Originally posted by leonidas
i've said that for a LOONNNNGGGGGG time around here. though instead of 'average', i tend to look more at consistency. i don't think average showing is necessarily the best way to go. if a character has the bulk of his/her high-end feats under one writer or 2, but several others write him/her much lower, then taking the average of the way he/she was written really isn't logical because BOTH versions of the character are EQUALLY correct and should be allowed equal validity. in that sense, it IS fair to use both the highest and lowest feats in a debate. it is equally unproductive however. i think it is imperative that the whole history of a character be taken into account in any debate. it's why i will never say that logan defeating characters like abomination and hulk is PIS--because consistently, through his history, he has done just that.sticking with the odin example, you could literally have an odin vs odin thread (or a superman vs superman thread) and one version, under one writer, would clearly stomp the other. hell, the way jurgens painted the odin power as used by KT, a well-written kirby-CLASSIC thor might be able to defeat him.
is the odin power (forgetting for a moment what naj said and staying with jurgens) planetary or galaxy level? the answer is very clearly BOTH, and if someone wanted to argue odin would get destroyed by a (fill in with someone who has written supes at a very high level) superman, and use jurgens' definition as proof, it would need to be conceded, as that is ONE interpretation of the character. BUT, by the same token, the other needs to accept that a kirby-written, galaxy-busting, universally powerful odin blinks superman out of existence.
there IS no solution to the problem, because the problem, literally, has many many correct answers. the best you can do is find as much connsistency in portrayal as possible. at least that's the best I'VE ever been able to do.
Totally agree arguments should be based on how a character is consistently portrayed. In regards to this whole KT scenario however the problem lies with this guy contradicting what he portrayed on panel. Could we say that jurgens portrayed King Thor at planetary level? indeed we could. However on panel he gives an explanation for this low level of power displayed by KT and makes it pretty clear that rather than the problem being the lack of power of the Odinforce, its thors innapropriate use of it. He describes it so clearly that its baffling how he can now claim otherwise in an interview.
However ultimately its not really too relevant to this thread. The character in question is Rune King Thor a character written by Michael Oeming. Oeming clearly had a different opinion of the odinforce as seen in his run on BRB stormbreaker where Beta ray bill is seen easily oneshotting planets a feat which would definitely put BRB on the same planetary level as jurgens KT with the full odinforce and from the looks of it, his Odin as well.
Originally posted by FalconPunch
dude.... thor got beat up by rulk 😐
RULK cannot be taken seriously. A hulk fanyboy wrote that story and everyone knows it.
As far as thor vs supes here im not sure. Dont care for prime or this version of supes due to their resistance to magic. What a cop out. Could you imagine a character that theses versions of supes had to fight that were immune to physical blunt force haha. This immunity stuff is stupid but in all fairness that may be enough for supes 1 millon. And that would be the only reason he won was for the immunity of magic. Without that hes gone.
Jurgens, who claimed that Odin was down at planetary, happened to be the one who had Thor at that very level. Not to mention the one who had Thor w/odin enchanted armour stop a Thanos-clone capable of destroying the universe.
Instead of looking for consistency in just comics, we should have a look at what these writers go on about.
Originally posted by Kris BlazeThis further backs up my point about Thanos and Odin's clash. While some writers have Odin at galaxy busting levels others clearly don't. The writer obviously meant for Thanos to be a peer of Odin when they had it out. Saying he held back because he didn't affect the multiverse was always erroneous because it wasn't the same writer.
Jurgens, who claimed that Odin was down at planetary, happened to be the one who had Thor at that very level. Not to mention the one who had Thor w/odin enchanted armour stop a Thanos-clone capable of destroying the universe.Instead of looking for consistency in just comics, we should have a look at what these writers go on about.
All writers view characters and powersets differently it seems and we factor them all in, but just because a planet or a galaxy is destroyed that doesn't mean that's proof of someone holding back. I am glad this has been brought to light.
Originally posted by Kris Blaze
Not to mention the one who had Thor w/odin enchanted armour stop a Thanos-clone capable of destroying the universe.Instead of looking for consistency in just comics, we should have a look at what these writers go on about.
Jurgens really must have forgotten what he wrote himself.