaster35 said:
To be fair, cartoons are not at all consistent for most of the time, especially if they lack any form of continuity or rely on toon force/gags for their feats like 90% of the time. If they were ever shown to be depicted weaker than when they did the feat (IE. Can move a planet yet get hospitalized from a fall), it's most likely the result of gags for the sake of comedy. So, I'd be fine to keep the varies rating for inconsistent cartoon verses.

Also, that verse you linked in the OP only relied on if it was the explosion or pulverization for the feat.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of serious verses are no better in that regard. Look at our Outliers, Inconsistencies, and Plot-Induced Stupidity pages to find a dozen examples (the only examples I'm personally familiar with are also from verses that few other people here know of, so I won't list them unless that becomes necessary). Why is "it's inconsistent for a gag" deserving of a varies rating but "it's inconsistent because the author doesn't care", "it's inconsistent because there's many authors with different views of the characters' strengths", and "it's inconsistent for plot-related reasons" aren't?
 
Last edited:
I also strongly disagree with giving a Varies for toon-based inconsistency, unless there's some further case to be made regarding the specific verse. It's basically inventing a verse mechanic that doesn't exist.

Worst case scenario, if something's inconsistent you should cover that with an "At least X, possibly Y", not a Varies.
 
Armorchompy said:
Kinda but it's still the same canon as things go, just because Homer Simpson doesn't maintain continuity between episodes doesn't mean that he's a drastically different character.
Click to expand...
Okay, so I guess we are looking at how they are generally portrayed instead of considering matters of continuity.
 
What does DontTalk think about this, in summary?

Also, should I ask AKM and our administrators to participate here?
 
Agnaa said:
We're explicitly talking about characters without an in-universe mechanic. Of course powers that are known to be random won't be assumed to have their best effect every time.
Click to expand...
Sure, but I firmly believe we have eyes. Eyes capable of seeing and judging the nature of feats even if the explanations aren't presented on a silver platter. Toon Force verses rarely will officially recognize toon force and yet we still list it as a power where appropriate. Similarly, where appropriate, inferring the varying nature of the power is justified.

Agnaa said:
But you're just taking a trope, pretending that the piece of fiction uses it as a canonical superpower when it demonstrably doesn't, and defining your standards around that. It's just "cartoon characters are sometimes funny and inconsistent > being funny and inconsistent is a canonical ability > we should give a varies rating" which can be equally applied to ordinary characters with having limited or heightened abilities when the plot demands it.

EDIT: Essentially, I don't know how someone can watch the relevant series, and think that Mr. Burns has a canonical reality-warping ability that changes his durability, but think that no shounen MCs have main character luck unless it's explicitly stated. Any honest look at the story, the fanbase, and how other writers in the genre engage with and create works based off of those tropes should show that more characters are far more deserving of getting abilities from tropes than ones like Mr. Burns.
Click to expand...
Of course, Mr. Burns isn't canonically supposed to have a reality-warping superpower. Similarly, Homer Simpsons isn't supposed to canonically have any permanent superpower of any nature. But unless you just want to disregard all the stuff we see happen and powers they use, we have to still infer that a power is there. However, considering the inherent inconsistency we see happening in use, scale and context, it does make sense to not assume that they always perform on the level of their best feats.

And I don't really get your comparison to other fictions. We also give them superpowers based on what we see them do. Of course, supernatural luck is hard to prove, because any instance of supernatural luck can also be normal luck (+ PIS). But if a character performs a clear feat they would get that and we would infer that it is a canonical ability, just as we infer for cartoon characters that the humor-based powers are actual abilities.

Btw. I don't really get why you consider this "getting abilities from tropes". It's not like we say they can do more than shown. If anything, this is getting limitations from tropes. Although I wouldn't really call it that. The trope itself isn't as much the deciding factor as is the overarching context of the feats.

Armorchompy said:
Worst case scenario, if something's inconsistent you should cover that with an "At least X, possibly Y", not a Varies.
Click to expand...
"At least X, possibly Y" means there is a fixed indeterminate value, though, which is not really what we deal with here. "Varies from X to Y" grasps the fact that the power can perform at both ends better IMO.

Antvasima said:
What does DontTalk think about this, in summary?
Click to expand...
I think we should judge whether a series of feats in context is just a regular set of feats or just random jokes that give the character very temporary powers/stats for the sake of humour. If it's regular abilities we give them the usual evaluation. If the abilities are jokes, we check whether they are vastly inconsistent and, if so, might decide to use a 'varies from X to Y' stat to express how feats vary by the humoristic nature.

The exact details should be up to case-by-case evaluation.

Antvasima said:
Also, should I ask AKM and our administrators to participate here?
Click to expand...
Idk if it's that important, but I suppose some more input can't do harm.
 
I agree with what I have said on a previous varies rating; I personally only wish to see a varies rating if there is an in universe description and/or author's note about how their power level(s) fluctuate. Such as Hulk's "Angrier he gets, the stronger he gets" or Flash's connection to the Speed Force. I don't think being gaggy or cartoonish in nature nor do I think being full of inconsistencies alone are enough to warrant a variable tier. Ryukama and other former staff have said that variable tiers often come off as just a lazy way out of the true debate which is trying to figure out whether or not certain high end feats are outliers or what "anti-feats" and hard lowend feats are PIS/CIS/GIS. I prefer to go with consistent ends that are usually mid end and few cases high end (Depending on whichever is consistent to the premise of the character).

Feats being cartoony doesn't always invalidate them being valid feats per say; depends on the examples though. Pulling mini-suns out of the sky in general just isn't that impressive. Or heck, some cartoony characters are still the Saitama/Bobobo archetype where the premise of their power is that they're so intimidating that nothing ever phases them. I don't think the existence of Toon Force automatically makes them different from any respective character types; either it be characters meant to be average civilians (Usually just has semi-low ends that are their own feats), superpowered metahumans, magically enhanced chosen ones, or the invincible character types (Who just stick to the absolute highest feat).

One of the only few characters where I could see toon force having an in universe description was Pinkie Pie, but regardless. I definitely still thing an in universe and/or author note is needed before allowing variable tiers. I know that it's not really going to be easy, but it's still doable if we take case by case into account.
 
Agnaa said:
Just find a consistent end.
Click to expand...
Easier said than done, there is no such thing as a "consistent end" for most cartoon characters, their feats vary greatly from episode to episode and even from one scene to another.

Not to mention the vast number of episodes that many of these series have over the years, which would make it a titanic, if not impossible, task.

Keeping Varies is probably still a better way to show their inconsistent and variable power.
 
Last edited:
Or just don't index them to begin with if you can't find a consistent end
 
I've noticed that in the case of Ed, Edd and Eddy, the profiles have multiple ends not because the characters are inconsistent, but because the calc has different ends... and it hasn't been evaluated yet.

This should be easy to fix at least.
 
Last edited:
Therefir said:
Deleting profiles is surely your way to fix everything 🗿
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying don't make those kind of pages to begin with
For pages that exist rn just find a consistent end, most cartoons are in fact not that long
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Maverick_Zero_X
Establishing rules for Varies ratings
5 6 7
Replies
260
Views
17K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Agnaa
  • Locked
Proposal for Off-Site Links Revision
Replies
11
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Regarding Page Names (Semantics)
Replies
18
Views
1K
KLOL506
KLOL506
DaMonkeMan
  • Locked
Editing some rules for the Wiki
Replies
21
Views
2K
ImmortalDread
ImmortalDread
Mr. Bambu
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
Replies
37
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top