What's more important? Statements and author intent or calcs?

[Amexim]

Most fictions-- like DBZ and FF (FFVII especially)-- aren't intended to be light speed, or at least the authors didn't intend to make his characters that fast or that strong (at first). I'm not talking about outliers specifically, but more like in the event of scaling not making sense for the story or the power of a verse when you look at what the author actually meant to do. For example Bahamut Fury in FFVII. Even if you just scale Zack to Fury's travel speed and ignore the "travel speed =/= combat speed" idea-- wasn't it based off of Bahamut's escape from Zack in Crisis core or something-- like I doubt sincerly they intended for them to be more than massively hypersonic, but calcs don't lie. Unless they're written off as outliers. But then, like, some outliers have to be Canon... So... What do you guys think?

 

[Omimi]

author > calcs

 

[Kaltias]

Calcs take precedence. Death of the Author is the rule here. If you don't want your character to be FTL you shouldn't make it cross a kilometer in a picosecond. If you do, we measure the feat and use it

 

[Davidsteel1]

Yeah basically what Kaltias said, calcs > authors intent,that's how it works here

 

[Ryukama]

Toriyama could insist Goku's never fought Frieza and that Piccolo goes Kaioken to defeat him, that clearly isn't what actually happened in the story. And nobody's going to believe that.

This site does that to a less extreme extent. Authors may not have wanted their characters to be FTL, but they clearly are in the story.

There is also the fact that an author is very rarely explicit on what they intended for a story. Especially in minor, niche details like feats and powerscaling. So whether the author actually wants their character to be X strong or X fast can't even be proven really.

Also VS debaters didn't invent this idea of discarding what the author wants and valuing ones' own interpretation/analysis. As you ca see.

 

[Amexim]

Low key agree, even though that sounds like we're overstepping our "authority" but, what if it's reverse and the author says they can move FTL but what happens when the author states that a feat that clearly isn't FTL is actually FTL.

Like, I think it's not our right to say what is an isn't in the story, even when shit doesn't make sense. But still low-key agree with calcs>authors-- because a plot hole or error in writing still has to be interpreted by us, so...

 

[Ryukama]

It's again what I said. Toriyama can say Goku never fought Frieza and Piccolo defeated him with Kaioken, that obviously isn't what happens in the story. The author may insist their character isn't FTL, but they objectively are.

Valuing ones' own analysis/interpretation over the author's is far from a new or absurd idea within writing.

Even then there's the fact is that you don't even know what the author wants. Authors are almost never explicit with what they intended in a story. Especially not in "feats "and "powerscaling."

Perhaps it isn't an issue that the author doesn't want them to be so powerful, rather that other people don't want them to be so powerful... So they assume "oh that's not what the author intended" when you can't really prove what their real intention was.

 

[Amexim]

Fair and delicious point, but what about direct statements. For example, let's say I were to make a verse, and someone did a calc on my story that got lower than what I had intended. If I stated directly that they are X level-- say Tier 0 and Omnipotent, and that type of thing isn't alluded to in any way, how can the word of God and a clear statement of intentions be overruled? Most people would just shrug and let the conflicting ideas marinate in their brains with the new Piccolo killed Frieza retcon, right? I mean, a retcon is a ******* retcon, no matter how much of a plot hole it is. For example, Goku being scarred by a bullet when that couldn't even happen to him when he was a kid, yeah it hurt and it left a bruise but a visible scar?! But we gotta accept that. Somehow... Even when he can be sucker punched by Universal Frieza and be fine... *Head explodes from the inconsistency* Though, like I said, personally I'm in favor of outlier and inconsistencies and Death of the Author, but, like I said, it's... My position on it is as about as consistent as Goku's durability.

 

[Ryukama]

Fair and delicious point, but what about direct statements. For example, let's say I were to make a verse, and someone did a calc on my story that got lower than what I had intended. If I stated directly that they are X level-- say Tier 0 and Omnipotent, and that type of thing isn't alluded to in any way, how can the word of God and a clear statement of intentions be overruled?

Again, it doesn't matter what the author wants or says happened in a story, when it clearly did not happen. Piccolo never one shot Frieza with Kaioken just because Toriyama made a statement that he did. Give yourself a little more credit, and actually analyze and interpret a story on your own without expecting the writer to hold your hand the whole way.

It's that idea that allows WoG statements and intentions to be overruled.

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

Even if WoG or a statement in the story claims that they are moving at a certain speed, if they have feats that show them moving much faster we use those.

For example, it isn't until Jin MoRi fights Satan that they are seen to break the sound barrier and create a sonic boom with their motions, but he's clearly been able to travel between solar systems in seconds before.

Or Superman supposedly can't go FTL, but flies from one end of the galaxy to the other in minutes.

 

[Antoniofer]

I would prefer: actual feats >= in-universe statement > WoG from authors/databook > calcs. Even if there are few calculed feats whose results are higher than the already showed or stated, if the author has really the intent of making the characters weaker than than the calculations made, you going to see several "anti-feats" through the serie. I personally prefer to give the stats to the characters what they really show or say, at the end, those are companies, drawers, etc's characters, not ours.

 

[The_Everlasting]

@Antonio

Authors can easily have a level of ignorance where they write feats obviously higher than others.

Take Zack Fair, a guy who survives attacks that blow up planets, but he gets killed by bullets.

We have absolutely, completely no reason to take them over calcs.

