Statistics Powerscaling (Staff Only)

[Sera_EX]

Since we clearly allow this for certain verses (Fate, Silverio, Masada), I was thinking of us making a page on this, but I'd like to get some opinions first. For those who are unaware, stat powerscaling goes as follows:

"Character A has a "100" in strength and has Island Class striking strength. This scales to most if not every character with a 100 in Strength."

Obviously the consistency of this varies drastically from verse-to-verse, so only in some cases should it actually be allowed.

So what do you all think?

A. We need a page on Statistics Powerscaling (rules and so forth)

B. Just add a section and/or note to the Powerscaling page

C. We don't need a page or note.

If yes, I don't mind making the rough draft in a blog, have it reviewed, and then have the final draft published all in record time.

Note: STAFF ONLY

 

[Antvasima]

I am not sure if a new page is necessary, and our current standards are probably mostly fine. Improving on the powerscaling page might be an idea, depending on if there are any good constructive suggestions.

 

[Antvasima]

Also, drastic changes definitely shouldn't be rushed. Clarifying our current standards to make them easier to understand is another matter entirely.

 

[Sera_EX]

Indeed. I wasn't exactly sure how we treat such powerscaling, and in regards to Fate, I think Promestein actually brought it up awhile back. I just don't remember.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Kaltias]

Can't really speak for Fate but in general i'd say that it depends if it's consistent with the feats of the characters.

Like, if the guy rated 100 in strength is consistently overpowered by a character with 20, then don't use it. If it's consistent, I don't see the issue

 

[Sera_EX]

Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing.

 

[Kaltias]

I think that a note/section would be better. It's a particular instance of how to do powerscaling so it would be better if it was on the same page.

Out of the top of my head, it needs to be consistent with the scaling established in-verse, kinda like in PMMM where a 4.5 has better showings than a 3 who in turn stomped a 1.5.

If it's consistent most of the time, but not always, the inconsistencies can be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Also maybe it can be specified that they shouldn't be used linearly if numerical (Like, a 1000 isn't necessarily 20x stronger when compared to a 50)

If it's a case like Jojo (I think) where it ends up being contradicted, normal scaling is the way to go.

 

[Sera_EX]

Perfect.

 

[Antvasima]

Does anybody else in the staff have further suggestions?

 

[Kaltias]

Should this be highlighted? This way other staff members can see it

 

[SomebodyData]

I agree with Kal

 

[Antvasima]

I have moved the thread to staff only. I suppose that you can highlight it if you wish, but I think that drastic changes would be a very bad idea.

 

[Kaltias]

I don't think that it causes any big change, it's only clarifying what's our stance about WoG/In-verse tiering systems for the purpose of scaling

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[PaChi2]

I vote B.

It's just a clariffication as to how a scaling utilizing statistics should be done and requirements to accept it. Or am I missing something?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I think B would be a good call.

 

[Reppuzan]

For Fate, we actually prefer feats over Stats, only using Stats when the characters have little feats of themselves due to lack of story relevance (i.e. majority of Fate/Grand Order Servants).

I'd be fine with A or B, but I won't be available to write it for a while due to exams and upcoming holidays.

 

[Antvasima]

So does anybody have a good idea of what we should write in the extra powerscaling page section?

 

[Sera_EX]

Well, using what Kaltias and Repp said above:

In the case of powerscaling via statistics, we generally prefer using feats. However, in some cases if the scaling is consistent enough and there are a lack of feats to suggest otherwise, statistics powerscaling can be applicable.

For example: A 4.5 has better showings than a 3 who in turn stomped a 1.5. So another 4.5 would be comparable to the previous.

Also it should be specified that they shouldn't be used linearly if numerical (Such as a 1000 not necessarily being 20x stronger when compared to a 50).

I'm aware it's pretty rough. Perhaps someone has a better way of wording it?

 

[Kaltias]

In the case of powerscaling via in-verse statistics, it's generally preferable to scale the characters based on their own feats. However, if the in-verse tiering system is consistent enough, statistics powerscaling can be applied.

For example: A character rated as 4.5 has better showings than a character rated 3 who in turn stomped someone rated 1.5. So two characters with the same rating can be considered comparable because the ratings are consistent with the established strength of the characters.

Please note that when dealing with numerical statistics, it shouldn't be assumed that they are linear (Such as a character rated 1000 not necessarily being 20 times stronger when compared to a character rated 50) and instead it should be assumed that they are simply meant to show which character is stronger.

^ This can work?

 

[Antvasima]

I think that Kaltias' wording seems fine to add.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I think this is fine.

 

[Sera_EX]

Yeah, that'll work nicely.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, feel free to make the addition to the page, and then close this thread then.

 

[Kaltias]

Ok. "Powerscaling via in-verse ratings" can work as a title?

 

[Antvasima]

Just to clarify, so there are no misunderstandings, is just a new section for the Powerscaling page.

Anyway, I think that could work as a title, yes.