Thor vs. Lobo

Very flawed logic. Just because you're too young to remember or you're too young to have read a certain comic means it's contents have no merit? I can't disagree more.

Age has nothing to do with this, there WAS no crisis for Marvel. The powers he had in the 70's weren't washed away, he still has them. Whether he uses them 24/7 is a different story.

In statistical terms, it is an outlier, something that is radically beyond the character's established capabilities ."

Again, the abilities he's shown in the past ARE his established powerset. No, they don't get nulled because you've never heard of them or because you have a mentality that seems to say "If it didn't happen to my generation, it doesn't mean anything.?. And, sadly enough, that's a major problem with people in their 20's and younger today. Self absorbed.

Originally posted by long pig
Very flawed logic. Just because you're too young to remember or you're too young to have read a certain comic means it's contents have no merit? I can't disagree more.

Age has nothing to do with this, there WAS no crisis for Marvel. The powers he had in the 70's weren't washed away, he still has them. Whether he uses them 24/7 is a different story.

Exactly. If you HAVE read a single Thor issue, you'd have no problem saying making a shield is not, by any means, "radically beyond" his power.

Again, the abilities he's shown in the past ARE his established powerset. No, they don't get nulled because you've never heard of them or because you have a mentality that seems to say "If it didn't happen to my generation, it doesn't mean anything.?. And, sadly enough, that's a major problem with people in their 20's and younger today. Self absorbed.

What you say makes a lot of sense. And my reasoning was a little flawed. But the reason why I say it happened a long time ago is just to show that it is an outlier. And "beyond doesn't mean greater but outlier.

In these forums we are (many if not all) somewhat fanboys to our favorite characters and haters to the characters that we don't like (our anti characters). Sometimes this makes us use some bias in our arguments. And sometimes it makes us become lawyer like and look up the rules to see what we can discredit and what we can get away with just to win for our side. The latter doesn't take into consideration of what makes sense, what is faulty, what is fair, or what will actually happen, But only what is LAW.

I am a fanboy to a certain extent and I will use whatever lawful means for my character to win or my anticharacter to lose. But not if it means I must lie to myself. For example, If I see my character losing by a certain strategy I will not post anything defending them. Or if I see my anticharacter winning using a certain strategy then I won't attack them.
So if Thor can summon an inpenetrable shield quickly then he shouldn't lose to almost anyone. And he wins this. But

with that said,
the LAW of the forum forbids Thor's shield by the forum rule quote I posted. Nothing else matters. Not good sense, fairness, nor nothing else but the Law.

But, the law does allow it. In fact, it talks about events exactly like Thor making a shield.

It basically says that a character will use any means necessary to win a fight. It says that Flash can lightspeed up to whomever we put him against and at light speed and k.o them. It's allowed because Flash has done that before, but not a lot and he's capable of it with the powers he has.

Now, that same thing applies to Thor making a shield. On here, if it's proved that Thor can make a shield and he has the necessary power to do so, then he is allowed to do so on this board. Thor meets those requirements.

Now, if there was an issue where Thor shot bullets out of his eyes and someone tried to use it here, we'd tell him that's not allowed.

How come spellcheck says the word "proven" isn't a word?

Isn't Lobo immortal?😬

Yep he is immortal.

What if Lobo had his powers to clone himself, would Thor be able to take care of more than ten Lobo's at the same time?

I'm undecided for the moment so I'm not saying who wins.

Originally posted by long pig

He's made them so he could fly through lava.
He's made partial shields to deflect debris.
He's made full body Shields to protect Sif.
He's made shields over an entire village.

Originally posted by long pig
But, the law does allow it. In fact, it talks about events exactly like Thor making a shield.

It basically says that a character will use any means necessary to win a fight. It says that Flash can lightspeed up to whomever we put him against and at light speed and k.o them. It's allowed because Flash has done that before, but not a lot and he's capable of it with the powers he has.

I agree. Yes it does
But using the necessary means to win doesn't have anything to do with using a power that one should not have according to the rules. These are two entirely different concepts. For example, Thor can use the godblast over and over if he wishes as a necessary means to win in this forum. Thats because that power has been established throughout his career and it is in his official bios from marvel hq. Also, Thor shooting absolute penetrating bullets out of his eyes would still be a necessary means to win a fight but it is not allowed for the simple reason of SmvFL.

If you don't agree then explain this

SmvFL is a feat that "is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career, as well as the character's opponents' established showings. In statistical terms, it is an outlier."

If you take that definition literally and as the letter of the LAW then there is no way for Thor to have a force shield.

Originally posted by h1a8

If you don't agree then explain this

[B]SmvFL is a feat that "is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career, as well as the character's opponents' established showings. In statistical terms, it is an outlier."

If you take that definition literally and as the letter of the LAW then there is no way for Thor to have a force shield. [/B]

Of course that statement doesn't make sense because you only posted half of the sentence.

