Thread 149866375

Why do people use this as an argument against powerscaling? The writer still has to powerscale the characters and write a logical way for one of them to beat the other. This in no way refutes the concept of power scaling.

>>149866375 (OP)
Pic related is literally
>STOP HAVING FUN
What a hack.

>>149866375 (OP)
It's not an argument against "powerscaling". Are you stupid? (Yes)

>>149866424
>He can't read the OP.

Powerscalers are highly autistic.

>>149866375 (OP)
>The writer still has to powerscale the characters and write a logical way for one of them to beat the other.
You death battle shills are actual retards.

>>149866457
this

>>149866485
What was wrong about the sentence you just green texted? Is the writer not supposed to make something logical?

>>149866375 (OP)
Stan was probably fed up having fans sending him questions on who would win. Most writers don't look at their own fiction from an analytical lens, it's very feels first, logic later. It's on the same level as the creators of Star trek saying the tech works very carefully when asked exactly what happens.

>>149866421
>FUN
This nothing but autism. No fun anywhere.

>>149866528
>Is the writer not supposed to make something logical?
That's a pretty autistic take. Chance could play a huge part in a battle. Just because someone might win 99% of the time, that still leaves 1%.

>>149866615
How is powerscaling, debating over rules and levels, fun?

>>149866375 (OP)
Because they're not fucking real anon, it's all fake, we're all just making shit up to justify why characters would even fight to begin with.

>>149866375 (OP)
>Fuck you for even caring!
The mask slipped.

>>149866528
>Is the writer not supposed to make something logical?
Of course not, haven't you seen Catwoman beat 3 Flashes? Or Squirrel Girl beating everyone as a gag? Writers can do whatever they want, whether it makes sense or not.

>>149866650
>Basic story consistency is now autism
If they have a random chance at beating someone, you'd still have to write that logically. Stories don't play out like events in real life.
>>149866688
I'm also allowed to call that writing shit and inconsistent.

Well She-Hulk beating the Champion was pure bullshit.

>>149866705
No, you don't. How is it logical to debate one thing but like give a pass to alien who can fly and shoot heat lasers?

>>149866375 (OP)
>This in no way refutes the concept of power scaling.
it doesn't and you actually agree with him in concept if you actually understood what he was saying

>>149866375 (OP)
>logical way for one of them to beat the other.
That doesn't always mean "Character A is stronger than Character B". Fights are STORIES. and just deconstructing them into numbers and feats takes away the entire point of them in entertainment. You can win a fight through surprise attacks and trickery, you can win because the location gave you the edge. Obsessing over the stat numbers of a character the thing that writers can make up on a whim is fucking retarded.

>>149866375 (OP)
Because if you want a certain character to win, you can just do that, these aren't real people, Goku can beat Superman, Invincible can beat Goku, Hulk can beat Doctor Doom, and Aunt May can beat Doctor Doom.
Anything is possible in the realm of fiction, there is no set rules of what is possible or not, there is literally no argument for what would "realistically" happen, because none of this shit is real, they're just stories we made up.

>>149866756
>How is it logical to be okay with a character having fantastical abilities but not be okay with inconsistently use of said abilities!
Did I enter the Special Ed room or something?

>>149866705
Anon, stories aren't math equations. Context, character choices, narrative needs, that all plays a part on top of writer bias. A character might technically be weaker on paper but still win because the plot, strategy or circumstances demand it. Logic doesn't account for storytelling or creativity. And many of these powers aren't quantifiable. Because they don't exist. Powerscaling is dumb because comics aren’t spreadsheets. Characters win or lose based on story needs, not math.

>>149866756
>How is it logical to be okay with a character having fantastical abilities but not be okay with inconsistent use of said abilities!
Did I enter the Special Ed room or something?

>>149866878
How do you even measure inconsistency here?

>>149866878
>>149866907
>Did I enter the Special Ed room or something? You're the one that double posted. :)

>>149866902
>Anon, stories aren't math equations. Context, character choices, narrative needs, that all plays a part on top of writer bias.
>Logic doesn't account for storytelling or creativity.
You're talking about bad writing. Not good writing. Scaling isn't about math. It's just comparing characters on where they are in the power system, which, again, any good writer does because it's essential for building up an action narrative. Without it, the fights are meaningless fluff with no idea of who should win or why.

>>149866705
>erm, this doesn't make any sense
It's a made up story anon.

>>149866956
And I messed up that greentext. >_< Ma

>>149866375 (OP)
The problem with powerscaling tards is that they have no grasp of the David vs Goliath myth - they treat everything as pure stats while not taking into account that some characters are just more specifically equipped to deal with certain threats than others, even if they are statistically weaker.
Batman may be able to defeat Superman with Kryptonite, but that doesn't mean Batman is now capable of defeating everyone Superman's won against.

>>149866969
>It's fiction so it's allowed to not have any internal consistency or logic!
How did this argument get so popular?

>>149866485
>picrel is a well powerscaled fight
you mad that chaos control sonic manhandles the likes of darkseid or something?

Even in real life, it's not like people are 100% predictable.

>>149866989
Again, what is your idea of consistency? There isn't really a scale you can measure imaginary things by.

>>149866987
Everyone uses this exact strawman but nobody ever gives examples.

>>149866375 (OP)
Reminder that according to the creators of Venture Bros, any question that involves Brock Samson vs, Brock wins.

>>149867014
Autistics should understand this lol.

>>149866987
David would have won in a normal real world interaction. Slingers are no joke, they are the closest thing to a gun in the ancient world, the fact Goliath didn't act defensively is the most unrealistic part of the story.

Dragon Ball and its power level bullshit ruined a whole generation of autists.

>>149867020
An IRL one? Vietnam.

>>149867018
>A story establishes a characters power
>Character should be this strong by the logic that the story presents
>If the writer breaks this, that's bad writing.
Is this really that hard to understand?

>>149866375 (OP)
because
>character goes all out and kicks ass, hes full aggro and is obviously winning
then
>guy somehow sneaks up on him and hits the back of his head with a brick because the plot needs him to lose
this happens all the time so it makes the power scaling irrelevant.

>>149867065
>>If the writer breaks this, that's bad writing.
This isn't always the case, though. See that kyptonite example. Stuff like that makes for a better story.

>>149867014
no shit. it’s a simulation. the point is not to be a 100% accurate, it’s to simulate what would happen.
this is what the military does before and during a war, even if they don’t know how many vehicles and men they‘ll lose. you draft estimates so the state leader can make generally good diplomatic decisions.
if earth was ever attacked by kryptonians or lemurians, we would be screwed because of people like you

>>149866987
David vs Goliath isnt a myth it was a literal event. Moses fought king Og, david fought goliath, all the patriarchs in OT fought giants. Its never portrayed as mythological non literal.

>>149867045
>>149867014
Fiction doesn't play out like real life. Are you people fucking retarded?

>>149866375 (OP)
The crux of the issue is that powerscaling is dependant on using past events as a way to hard cap a character's power level, but that's retarded because there were points in their history where that cap was lower than it is now - given that those events hadn't happened yet - so using it as a metric for how strong a character can be and then using that to determine "good writing" is stupid.
There was a time where Superman's biggest feat was lifting a car, does that mean all the crazy shit he did afterwards was bad writing because it didn't take powerscaling into account?

>>149866375 (OP)
Logic has nothing to do with science fiction.

>>149867114
>See that kyptonite example.
That doesn't break power scaling. It's just adding scaling to what was already there. If Superman randomly died to a bullet after being shown that he could easily tank them, that would be inconsistent scaling.

>>149867119
Well, I simulate my favorite character beats up your favorite character (that's canon)

>>149866375 (OP)
Threads like these are weirdly interesting to me because I really can't discern what the autists on this board actually want, you know what I mean? Words are coming out of your mouth, yet it seems like you genuinely can't articulate what's specifically bothering you, and what you also want from media in general thanks to constantly obfuscating what you really think.

>>149867153
Oh, so NOW it doesn't have to be realistic, huh?

>>149867211
Nobody said that to begin with.
>>149867208
You're probably autistic if you can't figure out what people are arguing for.

>>149867185
>that would be inconsistent scaling.
Or it would be a mystery that other characters investigate to explain why it happened. Things like this are how writers introduce new concepts to worldbuilding.

have you ever noticed that powerscalefags haven't made a single notable comic yet?

>>149867279
They are more oriented towards animation, same reason shippers prefer writing over making comics.

>>149867114
>Character should be this strong by the logic that the story presents
The logic there is that kryptonite hurts Superman. That's a predefined rule that makes for good writing. Bad writing would be like "oh, yeh, this thing you've never seen before, this also hurts you".

>>149866421
What is fun about getting worked up over which two characters would win in a fight?

>>149866375 (OP)
Because fiction isn't some magical portal into a simulation with perfect internal consistency.
Yes, writers should be as logical as possible. But spergs will genuinely argue to death over "objective" answers to "Which fake person would beat the other fake person harder?".

>>149867258
nta but then what if that explaination isn't liked?

>>149867354
But at one point kryptonite was also a thing that we'd never seen before - by that logic literally every single event in a story that hasn't already happened before is bad writing.

>>149867354
>Bad writing would be like "oh, yeh, this thing you've never seen before, this also hurts you".
Are you retarded? Characters aren't going to to have omniscient knowledge of everything in the universe so obviously new things will be introduced to them. And the fact that the character doesn't know what it is allows the story to EXPLAIN why it does what it does.

>>149867415
Why do spergs on here do this really faggy sophistry where they obfuscate and don't understand obvious things?
There's a thing called build-up and explanations.

>>149867440
Why are you pretending like he was saying "You the character" and not "You the viewer"?

