Re: Sar Agorn Vs. Beldorian
Originally posted by Seer Q'AniliaThere are rules about unknowns,some of the older threads have Ragnos owning and rampaging like crazy,Sadow whooping DE Sids,tulak hord, and Bandon lasting more than a second against Bane, granted some of the li. wasn't exactly complete but still...Both are unknown, and there are virtually no comparisons or references on either.So really are you trying to top me or are you just bored?
1. Force
2. Saber
3. All-Out[b]I HAVE TO KNOW! faint
[/B]
Originally posted by Seer Q'Anilia
Excuse me?
There are character's who's powers are based purely off of speculation and heresay. "back in the day", people used to say that these people were the absolute most powerful whatever based on said speculations. When asked what kind of sense it makes to say character A beats character B even though all of character A's powers rest on speculation, they would reply with "absence of proof is not proof of absence". So... people like Marka Rangos,s a guy who has literally not done shit, was, for awhile, seen as the most powerful dude who can own everyone.
😐 Wait- wat.
So now it's pretty much frowned upon to make a thread using characters who are unknown, or who's powers have not been fully described.
This thread doesn't really apply though.
Originally posted by Blax_Hydraliskname feats and ill apologise
There are character's who's powers are based purely off of speculation and heresay. "back in the day", people used to say that these people were the absolute most powerful whatever based on said speculations. When asked what kind of sense it makes to say character A beats character B even though all of character A's powers rest on speculation, they would reply with "absence of proof is not proof of absence". So... people like Marka Rangos,s a guy who has literally not done shit, was, for awhile, seen as the most powerful dude who can own everyone.😐 Wait- wat.
So now it's pretty much frowned upon to make a thread using characters who are unknown, or who's powers have not been fully described.
This thread doesn't really apply though.