Spiderman vs. Firelord, or SvFL, is a shorthand that refers to any time when a character performs a feat that their powers and skills should be blatantly insufficient for, and is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career....

It isn't out of his skill or power set to make a force field so this doesnt apply.....

Originally posted by thedude1948
Of course that statement doesn't make sense because you only posted half of the sentence.

Spiderman vs. Firelord, or SvFL, is a shorthand that [B]refers to any time when a character performs a feat that their powers and skills should be blatantly insufficient for, and is not repeated or is rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career....

It isn't out of his skill or power set to make a force field so this doesnt apply..... [/B]

That means the same thing as the half sentence.
That is why it is blatantly insufficient. Because it hasn't been established over his career. It was just a plot device. The power set of Mjlonir has already been established over Thor's career and it is only the official power set that has been consistent.

If Thor hasn't use his shield in ages, and only a few times at that, then what good reason why you think he stopped? Because writers disowned him from that power. I garuantee you that he will never ever ever use that power again. Otherwise there is nothing in the universe that can beat him. And that would make for lousy comics and loss of money and no forum debates about him.
Even superman did some crazy sh!I before in precrisis. If there was no crisis then I still wouldn't except his feats as proof. Simply because they contradict would he can do now. The same is with Thor.

Sorry but he can't use a force shield.

H1, you seem like you are grasping for straws rather than grasping everyone else's points. Unless you really want to be looked down upon as an illogical fanboy on these forums, I'd suggest you face the true and stop the bullshit.

Just because Thor hasn't used a power in the past 10 years or so, doesn't mean he can not now. It doesn't mean he forgot and it doesn't mean he was stripped of it.

It means he hasn't used it. That's all, and until a writer says(like they did with Superman) Thor's powers have been stripped, then we have no reason whatsoever to believe them gone.

Realize this: Thor from the 60's and 70's are not a different character from the Thor that we know now, they are all the same canonically. Marvel has never said that old time comics where in another dimensions, in fact, they deny it.

The only power Thor has ever had taken away was his ability to time travel, and that was done by Odin. Odin never said anything about a force field.

Stop avoiding facts because your a Lobo fan. Hell, I'm a massive Lobo fan, more so than Thor which I only moderately like. Lobo is great, but he's lose this fight.

Originally posted by long pig
H1, you seem like you are grasping for straws rather than grasping everyone else's points. Unless you really want to be looked down upon as an illogical fanboy on these forums, I'd suggest you face the true and stop the bullshit.

Just because Thor hasn't used a power in the past 10 years or so, doesn't mean he can not now. It doesn't mean he forgot and it doesn't mean he was stripped of it.

It means he hasn't used it. That's all, and until a writer says(like they did with Superman) Thor's powers have been stripped, then we have no reason whatsoever to believe them gone.

Realize this: Thor from the 60's and 70's are not a different character from the Thor that we know now, they are all the same canonically. Marvel has never said that old time comics where in another dimensions, in fact, they deny it.

The only power Thor has ever had taken away was his ability to time travel, and that was done by Odin. Odin never said anything about a force field.

Stop avoiding facts because your a Lobo fan. Hell, I'm a massive Lobo fan, more so than Thor which I only moderately like. Lobo is great, but he's lose this fight.

What don't you get about a feat being a "outlier"?
What don't you get about a feat "rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career" ?

This is plain english. Why can't you understand it?
These are the rules here. You can't make up your own because the ones here don't make sense or are illogical. You must either follow them or create your own forum in which you can state your own rules.

And by the way, I hate Lobo (with a passion). Thus this has nothing to do with being a fanboy to him. I'm just tired of people pulling crazy powers out of character's asses and saying that it is the rules.

Thor's used shields multiple times. There's nothing that so much as hints that he can't use it.

Originally posted by Accel
Thor's used shields multiple times. There's [b]nothing that so much as hints that he can't use it. [/B]

Q
F
T

Thor won't be killing Lobo, but you don't have to kill someone to beat them....

Thor wins 9/10

Thor wins. He can beat him for good but he can keep him down.

And yes he has shields. I refuse to listen to you after you said Spidey beats Namor 10/10.

Originally posted by Accel
Thor's used shields multiple times. There's [b]nothing that so much as hints that he can't use it. [/B]

Thor used a shield rarely in his career and last used it before we were born. So by definition:

Since it was "rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career" then it is SmvFL.

Originally posted by Juntai
Lobo's immune to magic.

Originally posted by h1a8
Thor used a shield rarely in his career and last used it before we were born. So by definition:

Since it was "rarely repeated again relative to the character's overall established career" then it is SmvFL.

Do you even understand the SMvsFL rule?

h1, I have come to understand your point more and I apologize the harsh word.

You make a point, but I just simply disagree.

Although, full powered Lobo would eat Thor alive. Lobo went from being a creature of destruction to being destruction's poster boy. No longer a tough dude but an actual unkillable, abstract engine of chaos. He's awesome.