>>149867377
Just let him have his overcompensation complex.

Powerscalers are stupid. They shriek like imbeciles if you try to bring up any of the following characteristics:
>intelligence
>strategy
>resourcefulness
>aggressiveness
>willingness to cooperate
>allies
>dedication
>honor and pride
>tendency towards mercy
Basically to have a "proper" powerscaling discussion, you have to replace the characters with unthinking robots who have all the characters' powers and who are stuck in a permanent bloodthirsty rage and then put them both in a featureless void where they take turns trading hits until one dies. Who are you even talking about at that point? But it doesn't matter, because anything beyond that and they start REEEEing like autistic retards.
My theory is that they were mindbroken when they read Akira Toriyama's quote about how powerlevels are dumb and he only introduced them to subvert them.
Instead of getting the message and not focusing on the numbers, they regressed and said:
>"No! I LIKE the numbers! Big number beat small number! Big number beat small number!"

>>149867442
Lol gotta love when people get super mad after their faulty logic is thrown in their face.
The explanation is happening in front of your very eyes retard, the comic is already saying Super Sonic is stronger than Darkseid by showing you him beating him, there's no reason not to assume it wouldn't be possible if they'd never fought before.

>>149867496
>Akira Toriyama's quote about how powerlevels are dumb and he only introduced them to subvert them.
He never said this. He said that he removed them because they would spoil the fights because you'd know who would win. That's him acknowledging the idea of power scaling.

>>149867414
>nta but then what if that explaination isn't liked?
Then tough titties. The story isn't tailored to you specifically. I prefer the red son explanation of kryptonians being future earthlings but the main stream canon isn't my choice to make

>>149866375 (OP)
what do you mena by powerscaling?

>>149866375 (OP)
Stan's an editor, he doesnt write outside of pushing characters based on profit so he has no idea how strong anyone is.

>>149867415
That’s a bad take because it confuses novelty with laziness or “bad writing.” Just because something is new or surprisingdoesn’t automatically make it a plot hole or poorly written. Kryptonite was popular enough to be reused multiple times. A badly written concept is so dumb that it's never touched again. That's... kinda how fiction works. If everything had to be “already established” nothing creative could happen. Poor writing is when something new feels arbitrary or breaks the story’s own rules. Kryptonite does neither. Well, I guess... case in point... only some of those other colors have stuck around.

>>149866688
>This isn't always the case
It is, if the author can't maintain consistency then it's bad writing, your feelings about it don't matter

>>149866375 (OP)
We don't use it as an argument against power scaling we use it as an argument to tell the autistic retards who obsess over this shit to fuck off.

>>149867415
That's nonsense. Stories exist to surprise us.

>>149867465
>Why are you pretending like he was saying "You the character" and not "You the viewer"?
Because the point of a protagonist is viewing the world through their eyes. We learn about force powers when Luke does we learn that there's a spell to turn you into an animal when Harry does. When a new alien race shows up bringing a solar energy absorbing alloy with them we learn about it when Supes does.
Writing is a fluid process.

>>149866987
>David vs Goliath
It's a mythical metaphor, you stupid retard. So far in this thread there hasn't been a single good argument against "muh, powerscaing bad" beyond not going full autism with it, but even then it doesn't influence the work.

>>149867440
I was actually referring to "you" as in the viewer but I see your point.

>>149866375 (OP)
Because people like winning arguments and when a winning argument doesn't exist, resorting to meta-level bullshit about writers and character popularity is an easy escape route to use so they can exit the argument without feeling humiliated.

Also, comic book writers are generally fucking awful, and saying shit like this is their way of admitting that they don't think about their own stories and the characters they are allowed to write for even 1/100th as much as the fans do.

There's no consistency to maintain because there's no consistency in the first place.
It's not real. The only that thing that exists is what happens in the story.
Writers only have to aim for the illusion of consistency, which is subordinate to other storytelling conventions like themes, arcs, etc.

>>149867510
Ok, if this stays consistent and Sonic isn’t defeated an hour later by people he shouldn’t be beaten by just for a forced plot twist, then there’s no problem — the powerscaling is fine.

>>149867496
>intelligence
>strategy
>resourcefulness
>aggressiveness
Not to be that guy but this rarely happens in most fiction. Writers aren't military strategists and it shows. I mean you are right about power level fags not caring about this stuff but neither do most writers. Why do you think experts in their field tend to cringe and winge when they watch/read the average fictional story set in their domain of expertise? Not saying you shouldn't dislike powerscaling, but most writers are as smart as powerscalers

>>149867546
Yes, to be fair, this is the guy who had to use aliteration to remember names.

So anti-power scaliers agree with Dan Slott?

>>149867639
>There's no consistency to maintain
>Writers only have to aim for the illusion of consistency
damn
which is subordinate to other storytelling conventions like themes and arcs. These are subordinate to a "logic" created by the author that must be forged and which the reader follows throughout the plot.

>>149867582
>We learn about force powers when Luke does
Isn't it when Vader choked that one guy?

>>149867639
This. How can you have consistency when there's multiple versions of a character based on time period or medium?

The problem is that too many retards take this shit too far. How many morons online today look at the retarded online fanfic death battle shit like it somehow has a mark of authority? Too many. What starts out as fun internet banter because religious crusades of autism

There’s an argument against powerscaling, but many anons here use an argument against consistency and promote bad writing. There’s a difference, but many anons think it’s the same thing, which gets them nowhere with their mediocre arguments.

People don't write consistent characters with consistent voice, intelligence, logic. And even then normal people can have inconsistency to them dpeending on a variety of things. The problem is a superhero character only exists in the moment, they are as intelligent as they are in the moment and so many situations are ultimately contrived in who will win or lose.

>>149867659
Writing strategic outmaneuvering is easy. You just start from the advantageous situation and write backwards to how they achieved it. But that's besides the point.
The problem is that there are powerscalers, just like shippers and gooners, they all grew up and infiltrated the writing department and now the inmates are running the asylum.

>>149867694
Exactly. We, the viewer, get knowledge of the Force before Luke. Does that make for bad writing? No, it builds tension and anticipation.

>>149867757
>People don't write consistent characters with consistent voice
you don't understand that being inconsistent in certain situations or moments is still... consistent.
Just don't have someone who can destroy planets get taken down by a bunch of thugs with baseball bats for no reason and we're good.

>>149867732
I think it's some kinda tribalism. Some people identify strongly with their favorite characters so defending them becomes personal.

The powerscaling of the US vs Vietnam fight makes no sense. There's no way the US would ever lose a fight with some shitty rice farmers, the writers had to pull some domestic turmoil bs to make it even somewhat believable

>>149867739
Apply consistency to a fight though. If a character is always going to win, why read it?

>>149867852
How about actually arguing instead of a retarded strawman?

>>149867852
Wasn't it the environment? So that was the kryptonite, so to speak.

>>149867875
Well, in MMA, the best fighter doesn't always win. But in real life, one fighter can't destroy mountains while the other is just a normal, unprepared human. Just don't make the difference in power so great between villain and hero, and that's it.

>>149867852
Can't believe they'd expect us to believe this, bunch of hacks

>>149867896
It wasn't. OP asked for an irl example itt of how you can't judge something based on pure stats and anon replied with Vietnam.

The only people who care about Death Battle are literal manchildren and autistic adults.
No one cares about who wins in a crossover fictional fight. Just discuss it online then you'll get your answer.

How do you guys feel about power creep?

>>149867852
That’s not a criticism of powerscaling or a good comparison, because politics comes into question here, giving consistency and logic to what happened. It’s not like Vietnam simply wiped out the U.S. army with superhuman soldiers who came out from hiding underground — nothing like that happened. Therefore, implying it doesn’t make sense.
Also, many Americans argue that the United States didn’t lose, it simply got tired of killing without any real objective.

>>149866375 (OP)
Stan's quote here kind of speaks to a wider issue with comics in general beyond powerscaling.
It's not enough that a good writer writes a good story, said story also has to abide by a bunch of rules and limitations arbitrarily set up over the course of 50+ years by a plethora of different writers.
And if the writer doesn't do that then it's automatically considered bad writing, regardless of the individual story's quality.
In an ideal world comics would operate on Simpsons rules and each writer got to write in their own individual version of the universe with only an initial status quo to go off of and unable to affect the stories of concurrent and future writers, this way the only continuity that matters is the one you yourself establish in the comic you're currently writing.

>>149867915
This ignores context like teamwork and stuff.

What do powerscalers consider the best media, by chance? What's the most "consistent" story in their eyes?

>>149867996
Dragon Ball Zed

>>149867996
Nim

>>149867694
>Isn't it when Vader choked that one guy?
We see a man start choking during the briefing scene then later Obi wan explain the existence of a controllable energy field generated by life to our proxy Luke. We the audience then make the logical connection to how Vader choked him before. The entire point was having the viewer go "what the fuck was that?" because we're new to the universe the same way a farm boy on the outer rim is. Luke couldn't be in the room with Vader for the "show" portion of "show don't tell" but we could.

>>149867991
Well, amazing Tamwork also influences that. Listen, lad, I think you're confusing my argument with something.
Let's put it simply so it's clearer.
Suppose a level 20 villain faces a level 25 hero. Does he always lose 1v1? No, because the difference isn't that big, and a bad decision or bad luck means everything in a fight.
Now, what about a level 20 villain against a level 100 hero? Now the villain cant win 1v1 even with luck or good decisions in a head-on fight. What does he do now? Does he never win again in his life? No, he can still win with preparation, recruiting, and many other reasons... REASONS that follow a LOGIC, which means consistency.
Powerscaling is respected, and you don’t see a level 100 hero being defeated by a level 20 villain without LOGIC.