 

[Antoniofer]

Again, actual feats >= WoG, if he survived a planet explosion obviously being killed by bullet is inconsistence... unless that the planet thing ocurred one time and the bullet one ocurred several times cross the serie, in that case, look ar another feats would be necesary to determinate what is the outlier and what the inconsistence.

 

[The_Everlasting]

Feats and calcs are effectively the same thing, your above "logic" for calcs applies to feats as well.

 

[Antoniofer]

Welp, it wasn't the better name that I could give it, outside here are commonly known as "fancalcs", but that name is a little demeaning for us the "calculators"... and no, not all the the calcs qualify as "fancalcs".

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that before upgrade someone, a complete archive of feats is necesary, and if the author(s) really has the intent, those kind of feats that they really want would be across all the serie. If author(s) say that they are weaker/stronger than the characters has showed across the serie, we have no reasons to listen to him/her/them, and that's why: actual feats and in-universe statement > WoG.

 

[The_Everlasting]

Authors often don't "intend" to make feats a certain level, they just want to write a story. Your logic doesn't work.

 

[Amexim]

It's all subjective I suppose-- whether or not you want to take Bullshit WoG as Canon or not, because even if Toriyama said Krillin was Frieza's father and he became a super Saiyan to kill Beerus, while I can say he did a terrible job of conveying that in the story, I can't say it didn't happen, because he wrote the damn thing and it's basically the same as a nonsensical retcon. I mean, I can say it didn't happen-- but that doesn't mean what he said isn't Canon... It's dubious, Death of the Author.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Ryukama and The Everlasting.

 

[Ryukama]

Rewriting the story itself until something is retconned is one thing. Claiming that something happened within the story that clearly did not is something different.

I'm kind of curious as to how one can manage to read or enjoy anything if what the author wanted with it means this much to them. Personally I feel a level of thinking for yourself is necessary to interpret, critique or analyze a story.

Especially in a case of VS debating, where pretty much no author cares in the slightest about "What level of energy is this feat?", "How consistent is the powerscaling?" or "Could my character beat this random dude from another story?"

 

[Amexim]

I'm not saying that the story is by any means enjoyable or good-- that's irrelevant to whether or not things are Canon in a story. I don't like Goku's inconsistent durability, but it's still probably Canon. Goku DID get scrapped and scarred by a bullet-- and even if I saw otherwise and AT said that it happened-- he is the creator and God of the story, what he says goes. If AT died and all of his contradictory statements were lost to time, then the Canon of DBZ changes from interpretation to interpretation-- specifically if you count filler and anime only scenes as Canon, etc.

I'm basically saying any plot holes created by word of God statements should be handled in a way that writes off the prior contradiction. If piccolo one shot frieza in Kaioken, that's Canon. Nuff said. Doesn't mean it's good. Just what he wrote before is now filler or something.

 

[Ryukama]

My point is how can one enjoy a story for themselves when they will just listen to anything the author says and not provide any thinking of their own when interpreting or analyzing something. Refusing to give their own thought value and wanting the be handheld by the author.

But that point doesn't matter. And again, if Toriyama wants to for some reason rewrite the story drastically changing the events that happen, sure. We'll treat it like we do with comic retcons. But him merely stating "that never happened here" when it very clearly did, we're not taking that as fact.

Regardless you had your question answered already. Calcs takes priority over author intent and contradictory statements on this site.

 

[Antoniofer]

Obviorly Goku being scatched by a bullet is stupid (granted, most likely was Toei idea), even when he was a kid and caught for surprise, he resisted bullets in a better way, that's why we can tell than that is an inconsistence.

The method or "logic" that I use is not different that the wiki use: evaluate the most feats in order to determinate what is the most consistent, I don't like to downgrade/upgrade characters for only a couple of feats when there are dozens that suggest otherwise. We should have a ratio for that if you ask me.

 

[Ryukama]

Except "actual feats >= in-universe statement > WoG from authors/databook > calcs" is nonsense. A calc is just a feat properly analyzed. And why are you a calc member if you think this lowly of calcs?

 

[Antoniofer]

Again, that was a bad name; when I refer to actual feats I'm refering to simple things: radius of explosion, destruying v volume of y, covering x distance is t time, lifting x volume of y material, producing T temperatures, things taht I can compare with real life reference. When I say calcs, I'm not refering all the calcs, if not the ones can change in differents situations or are overlooked, generally it happen when there's no more feats to calculate. Although, maybe I should stop cuz anytime that I want to write an opinion, the staff generally bash me; I have never tryed to change anything with my opinion.

 

[Ryukama]

Alright then. I'm not trying to bash you in the slightest and I greatly apologize if I came across as that. I just disagreed with the idea of calcs being beneath authorial intent and feats somehow. And was wondering why you'd want to make calcs if you thought so little of them. But it seems that's settled now.

 

[Antvasima]

I definitely agree with Ryukama, and we have Editing Rules about these types of situations. We should probably close this thread.

 

[Austrian-Man-Meat]

To put it short, Feats > Author Intent. For discussing a characters power levels we must supersede the authors intentions in order to do so as objectively as possible; if we were to do otherwise we'd be stuck in a rut discussing who'd win out of Saitama and TTGL (along with many, many others). We'd also be questioning whether or not this site should even remain as creating a site of this nature goes against the intentions of literally every author who's series is present here.

I don't really even see why I and many other users here are discussing this topic at such length when it has already been answered effectively, almost two decades ago.

 

[Antvasima]

I strongly agree with AMM. We should probably close this thread.