>>149866375 (OP)
Anyone who uses this image is just a loser with no sense of fun in their lives.

>>149867977
Oh, OH, so when it comes to one of your hyperfocuses you're perfectly ok with acknowledging other viariables...

Also politics = consistency and logic?

>>149866375 (OP)
This argument works when someone tries to use real world logic for there debates. At that point the person isn't having fun they just want tere character to win with a bigger narrative.

Because powerscalers want to have set a set-in-stone power level chart ala DBZ so that all battles can be conclusively solved. If Hulk has a power-level of 12000 and Wolverine only has a power-level of 10000, Hulk has to always win, so they can call any writer who has Wolvie best Hulk hacks who are trying to ruin comics.

You're correct that there has to be some sense of scope with how strong certain characters are (Yes, it IS bullshit that Harley Quinn can dodge Superman and hog-tie Wonder Woman simply because she's "crazy"), but a good writer can do cool stuff with obviously uneven "match-ups".

>>149868078
>Also politics = consistency and logic?
Yes. Consistency means good writing. Powerscaling is just a form of consistency. If those variables follow reasoning and not something like
>Oh, it turns out I can make someone much stronger even though I'm just a normal human without powers or any possibility that allows it.

>>149868055
I'm gonna nerd out for a bit but the actual dialogue is

VADER: Don't be too proud of this
technological terror you've
constructed. The ability to destroy
a planet is insignificant next to
the power of the Force.

MOTTI: Don't try to frighten us with your
sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader. Your
sad devotion to that ancient
religion has not helped you conjure
up the stolen data tapes, or given
you clairvoyance enough to find the Rebel's hidden fort.

>>149868147
If the variables allow for a reasonable outcome, then power scaling is not compromised. Instead, power scaling is respected and followed.
One thing does not drive out the other, instead, they come together.

>>149868065
It sounds like what you're arguing against are deus ex machinas, in the sense that a weaker character fighting a much stronger character shouldn't be "suddenly or abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence".
I agree that when that happens it's unsatisfying, not because it's illogical though, but because it misses out on telling an interesting story about HOW the underdog overcame the challenge

>>149867840
>you don't understand that being inconsistent in certain situations or moments is still... consistent.
I literally started that in the second sentence
>And even then normal people can have inconsistency

>>149867678
Dan Slott may be an arse, but I wish no-prizes were still a thing.

>>149868147
Isn't DBZ notorious for arbitrary power creep?

>>149868065
Erm... powerscaling sisters?

>>149867946
>OP asked for an irl example
No, they didn't.

>>149867807
Tell me how you would "strategize" to victory in a fist-fight with hafthor bjornsson then, smart ass.

>>149868194
eh, good enough I guess. a character powerscaling lol

>>149868251 Maybe it wasn't OP, I just assumed. And you're right, they didn't ask for an irl one.

>>149868214
Absolutely. Immediately after fighting a galactic emperor who blew up planets when he was losing, they find out a regular Earth scientist was able to make fucking three robots that surpass said emperor a hundred-fold; which is solved by working out really hard for five years.

zamn, powerscalekeks lost hard today

>>149868284
Forgot the post. >>149867020 And you right, they didn't technically ask either lol.

>>149868291
So this is the level of storytelling you powerscaling fans want?

>>149868215
that's a bad video game, senpai. no one play that

>>149868267
Banana peel.

>>149868174
Yeah, but you're both being too generous. Powerscalers aren't debating if Superman or Thor should be able to beat each other arm-wrestling. They're complaining about how any of Batman's villains are still a threat to him when he can flawlessly beat the Justice League literally with his hands tied behind his back or why Doctor Cuck can hit Peter Parker in the jaw and not have his fist immediately shatter.

They have no sense of dramatic storytelling. It's all just toys smashing against each other until one breaks.

>>149868291
Is it actually shown that the robots were more powerful than Frieza though?

>>149868377
Trunks struggles against them and he literally one shots Frieza in his introductory scene.

>>149868351
>They're complaining about how any of Batman's villains are still a threat to him when he can flawlessly beat the Justice League literally with his hands tied behind his back
That really seems like more of a complaint against deus ex machinas. Like, realistically, Joker should have been excuted but he's not because he's a good character for stories.

>>149868400
So? You're not talking context into account. Fights aren't a chess match.

>>149868437
They literally tap dance on vegeta.

>>149866709
To be fair, this isn't new for the Champion. That one comic where the Thing fights him was just several pages of asspull after asspull of why literally nobody but the Thing was allowed to fight him.

>>149867058
I remember reading somewhere that Goliath had some form of gigantism which is why he was so big compared to most people at the time, and apparently had bad eyesight as a result, so the army he worked for mostly relied on his sheer size to scare people off from fighting him.
So odds are Goliath had trouble seeing what David was even doing. if what I read was correct anyways. But you're right, slings were insanely overpowered at the time only held back by the fact they took a lot of practice to use properly(which David had plenty of time since he mostly just kept an eye on the sheep and sued the sling to scare wolves off). Slings are still pretty scary honestly, but no one would use one in a real fight because any fight where you can bring a sling, someone else can just pull a gun and shoot you in half the time.

Power scaling is dumb because character abilities aren’t fixed. They change depending on the writer, the plot, dramatic needs. Characters win or lose to serve the narrative not because stats say they should. Abstract powers like telepathy, magic, reality warping, can’t be quantified. Also context like environment, prep time, allies, emotional state really matter.

>>149867678
All the aughties hacks raped continuity so hard that not even the most dedicated nerds could come up with workarounds.
Also caring about continuity isn't the same as condoning scaling faggotry.

>>149866375 (OP)
>>149866421
>>149866967
>>149867119
Characters aren't numbers on a spread sheet, and stories aren't a science. You dumb fucks, and it's not "bad writing" if a 'weaker' character can beat a 'stronger' one, if the story calls for it. Powerscaling is only useful to give context to the audience, Superman is strong because he's supposed to be, he is the strongest man on Earth, but he uses them to help other people despite having no obligation to besides it being the right thing to do.

Goku is stong because he's directly inspired by Son Wukong and Journey to the West, and both it and DB are meant to protray the importance of finding ones self, and self improvement despite the circumstances of ones past.

If they are beaten, it's meant to protray more improtant to the story. Which is why shit like "metaversal" or whatever is fucking stupid to take seriously, and at odds with the concept of narrative story telling in general

EVERY protagonist starts out weaker than the antagonist, that's the fucking point, that is what makes stories interesting in the first place, because if the protagonist was stronger than everyone most of the time, THERE WOULD BE NO FUCKING STORY.

zamn, badwritingcucks (aka anti-powerscalers) lost hard today

>>149868606
Explain One Punch Man then. It CAN be done, it's just rare.

>>149868630
It's not the same thing I think. I don't think anyone is saying having no scale at all is a good thing.

>>149868646
The point of One Punch Man is Saitama learning to find purpose with his life once he's reached the top physically, that are things worth living for despite your goals having seemingly been reached, that's why Genos is there, that's why King is there, that's why Tatsumaki got humbled, they are there to see the top, to see what they're actually fighting for, and decide if that's what they really want. That being strong is not, nor has it ever been the end goal in life.

The main "antagonist" of One Punch Man isn't anyone you can fight, but the reason for being itself.

Context and themes are important dumb dumb.

>>149868630
>Powerscaler shitter thinks his team is in favor of good writing
That's rich

>>149867724
This. Which versions of the character are you talking about? Can I use the one in my fanfic?

HOLY FUARKING STRONG

>>149868804
That's not officially licensed fanfic.

>>149866375 (OP)
I you care about powerscalling in somethig as inconsistent as comic books you're stupid in the first place. The same cam be said about Japanese media in general.

>>149866485
I'm baffles comic needs don't know how powerful sonic and kirby are on their lore.
Those two are actual cosmic god killers, that kill eldritch horror monsters before breakfast.
If it was darkseif against normal sonic, I would agree, but supersonic? Not at all.
The only stupid shit about that crossover was sonic beating reverse flash, with pure raw speed.l, bit I guees the dude is immune to speed force shenanigans, because his speed is actual natural.

These discussions make it painfully clear that there's people incapable of understanding the concept of intent. Sometimes writers make mistakes or change their mind the same way game devs buff or debuff certain characters and gear to keep a game balanced. Creativity is a process and it's going to be hit and miss.

>>149869089
It baffles me that Sonic and Kirby even have this kind of lore at all and that you care about it

>>149869134
Everyone is fan of something, even if some don't like the same content.

>>149869134
nta but world building is pretty important for any kind of fandom.

>>149866421
You dont have an emotional eye. Thats a “Leave me alone with this question“ reaction after getting asked the 100th time a vs-quesion.

While I get Stan Lee's point, Marvel still has some semblance of power scaling. For example Spider-Man is the company's most popular hero but he's still consistency shown to get his ass beat by Dr Doom to the point that nowadays he gets scared shitless and doesn't even try.

It shows at least a bit more restraint than how DC has Batman defeating all of the Justice League single handedly due to prep. But in that case you know it's just because Batman is the company's most popular hero by far. Similar to how Joker is one of DC's most feared villains even though he's just an edgy clown.

Powerscalers never consider the strategies, locations, a character's intellect, their flaws, their knowledge, their emotions, etc. and so many other variables that only happen in an actual story. So yes, Stan Lee is right.

>>149869089
Is funny to know sonic beat actual lovecraftinan monsters, the abstract concept of dead and the end of all things as concept of all things, in his last game.

>>149869244
Didn't Tombstone just go to town on him? Flippin' Tombstone...

>>149869090
DBZ nerds still have yet to understand that Toriyama didn't have any of the story plotted out and that he was literally chasing trends from the other manga at the time.

Almost all of Dragon Ball after the first arc was Kinnikuman but with martial arts (all his enemies become his friends, he has a long lost alien heritage, power levels, his sensei is a hermit on an island associated with Kamehameha)
Goku grew up because adults were still popular main characters in Jump at the time.
Trunks looks exactly like the main character from Dragon Quest IV because the Dragon Quest manga was getting popular.
Gohan was a teenager when he was made the main character for a few chapters because all the other main characters in Jump at the time were teenagers.

>>149869244
>Marvel still has some semblance of power scaling. For example Spider-Man is the company's most popular hero but he's still consistency shown to get his ass beat by Dr Doom to the point that nowadays he gets scared shitless and doesn't even try.
This is actually very shit writing and storytelling. See again, "powerscaling" is only ever useful to give context to the audience, to make the reader feel nervous if these two were in the same room? But for Peter to just give up at he sight of Doom is awful characterzation and something he wouldn't do if he didn't have the choice.

And Batman being le ebin always prepared guy, has 10 different plans in case one of his fellow JL members goes rogue, is also very shit and ruins his characters, but this board isn't ready for that conversation

>>149867982
I agree with this

>>149869134
With Kirby, it was just people vamping up stuff until it became true in canon. If you call Dark Matter "The Star Meanies" literally nothing in-game changes. They aren't explicitly nightmare eldritch beings; they just creepy-cute things in a game for kindergartners.

>>149869414
How do we feel about fans being able to influence material like this?

>>149869352
People on this very board outright stated that Failsafe and Batkek are very obviously DC trying to tell people that Preptime BatGod is fucking stupid and that Batman works best with a Robin solving crimes and scaring bad guys.

>>149869293
Powerscalers never consider that win/lose isn't a binary thing in storytelling, if a character loses it's because it serves a greater point in the story. Either to help the themes or simply to create tension

That not all fights can be won through strength alone.

>>149869134
People are into different things anon.

I like thinking about different characters fighting but the whole concept has been ruined by spics who don't understand the difference between stories and sports

>>149869444
Yeh, and look how well the whole Rorschach thing went.

>>149869225
Its not the world building it's the tone. The games are about a funny blue rodent who goes fast and now we're gotten shit like dark clones bent on revenge because children were machine gunned down or whatever the fuck Shadow's deal was.

>>149869444
It's not just that it's dumb and lazy writing, even though it is. It's that Bruce even having those plans in the first place, ruins his character and growth. That Batman can't and won't trust people who would fight alongside him and give their lives for him, that there's always "some chance" they might turn evil and blow up the world or something, and often DC's rewards that kind of paranoia, while also half-assedly tries to condemn it, sometimes in the same story.

That is why the Batfamily exists, because its Bruce literally opening himself up again into having connection with other people after the death of his parents.

But no, we gotta have Batman think 10 steps ahead for every possible outcome, how else would we understand that he's cool?

>>149869491
Yeah let's ignore how inconsistent is media about story and powerscalling in general, people tend to forget some characters don't like to fight at all, are goody two shoes, or have actual morals to not being the police, the judge and the executor at the same time, because they live in a society with actual rules, because they aren't drunk with power nor, want to make their will against masses, they just want to help people.

>>149869352
Unless I'm missing something the last time Peter Parker and Dr Doom met was during the "Eight Deaths of Spider-Man" storyline in which case Peter Parker was still acting like a snarky shit-talker to Doom. But Doom unleashes some demon from Hell type monster on the city and when Spidey can't handle it he goes "OKAY FUCK I'LL DO WHAT YOU WANT JUST DON'T LET ANYONE DIE".

Which is honestly in character for Peter Parker. He's like the type of character that will crack jokes at the risk of his own life but then if he sees someone else's life is at risk he panics and is easily manipulated. See comics like ONE MORE DAY for example.

>>149869562
Tower of Babel/Identity Crisis and their consequences have been a disaster for DC Comics.

>>149869546
So watch Sonic Prime and ignore that.

Sometimes I think about making crossover fight fanart because I know that legitimate autismos having powerscale fights in the comments is actually good for algorithm shit

>>149869622
That's better I guess. Peter in any form, isn't the kind of person to let other people die out of his own fear or if who's he's facing is leagues above him raw strength. That's WHY he's such a smartass, to not let the pressure get to him

>>149869629
I think were Tower of Babel really falls apart is that while even the League agrees that contingencies aren't a bad idea it's that Batman never really shows regret. They try to paint him as right for it even when it's blowing up in their faces. Batman wasn't wrong for having them he was wrong for being a dick about it.

>>149869622
Peter literally beat the everloving shit out of Kingpin in front of his men when he found out that it was him who ordered the hit that put Aunt May in the hospital to begin with. He's not the "I'll do anything; please just don't hurt them" type when actually pushed against the wall.

>>149869696
Identity Crisis made it worse by justifying him not regretting it by explaining that all of his mistrust about the League isn't some logical "we need contingencies" thing, but him honestly believing the League are out to do harm and he personally has to stop them.

>>149869804
Kingpin at the end of the day has zero superpowers. He's just weirdly strong for a regular guy.

When Spider-Man power-scalers try to make Peter Parker seem super strong they claim he "was always holding back". So for example when Doc Oc is in control of his body and he punches Scorpion his jaw flies clean off.

It's kind of a lame excuse since Parker and his loved ones have been in so many deathly situations but "he was always just holding back lol".

>>149866375 (OP)
Let's be honest, if that phrase wasn’t from Stan Lee most people wouldn’t use it. They use it thinking that it’s the hard truth because it comes from "Mr. Marvel"

>>149870144
We're not indians. I assume most people here have nuanced opinions of Stan Lee

>>149866421
The picture is literally HAVE FUN AND STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT WHO'S BETTER!

>>149866375 (OP)
>Why do people use this as an argument against powerscaling?
Because powerscalers are autistic retards, you autistic retard.

>>149866669
>debating over rules
https://youtu.be/IRsPheErBj8?si=tlnZR37hql82ngWE

>>149867546
>Stan's an editor, he doesnt write
He actually doesn't do anything, anon. He's dead.

>>149870526
Isn't the general consensus that his was a huckster showmanship that took credit for other people's work?

>>149866375 (OP)
>Why do people use this as an argument against powerscaling
because they are made-up characters and the winner is whoever the writer wants to win

>The writer still has to powerscale the characters and write a logical way for one of them to beat the other.
you have it backwards, the writer already has the winner in mind and he writes the story to suit that
the actual powers

>This in no way refutes the concept of power scaling.
stan lees ultimate point is that arguing "hulk would totally beat thor, he is stronger" is pointless fan arguing

>>149870770
>ESL
That's the general consensus of NPC retards. People who actually know the first fucking thing about the history of the industry know that while he was obviously not above inflating his own contributions to any given work, the man personally wrote a huge chunk of the early Marvel stories that became the foundation for the entire company.

>>149867377
What is fun about getting worked up over fiction in general?

>DUDE WHO CARES ITS NOT REAL
Do anti-powerscalers realize they sound exactly the same as people who are anti-fictional content in general?

>>149870770
Stan Lee created Marvel 'nuff said!

>>149870841
Oh, no, you autistic power scaling fans are WAY more militant than us.

>>149870861
weak justification, everyone is worse than someone else, again you're just saying normies are right for shitting on fiction in general

>>149870841
>anti-powerscalers
Anon that's a weird fuckin' way to spell "normal people without crippling autism"

>>149870881
>normies are right for shitting on fiction in general
Who itt is saying anything close to that? Kind of a strawman.

>>149868606
None of that refuted anything I said.

>>149870881
>everyone is worse than someone else
but nobody is worse than you, retard-kun

>>149870915
You need to be more specific which autistic rambling I responded to

>>149870881
What I'm saying is that, sure, you can like power scaling and have fun little what if battles and stuff but the people that autistically rant about it like you ruin it for the rest of them.

>>149870904
>Who itt is saying anything close to that
If you say "powerscalers are worse because they are more militant' then the same logic works with normies going "people who like fiction are worse because they are more militant"

>>149870940
>You're talking about bad writing. Not good writing. Scaling isn't about math. It's just comparing characters on where they are in the power system, which, again, any good writer does because it's essential for building up an action narrative. Without it, the fights are meaningless fluff with no idea of who should win or why.
You're talking about bad writing. Not good writing. Scaling isn't about math. It's just comparing characters on where they are in the power system, which, again, any good writer does because it's essential for building up an action narrative. Without it, the fights are meaningless fluff with no idea of who should win or why.
Nothing of what you said about characters starting off weak and then growing stronger, or any of that other shit refuted the concept of power scaling.

>>149870946
What I'm saying is that, sure, you can dislike power scaling and stuff but the people that autistically rant about it like you ruin it for the rest of them.

>>149870900
>>149870841
>LE AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM! ANYTHING I CANT REFUTE IS AUTISM! BASIC CONSISTENCY IN ANYTHING IS AUTISM! I SEE AUTISM EVERWHERE AROUND ME AAAAAAAAA!!!!

>>149870978
>being this autistic

>>149866375 (OP)
You can write pages upon pages of how, logically considering their canon powers and achievements, Galactus should be capable of absolutely destroying the fuck out of the Fantastic Four, but nuh uh, he always loses because PLOT CONTRIVANCE. Oh, Goku can tank attacks that destroy planets? Nuh uh, man with laser gun can kill him and that's ~canon~ hahaha. The Flash, wielding the speedforce, has the punch of infinite mass and can travel through the time, HOWEVER, Batman had preptime so his victory is guaranteed.
Power scaling is fun, sure, discussing what if scenarios is fun, but at the end of the day they're not going to determine the outcome of any canon fight, because they're fictional characters and writers control who fights who, who wins and who loses.

>>149870940
>You're talking about bad writing. Not good writing. Scaling isn't about math. It's just comparing characters on where they are in the power system, which, again, any good writer does because it's essential for building up an action narrative. Without it, the fights are meaningless fluff with no idea of who should win or why.
Nothing of what you said about characters starting off weak and then growing stronger, or any of that other shit refuted the concept of power scaling.

>>149870991
Nobody is interested in "refuting the concept of power scaling" we just want you fucking spergs to shut the fuck up.

If you enjoy fiction more than me, you're a FUCKING LOSER AUTIST.
If you enjoy fiction less than me, you're a FUCKING TOURIST NORMALFAG CASUAL.
I unironically believe everyone must enjoy it exactly the same degree as me, no more, no less, I am a serious person.

I don't point of getting uppity about continuity changes and then saying continuity in power scaling is bad

>>149870990
>because they're fictional characters and writers control who fights who, who wins and who loses.
But if they don't write it in a consistent or logical way, then the writing fails, and thus it's bad writing and bad power scaling.

>>149871004
Too bad, not gonna happen, so you better just learn to tolerate/avoid things you don't like, a very valuable life skill in the internet age

So how does Storm go back to jobbing to big robots after this

>>149871004
>Nobody is interested in "refuting the concept of power scaling" we just want you fucking spergs to shut the fuck up.
No. Give an actual rebuttal.

>>149866375 (OP)
The difference between a bad writer & a good writer is one who can actually fairly match two characters together to achieve a logical outcome. A bad writer plays favorites & or in the case of dumb crossovers just has everyone act retarded in the face of a threat that shouldn't be as bad as it is.

>>149870991
Anon, what you said is both being willingly obtuse to how powerscaling works and misses the point. Nobody is saying fights should be random with no internal consistancy, but the outcome of said fight is not determined through strength alone given what's actually being written and why.

You know goddamn well most of these debates are just stacking things done or said in canon and comparing them to see which side tips slightly bigger.

>>149870956
It most certainly does not. Powerscalers are a narrow subgroup within fiction fans defined by a specific behavior. "People who like fiction" is an extremely broad category encompassing nearly everyone in some form, including casual and non combative fans. If some powerscalers are more militant, that’s a higher proportion of the group, so “powerscalers are more militant” can plausibly describe the subgroup’s tendencies. If some fiction fans are militant, they make up a minuscule fraction of ALL fiction fans, so “fiction fans are more militant” is not a representative statement. Applying a behavior seen in a small minority to the entire massive category of fiction fan is statistically unsound. With powerscalers the behavior is attributed to a smaller group so the base rate of militancy can actually be more representative of the group as a whole. It's basically a false equilency.

>>149871036
The rebuttal is kill yourself

I'm just gonna keep debating on whether Hulk can beat Superman, haha sorry I'm just not gonna stop

>>149871021
It's comic books, consistency and logic get thrown out of the window all the fucking time if it serves the story
There hasn't ever been a single hero or villain with a consistent power scaling and there will likely never be one.

>>149871051
I'm not really interested in hearing your gripes with the community. I'm here to talk about the concept itself. In most cases, a character can speed blitz and instantly beat another one with no chance of any kind of other strategy working. If you don't like it, tough shit.

I love how powerscaler autismos genuinely try to present themselves like they're what the average audience member is when consuming literally anything.

Yeah, I'm sure most of the people who played the new Donkey Kong were wondering if he scaled to fucking Godzilla or The Thing or something.

>>149869955
It's the normal superhero thing. They could straight up obliterate a lot of their foes. It's only when the villain crosses a line do they need to do the same.

>>149871116
>BRUHH DIS MOFUGGA BE CRITICALLY THINKIN AND SHEIT HE FINNA BE PRETENTIOUS
Actually kill yourself. This is the reason why so much media nowadays is garbage.

>>149866375 (OP)
This quote will forever be one of the dumbest things I see parroted by idiots. Like of course Stan Lee said this out of touch shit. No the writer is not the be all end all of what happened in a comic and never was, that individual is the editor. Of course Stan Lee, the chief editor of Marvel, will say this cause he was the top of the system when he was active. He was the guy telling other people no so of course he doesn't actually understand what being a normal writer actually entails.

>>149866375 (OP)
Stan was right.

>>149871131
Doinkey Kong vs. Godzilla is critical thinking?

>>149871081
You can't divorce this coversation from the comumunity you coward. When people talk about "powerscaling" they're talking about the kind of fuckers who only value Superman or Goku because some out of context panels

We're not talking about the naunces. Yeah, scaling can be useful to give context and scope in a story, but it's the only thing important about it.

>>149866709
Dude, the Champion was created to job against comic protagonists.

>>149871135
>a normal writer
A normal writer puts the needs of the story over nerd arguments about who will win
If daredevil needs to beat galactus, he will if it serves the needs of the story

>>149871116
> genuinely try to present themselves like they're what the average audience member
No one is doing this

>>149871131
>pretentious
the word is pathetic, actually

>>149871173
A good writer is capable of staying consistent while delivering a gripping story. Any retard can just dump random assortment of aura moments and epic quotes into a script

>>149871131
>>149871179
Yes, you sure thinking critically about how strong a fictional monkey is, I'm sure this exactly what Nintendo intended when they made the game.

>>149871021
Writing is inhernely an emotional and pathos-focused medium and those always trump "who would win"
If you want pure reason, watch a documentary

I find the very nature of versus battles frankly insulting. Anyone who's a fan of anything shouldn't want to see their heroes fight each other to the death unless their an edgy retard and if you're just trying to flex on shit you don't like then fuck off back to your own hole. It says about your own thing when you can't enjoy it without shit talking other crap.

>>149871168
Isn't your entire argument talking about the nuances of just not every fight being about numbers and just one beating the other by pure stats?

>>149871193
>A good writer is capable of staying consistent while delivering a gripping story.
A better writer knows to put a gripping story above all

>>149871178
>Nobody is saying this
>>149870956
>>149870881
>>149870841

>>149871200
>>149871151
>Strawman strawman strawman
Is this all you fucks can do?

>>149871173
And a good editor would tell that writer that doing that would ruin the stakes of the character and the credibility of Galactus as a villain and to go back and write something else.

>>149871208
Because I disagree with the notion of powerscaling in general in this context
There's that word again "context", which is kinda important about this, and one you seem to love to forget when it suits you

>>149866375 (OP)
It's not really any kind of argument at all. Yes, fiction is arbitrary. But if your narrative is arbitrary, it becomes a bad narrative. A good narrative is rigorous and has reliable expectations.
You don't want to be an arbitrary writer if you can help it.

>>149871226
>Strawman
Anon, this is literally what you're arguing for. What else are you "thinking critically" about in this instance?

>>149866375 (OP)
>The writer still has to powerscale the characters and write a logical way for one of them to beat the other.
Akira Toriyama sure didn't when he made Kid Buu the strongest Buu and Goku the strongest hero despite all logic saying otherwise.

>>149871224
none of those posts say that

>>149871215
Shit happening arbitrarily and inconsistently will never be gripping. Dei ex machina are unsatisfying.

>>149871215
and a story isn't gripping when it can't even get the characters right. This idea that your story is so gripping and impactful is just diva author cope.

>>149871261
If a writer portrays a character as a certain strength and then they abandon than or change it with seemingly no build up or explanation, then that's bad writing. This is basic critical thinking.

>>149871277
Except characters aren't set power level most of the time. Their strength fits what's best in the situation in they're in. You don't need to think about Donkey Kong being strong, because he can see it, we see it throughout the entire game.

There are certain times you don't need to think about the character traits of a given character, nobody needs to think about how Superman is strong, we all already know.

Whether they win or lose is dependent on what the story and writer wants to do with them.

>>149871235
Thats a bad editor who prioritizes street cred over a good story

>>149871329
>Except characters aren't set power level most of the time.
>Except they are. In any well written story.
Their strength fits what's best in the situation in they're in.
This is the definition of plot convenience which is bad writing.
>You don't need to think about Donkey Kong being strong, because he can see it, we see it throughout the entire game.
And if they suddenly portray Donkey Kong as way weaker or way stronger than he was shown to be before just for the plot, then that's bad writing.
>There are certain times you don't need to think
You aren't thinking at all, clearly, with this mindset.
>nobody needs to think about how Superman is strong, we all already know.
And if they suddenly portray Superman as way weaker or way stronger than he was shown to be before just for the plot, then that's bad writing.
>Whether they win or lose is dependent on what the story and writer wants to do with them.
And I'm free to call out their shit writing if they mess up on this front. They can't just write whatever and have it be good. They have to be consistent and written well.

>>149871267
>Dei ex machina are unsatisfying
A victory being decidied by what is more important to the story is not a deus ex machina

>>149871380
>donkey kong can only lift 40 tons instead of 60 tons
>this means the story is bad
Consistent power levels mean jack and shit in a story and only powerscalers think otherwise

>>149871414
>donkey kong can only lift 40 tons instead of 60 tons
If they explicitly state this, and then suddenly have him lift something that's shown to be beyond that level of weight, with no build up or prior explanation of him getting stronger, then yes, that's bad writing.

>>149871394
Yes it fucking is, you imbecile. If it is not adequately justified, it's a god from the machine and can be NOTHING ELSE.
Deus ex machina is literally the term for "a result that is not adequately justified".
A result that is important to the story, but not adequately justified, is a deus ex machina that proves an inadequate writer who needed something to happen but couldn't figure out how to make it happen in a way that was satisfying or made sense.
This is tautological. It should not confuse you.

>>149871380
>This is the definition of plot convenience which is bad writing.
No it isn't. Because character can be a strong or as waek as they need to be for the story to be interest
Your whole post is "wahhhhaaaaaa characters who are strong losing sometimes is bad writing" Like it's that fucking simple.

You don't need two pages of exposition to explain why sometimes a character loses to other who's weaker. You know what that does? It kills the pacing. Nor they should they be limited in the stories they tell, which you are, but saying no character who clearly weaker should even interact with another who's stronger in any sense.

>>149871367
"BUT MUH STORIES", sorry anon but comics are a business. Maintaining consistency for a continuity that is meant to go on in perpetuity is much more important than "good" one off stories that ruin the over all consistency of the company.

>>149871434
Who gives a shit? Are you measuring how strong they are? Does that ruin the expirence if they slightly go over or under, like the writer is keeping track of how many pounds they're lifting in a given moment?

Fucks sakes

>>149871434
>If they explicitly state this, and then suddenly have him lift something that's shown to be beyond that level of weight
"Go beyond their limits" is literally a storytelling staple where people can lift things vastly outside their limits
Because normal people do not care about consistent powers, they care about people pushing themselves beyond what they are capable of when they are backed against a wall
Spider-man lifting a 100-ton piece of wreckage when he is ostensibly only capable of lifting 10-tons is an iconic moment despie being a flragrant disregard of his power level because showing his absolute devotion to aunt may matters more to the story

>>149871461
>No it isn't. Because character can be a strong or as waek as they need to be for the story to be interest
If the story says that they're a certain level of strength, and then randomly, with no prior explanation or build-up, decide to show otherwise, then that's bad writing. You're doing these copious amounts of mental gymnastics to try and around what's a very simple and obvious point because you simply don't like power scalers. You won't have any good faith rebuttal to this.
>"wahhhhaaaaaa characters who are strong losing sometimes is bad writing"
Strawman again.

>>149869955
I was refuting the idea that Spider-man "panics and is easily manipulated" when he sees someone else's life is at risk by using one of the biggest examples of "If he's not quipping, you're fucked."

Spidey gave up against Doom because a giant kaiju attacking New York IS out of his depth.

>>149866671
I always hate it whenever writers make Batman and Superman fight because, when you think about their histories and ideologies, they'd normally have no reason to do so. Even when the friction between them is at their heaviest, they wouldn't have a reason to fight unless you made one or both of them act severely out of character. In The Dark Knight Returns, Millar turned Superman into a government lapdog in order to force him and Batman to come to blows. In Batman V Superman, Snyder turned Batman into a complete maniac who casually kills people by the dozen. In Injustice, Superman became a tyrannical despot. For them to come to blows, Superman either has to completely abandon his defining principles or Batman has to become a completely irredeemable psychotic jackass.

Batman and Superman both want the same things. Sure, Batman is darker and more cynical, but their differences are only skin deep. They both want to save lives. They both generally refuse to kill. They might have their differences, sure, but how is what Clark wants any different from what Bruce wants? In reality, even if Batman can be an asshole about it at his worst, the world that Superman wants isn't really all that different from the world that Batman wants. They both have the same principles and ideals. In fact, when you get right down to it, in all the Justice League, I doubt there's any two superheroes who (should) agree with each others' ideologies more. So when written well, these two should never willingly fight. If anything, historically, Batman has usually been Superman's most ardent supporter.

>>149871480
>Who gives a shit? Are you measuring how strong they are? Does that ruin the expirence if they slightly go over or under, like the writer is keeping track of how many pounds they're lifting in a given moment?
Strawman again.
>If they explicitly state this, and then suddenly have him lift something that's shown to be beyond that level of weight, with no build up or prior explanation of him getting stronger, then yes, that's bad writing.
Read my post again, and come back with an actual argument.

>>149871506
Strawman nothing. That is your entire point and it's stupid. That characters can't be any stronger or weaker than they are or else it's bad writing.

Obviously there are exceptions to this and it's more complicated than a simple binary win/lose scenario, but you damn well know, you're not talking about this is good faith, and painting all stories and the fights they have, as equal, at least the "interesting" ones, the ones you people spend hours talking about like taking out of context clips and panels and using them as gospel to prove you're right.

>>149868884
>powerscalekekaroos couldn't even muster a response to this

>>149871486
Still has to be believable. The deed has to be sold. Having Spider-Man lift 100 tons, sure, whatever, he's super strong and extra motivated. Having Spider-Man punch out Galactus, that just becomes nonsense, isn't that guy supposed to be stronger than gods? The numbers can fluctuate an appreciable distance, they should not be totally arbitrary or the entire concept loses its cohesion.

>>149871597
>Having Spider-Man punch out Galactus, that just becomes nonsense
>Cries about strawman while using a strawman argument
I'm not even surprised at this point

>>149871569
>If they explicitly state this, and then suddenly have him lift something that's shown to be beyond that level of weight, with no build up or prior explanation of him getting stronger, then yes, that's bad writing.
Read my post again, and come back with an actual argument.

>>149869444
Failsafe is basically just sort of an inverse of Brother Eye. Where Brother Eye was created as a paranoia-fueled counter against other superheroes, Failsafe was created as a paranoia-fueled counter against himself. Ever since the Tower of Babel storyline, there has always been a bit of intrigue as to how Bruce would come up with a contingency against himself if he ever went rogue. So basically, he fucking created a Brother Eye designed primarily as a counter against himself.

Tower of Babel and Crisis on Infinite Earths have had disastrous consequences for Batman's character that has continued to haunt him to the present day. Writers who loved these stories can't fucking stop revisiting them, further degrading Batman's character every time they do so.

>>149871579
Flash is basically the poster boy of "OP in your own book; Jobber in everyone elses".

In his own book: he and his family are literally the reason why time moves sequentially because they wowed extra-dimensional beings with the concept of how much they love their families based on traveling from one place to another for them; regardless of barriers.

In own books: Batman can beat him by tricking him into walking on teflon. Deathstroke can beat him by just holding a sword under his armpit because The Flash is too stupid to actually look where he's running.

>>149866987
>>149867058
>>149867583
>the David vs Goliath myth
The entire myth is retarded and is a great example why not to use stories to convey information. If you know anything about the slings used at the time it's the equivalent to Indiana Jones shooting the guy with the sword. If you don't, it's a story about a guy overcoming impossible odds. They're two completely different messages.

>>149867131
It's called a "myth", because nobody outside of your religion believes it happened.

This is me being ultra pedantic but I wish more people split the difference between power "scaling" and power "levels"

He's absolutely right though. If a writer wants someone to win, they will win even if it's bullshit. Just see how insane the plot armor most humans have in situations against like dragons and other shit.

>>149871628
Flash writers are all massive Flashfags who want him to be the greatest and most powerful superhero ever. But since not all writers share this sentiment, they often disagree, some more maliciously than others. Superhero writers and editors are constantly flinging shit at each other. It's an industry filled with intense bias, spite, fanboyism and deliberate revisionism in order to fit one's own agenda. Writers and editors will not hesitate to put each other under the bus in order to get what they want. It's cutthroat as fuck,

>>149871611
You don't have a point anon. And right now, you're just being a broken record because you have no actual argument to respond with.

Take this (You) I'm fucking done

>>149871609
The fuck? That's not a strawman. That's a comparison, anon. Words have meanings, you can't just toss out fallacies and expect them to be appropriate to the conversation.

>>149871672
>Flash writers are all massive Flashfags
No shit, really?

>>149871597
>Still has to be believable
Its as believable as the writer lets it be
And believability is secondary to pathos
Spider-man becoming stronger out of nowhere is unrealistic, but its good becuase it shows his extreme determination

This is the same case for vs battles
The winner is whoevers name is on the cover, the writer just comes up with a good explanation for why
Spider-man beating people outside his power level is acceptable if it shows some aspect of his character
Spider-man beats colossus and wolverine to show his speed and experience, not because he is inherently more powerful
Spider-man wins or loses based on that rather than numbers

>>149866375 (OP)
As someone who enjoys watching DB, I love seeing other DB fans seeth over this. The point isn't that his ideology over this is objective, he's just saying to not take this shit so seriously and you shouldn't. I've seen grown men literally crash out and have genuine suicidal thoughts over Goku losing to Superman

>>149871689
Very rarely, you do get writers assigned to work on titles for character they don't have insane erections for. There's been a small handful of cases where head writers of certain titles even took the opportunity to knock the character down a peg.

See: Almost ever Spider-Man writer in the past ten years.

>>149871674
Making a argument nobody was saying is a textbook example of a strawman, fuck off.

>>149871691
>the writer just comes up with a good explanation for why
And that's the key point, anon. That's the central matter that everything orbits. It has to have a good explanation. Otherwise, it's bad writing.
Yes, fiction is arbitrary. This is not a revelation. Everyone already knows that. Powerscaling is nothing more than the extrapolation that any good writer would perform BEFORE coming up with their good explanations for why David can beat Goliath.

>>149871673
I accept your concession.

>>149871730
It's a fucking comparison, anon, it's not an argument, it's a secondary data point. Nobody has to make the argument for me to make the comparison. Is this a bot? Do you not speak english?

>>149871733
>That's the central matter that everything orbits
The writers job is to make the fight interesting, not decide who beats who based on spreadsheet numbers
The winner is decided by what is more interesting or what is better for their characters, not who makes more sense

David beats goliath to show god on his side, and that trumps physical size
Not because slings are secretly S-tier weapons and david had a 10 in speed that let him shoot first, which is irrelevant to the story

The fight, and its victor, serves the story
Not the other way around

>>149871801
Yes, anon. That is how a narrative works. You are treating this as something that is not self-evident. The sky is also blue, and the pope is catholic. However, a good writer will run the numbers, realize what needs to be done, and JUSTIFY.
So yes. David has God on his side. That is the justification. That makes it believable. The fight served the story, AND it managed to retain its narrative consistency and did not descend into arbitrariness. We now know that David < Goliath < David+God. This is our consistent framework.
All "powerscaling" is, is interpreting the consistency of a framework. It is nothing more than that at all.

>>149869089
Sonic was only able to nick the chaos emerald from Reverse Flash using his speed, but otherwise couldn't land a hit. Reverse Flash seemed almost to be playing with Sonic. When Sonic does beat him up, he's using chaos control with the emerald to stop time.

>>149871864
>All "powerscaling" is, is interpreting the consistency of a framework.
Powerscaling is just irrelevant to the story
The importance is what the emotion and character conveyed, not spreadsheet numbers determining who is stronger than who

>>149871864
Consistency in power levels does not matter
X can beat Y on tuesday but Y can beat X on saturday, because they had different plots and whoever is stronger depends on the needa of the story

>>149871922
Powerscaling is absolutely relevant to the story. If Goliath was not stronger than David, then his defeat is not interesting.

>>149871962
That does matter because this inconsistency makes your story drivel if you don't justify it.

>>149866375 (OP)
Power-scaling makes dadaists ass mad for it demands narrative coherence and not lolsorandumb slop

>>149871691
>Spider-man becoming stronger out of nowhere is unrealistic
To be fair, there are real life accounts of moms fueled by adrenaline lifting cars and stuff.

>>149871639
>The entire myth is retarded and is a great example why not to use stories to convey information. If you know anything about the slings used at the time it's the equivalent to Indiana Jones shooting the guy with the sword. If you don't, it's a story about a guy overcoming impossible odds. They're two completely different messages.
Or maybe it's a story about how you can overcome seemingly impossible odds with the right tool.

>>149871987
It really doesnt
At best, its a 5th priority after everything else has been done

>>149871965
>Powerscaling is absolutely relevant to the story.
It isnt

>If Goliath was not stronger than David, then his defeat is not interesting.
No one cares about power levels, feats, or abilities
Only the symbolic message that gods will trumps everything
Writing for themes and messages beats writing power levels every time

>>149873662
>No one cares about power levels, feats, or abilities
Different anon, but - That statement is unfortunately not true.

>>149873662
If nobody cares about power, then why is the fact that Goliath is stronger than David important to the story in the first place?

>>149873623
I'd put it somewhere around third? After artist's intention and general appeal? Narrativistic consistency is kind of a major deal. Otherwise your story becomes dumb, and who wants to write a heartfelt but dumb story?

>>149868606
>Characters aren't numbers on a spread sheet,
You don't need exact numbers to have a general consistency you retarded autist

>>149873937
Who says he was? All we know is that he was a big, tall guy.

>>149868606
Fist of the North Star.

>>149870827
No one responded because they can't respond without either validating power scaling (because people enjoy it), or invalidating their own hobby (you're right, this is all meaningless, I should find something better to do with my time).

>>149873937
powerscaling david vs goliath takes away from the narrative
powerscaling arguments are "X is stronger than Y, so Y shouldnt win the fight" followed by an autistic breakdown of every single feat and ability that each character has ever shown
you see that kind of argument presented above, where someone was trying to argue the sling was actually an S-tier weapon and david could have won the fighr even without gods help

but the ultimate point of the story has absolutely nothing to do with power, all human power is irrelevant compared to the will of god, and david wins regardless of any advantages goliath has because god is on his side
which is a recurring thing in the bible
X, Y, Z or any other earthly attribute is meaningless in the overall scheme of gods plan

this applies to non-bible stories, the winner of a fight shouldnt be governed by power levels, it should be governed by what story you are trying to tell
weaker people can overcome stronger foes, if not by god then by whatever else fits the narrative being told, but arguing about power levels as a means to settle who would win in a fight is non-sense

stan lee was right, the winner is whoevers name is on the cover of the comic

>>149874755
There are far more interesting things to debate in fiction than power scaling though.

>>149871639
It doesnt matter if you believe it, the authorial intent and surrounding references and retelling in the book Chronicles take it as literally true. You are changing the authorial intent by calling it a myth and knowingly doing so as an insult to the material. For example if im discussing a STORY from the kuran that I dont take to be "true" I dont call it a 'myth' to trivialize the material because doing that is literallly insulting. Its written under the premise that it happened, so I will call it a story/narrative/recounting etc etc and you want to turn it into a larger argument about the authenticity to distract from what im telling you plainly and directly for your own point youd rather get into. We have the geneology of David, the psalms and Chronicles books take the events of his life as literally true.

>>149874776
also what no one is mentioning is God had been trying to kill the giants since the flood, Goliath is a smaller one hence they were dying off and David championing a battle against one of them signifies room was being made to build up jerusalem. Thats why turning it purely into a morality play or mythology takes away from the factual events going on. But I do agree anyway sorry for babbling.

>>149874776
Yes, anon. That is how a narrative works. You are treating this as something that is not self-evident. The sky is also blue, and the pope is catholic. However, a good writer will run the numbers, realize what needs to be done, and JUSTIFY.
So yes. David has God on his side. That is the justification. That makes it believable. The fight served the story, AND it managed to retain its narrative consistency and did not descend into arbitrariness. We now know that David < Goliath < David+God. This is our consistent framework.
All "powerscaling" is, is interpreting the consistency of a framework. It is nothing more than that at all.

>>149874865
narrative = good
powerscaling = bad

sitting around reading every feat and an ability a character has done (he flew faster than the speed of light in issue number 69, so he should defeat all enemies in -0.01 picoseconds) is misguided at best
better to just ignore all that and write from a thematic point of view (person X is morally right in this scenario, so he should win)

>>149874784
That is entirely subjective.

>>149874898
If person X should win but narratively there is no explanation for how he can win, your narrative is bad.

>>149868606
>Goku is stong because he's directly inspired by Son Wukong and Journey to the West, and both it and DB are meant to protray the importance of finding ones self, and self improvement despite the circumstances of ones past.
And so wouldn't it be weird if out of nowhere Goku got oneshot by a beam comparable to one he tanked to the face when he was weaker just because the plot needs him to be out of the way for five minutes to facilitate two entirely different copouts?

>>149874922
winning is not determined by power-scaling, and power-levels should be largely ignored for the purposes of determining a victor

this is literally what stan lee was arguing about
he was sick of fans mailing him about who would really win in a fight, when in his opinion the writer could and should decide the winner based on the needs of the story

the narratives quality is entirely independent from whether their power levels are consistent or not
wolverine lasting more than 10 seconds against the hulk is, by power scaling standards, really stupid
but the narrative is still engaging because the fight is really about drawing similarities between hulk and wolverine, both of them are animalistic and instinct driven, but wolverine craves violence while hulk avoids it
yeah, it should have ended instantly with hulk using his super speed, reflexes, and strength to paste wolverine in seconds
but thats not interesting

>>149875008
Hey look at you, dodging the point like a pro.
All that doesn't matter. If person X should win, but you can't explain why, you have a bad and inconsistent narrative. There is no way around this. Go right ahead and ignore the powerlevels, but if you don't justify in the face of them, you have despoiled your narrative.

>>149866375 (OP)
for context: stan lees actual thoughts were not that the writer can make a thing beat the hulk for no reason at all

in his editorials, he elaborates his reasoning a bit more
he considers the hulk stronger and would win in a fist fight, but the thing is faster and smarter and could win if he trapped or tricked the hulk

so his stance was a bit more nuanced than making anyone win instantly because he wanted to

>>149874789
>You are changing the authorial intent by calling it a myth
No, I'm denouncing your religion as myth. Little-to-none of it has any basis in documented history. There is no evidence of a historical jesus either.

>>149875050
>dodging the point like a pro.
inconsistent power levels do not cause any real detraction from the enjoyment of the narrative

>>149875050
>>149874922
Different anon. And I ask this as respectfully as I can here:
"Should" win by what metric? And I ask this not to challenge one side or another here, but because I'm curious here and just want that elaborated on.

>>149875089
Yes, they fucking do. Nobody enjoys deus ex machina, idiot. Undeserved victories are unsatisfying. You are absurd to assert otherwise, these are objective narrative flaws.
>>149875094
The "should" there is by the needs of the narrative. Character X must win, or the plot is over.

>>149875094
the people stan lee was addressing his argument towards were people who kept asking him "who would win a fight"
stan lee responded with OPs pic, that the winner is whoever he wants to win

powerscalers argue that stan lee is wrong because the higher power level should always win
the person who "should" win is the one who is therefore the one who is more powerful
and that if the weaker person wins, it is inconsistent writing and therefore bad

>>149875133
>powerscalers argue that stan lee is wrong because the higher power level should always win
... the fuck? Nobody asserts this. What are you even talking about?
Do you only have a strawman image of powerscalers in your head or something? Powerscaling can acknowledge when characters are in the same ballpark, when characters have incompatibilities to be leveraged one way or another, when characters fluctuate by their own narrative (e.g. Hulk gets stronger when he's angrier, meaning if he loses in any given fight, easy to say he's just not that mad today), and so on and so forth. And, of course, when fights are so close that luck and circumstances are the factor.
It's essentially never so simple as "this guy stronger, this guy always win".
Try actually participating in the stuff you're trying to shit-talk.

>>149875128
>Yes, they fucking do.
they really dont
no one is kept up at night because superman, who could literally move planets by chain, lost to braniac, a really smart guy in a pink polo, in their first battle

>Undeserved victories are unsatisfying
that is irrelevant
the outcome of the fights "deservedness" is entirely relevant to whether it furthers the story. its themes, or its characters or not
not whether they were entirely consistent with what they could do in previous issues

superman suddenly developing teleportation in superman 2 is, at best, just a minor issue
it does not detract from the action or the story in any way
nor does superman being equal to all 3 of the kryptonians when previously he struggled against just one, which is something that only the hyper-obsessed would even notice

I would beat every other poster in this thread in a fight.

>>149875190
>no one is kept up at night because superman, who could literally move planets by chain, lost to braniac, a really smart guy in a pink polo, in their first battle
Anon. Are you fucking kidding me? Yes, people will badly review issues that are illogical and unsatisfying. No, you don't have to be "kept up at night", but a badly told Superman fight is a bad issue of Superman. Jesus fuck. The golden age was not well written and nobody will assert that it was.
>that is irrelevant
It is most assuredly not irrelevant.
>not whether they were entirely consistent with what they could do in previous issues
Yes, the consistency will in fact bother a large cut of your audience. Are you SERIOUSLY trying to assert that what gratifies you is exclusive to all media, man?

>superman suddenly developing teleportation in superman 2 is, at best, just a minor issue
>it does not detract from the action or the story in any way
It creates narrative dissonance if he were to ever come to a problem he could solve with teleportation. Consistency is, in fact, a relevant detail. The fact that you are entertained in spite of that is your business alone.

>>149875133
I've largely seen that sentiment before. I wanna give people the benefit of the doubt and keep things civil here because otherwise things go from discussion to argument and fighting.
Which as of late I've found that I would like to avoid as much as possible because of how exhaustively unpleasant it has consistently been. Even in arguments I've 'won' I still regretted stepping into them because I knew there was no convincing anyone from the outset. I knew it would end in angry bile all around. Against my better judgement.
So generally, I keep things at least as civil as possible. Though that's not always a sure thing.
Do pardon the segue.

>>149875128
Again, I do hope you'll forgive my ignorance here and be a little patient: The needs of the narrative? When character X has to win or the plot is over, could you give some specific examples? They could be real or hypothetical, I just want to make sure I understand completely.

>>149875249
>Again, I do hope you'll forgive my ignorance here and be a little patient: The needs of the narrative? When character X has to win or the plot is over, could you give some specific examples? They could be real or hypothetical, I just want to make sure I understand completely.
This is something you can find in nearly any media, really. It's just how storytelling works. Let's go with, say, Star Wars. The Emperor has Luke at his mercy, and finally decides to kill him with his lightning. Luke, by all rights, is dead on the spot, because the lightning should basically kill him instantly when an evil Sith chooses to kill, but if Luke dies there then the story is over and it sucks. So, the Emperor is using his lightning on its low torturous setting to kill him super slowly so Darth Vader can turn on the Emperor and save Luke.
That is an event that needed to end with Luke's victory. So, the writer gave a concession of logic for the narrative to prevail. That is entirely fine. This is a good way to make the strong bad guy lose and keep the narrative consistent, the logical loss of "the Emperor is not completely rational, he is a sadist who went for a slow kill" is only a character flaw, no narrative flaws.

A bad story, however, would do something illogical for the power difference between them. Say, have Luke block and reflect the lightning with his lightsaber, destroying the Emperor with his own power. There would be no good reason he should be able to do that. It would become confusing, unsatisfying, and make you wonder how that is a result that is even possible. The confusion plunders the narrative.

He's right and you can clearly tell he's saying that there's more to the characters of marvel than just being varying levels of strong

>>149875249
>The needs of the narrative?
the above mentioned hulk vs wolverine
from a powerscaling point of view, they arent even in the same building, hulk has super speed, super strength, super reflexes, and has tussled with heavy weights like thor and won
even the weaker grey hulk used in that issue is still strong enough to equal the thing (after that thing had been mutated to be even stronger)
by all accounts, a straight fist fight between the two should take 3 panels

but we can ignore all of the above, because a protracted fight is more interesting
we can pretend for a minute that wolverine, who has lost to middle-weights like spider-man, can at least briefly match the hulk and even stand over the bleeding body of the hulk (for 10 seconds before hulk regenerates)
the narrative takes precedence over logic in this scenario, because it lets us see wolverines thoughts on how he and hulk arent really that different
the thing has also managed to finally beat the thing in a one-on-fight against an empowered immortal hulk because of heroic willpower
while it doesnt make any particular in-universe reason, its basically just the same thing that made spider-man suddenly increase her strength 10 times for one issue, but its still a great moment because it shows the thing going the distance and finally getting a win over the hulk

>>149875339
>Say, have Luke block and reflect the lightning with his lightsaber, destroying the Emperor with his own power. There would be no good reason he should be able to do that. It would become confusing, unsatisfying, and make you wonder how that is a result that is even possible.
hey wait a minute

>>149875371
You don't have to "pretend" anything. You can justify. The Hulk is faster and stronger when he is madder, there's no reason for him to be that mad against a good guy like Wolverine. Wolverine has a lot of combat experience, and while Hulk is stronger and faster, he is also clumsy and predictable, moving without grace. All of a sudden the clear lines are blurred, and the arena is anyone's game. The Hulk at his highest setting would twist Wolverine's head off, sure, but this doesn't have to be that Hulk.
Good writers create consistency.

>The writer still has to powerscale the characters
Or just give one a sling. Character A only scales to character B if they directly compete on even playing fieldd in something objective like strength or speed.
>and write a logical way for one of them to beat the other
Plenty of trash writers just have characters win illogically. What writers should do and what writers have to do aren't the same thing.

>>149875438
>a good guy like Wolverine
Wat?

>>149875339
>but if Luke dies there then the story is over and it sucks
I don't want to get side tracked too much because what you posited is pretty reasonable all things considered, but I'd like to interject for a moment and go on just a bit of a tangent:
Supposing in this example Luke does die in that moment. I'd like to posit that outcome is not necessarily bad for the narrative. Avoiding for the moment all the possibilities of what could happen next and all the ways the narrative could continue, supposing again - for the sake of just thinking aloud here - that the story ends that way. Luke dies. The rebels lose. The Empire takes over the galaxy in a reign of blood that lasts for centuries. An ending in which evil wins or the protagonist fails is not always a bad thing and can still be entertaining, if bleak. However. To argue against myself, there's nothing wrong with not wanting to see that. There's nothing wrong with not wanting to see an adventure or narrative where everything just sucks at the end. There's also nothing wrong with liking that.
To give a couple examples since you were so gracious to provide one, two stories come to mind with similar (thematically) endings to the protagonist losing or the antagonist winning.
In Death Note, Light is the protagonist. He dies in the end and loses. Despite being the protagonist, however he is most assuredly not the 'good guy.' The two terms are not necessarily always the same.
Similarly, in No Country For Old Men, the antagonist wins. And in this case, antagonist actually is the bad guy, and the protagonist is the good guy. Again, the protagonist dies to the antagonist. Unless I'm misremembering who the protagonist is in that film, it's been a bit. We could also bring up Breaking Bad and the way that ended.
Nevertheless - Those are some endings I enjoyed, for a myriad of reasons, but this comment is growing long. Summed up, a plot ending in that way CAN be enjoyable.

>>149875497
You have to set it up right. You can't just go on a hero's journey and crash into the wall with "then the hero died, and darkness reigned for a thousand years, the end". That makes the journey you were just on completely pointless. A grim and brutal ending has to be appropriate for a grim and brutal narrative, and ideally, the protagonist we follow still had to have a meaningful journey even if it ends in failure. The tone is up to the author, the message still needs to be sold. Nobody wants their time wasted.

>>149866709
Nigger She-Hulk literally needed to train, get a huge-power up and then take Champion's Power Gem to do this

>>149866485
>Backseid
That's a pretty good one.

>>149875541
Correct all the way around. I do apologize for not clarifying there but post length forbade more elucidation, but the failure is still on my part for not including the caveat that such an ending would feel tonally dissonant with the narrative established not only by the rest of the beginning of Return of the Jedi, but with the rest of the films and what they led to. It would certainly be different from what people were expecting. And sometimes directors like to do that, but it's rarely received well and often disjointed. Such subversion sort of works against the narrative to create an answer to a question nobody asked and shows people something they weren't really interested in to begin with. You might be left with people asking, 'Ok so the villain won, but why did you do that buddy?' You could fumble around for an answer and come up with, "well sometimes the bad guys win" sort of answer, but that's not really what it's about, since the beginning of the story of star wars does not feel like it's tonally chaotic, but pointing to an ordered story of the hero's journey.
But, to return to the point of powerscaling, I'm going to be bold here and enter with my opinion properly: I'm not overly fond of it, but mostly because I see it as a tactic for argument rather than structuring the story. That sounds really harsh and critical I know, but that's generally how I've seen it used. And if some people like that kind of discussion, well, fair. But it lends itself as unpleasant to me. From a narrative standpoint, it feels unnecessary to me so long as you can and have provided the requisite explanation for victory or failure in the first place for people to not necessarily just like the outcome of a conflict, but to be able to understand it; not only or strictly logically but within the explanation of the story. That said, and I am being forthright with my biases, I see powerscaling mostly in the context of death battle. Something I'm not fond of.

>>149869546
Bitch sonic the hedgehog has that kind lore since the 2000's classic only lasted 9 years.

what's difficult to understand about "the writer decides who wins"?
you nerds just have to take it.

>>149875728
It was still bullshit.

>>149876865
Yeah. It's basically
>dick measuring contest using someone else's penis