Originally posted by abhilegendYou guys are going too fast and loose with my viewpoint here.
But isn't that against the rule of concentrated attacks, why even bother to toss Gas out of the planet when concentrated attacks don't deal any damage to surrounding.
Of course showings of high-end collateral damage *can* exist in DB -- that's how we get statements/feats like moon-busting, planet-busting, solar system-busting, galaxy-busting, universe-busting, etc. I'm just saying that we don't *need* a huge amount of collateral damage to be present 100% of the time, in order to know that an attack can logically be FAR beyond those kind of levels in terms of potency.
For example, do you think Gas would have been at all affected by a planet-buster from Saiyan saga Vegeta or 1st form Freeza? Yes or no.
Or how about SS2 Vegeta's kamikaze? Do you think releasing the sum total of his energy(to the point where it literally killed him) only contained nuke-level potency? Yes or no.
Or how about the Kamehameha Goku used to drop FP Jiren. Do you think OG Roshi's moon-buster was the more potent attack simply because it caused greater collateral damage? Yes or no.
Or how about the Spirit Bomb that Goku used to perma-kill Pure Boo. The attack only damaged a small portion of the planet, yet Boo was destroyed just the same(even though he had previously regenerated from his own planet-busting attack.) So do you think the Spirit Bomb contained less than planet-busting potency? Yes or no.
Speaking of Boo's planet-buster: it 'only' destroyed the earth, but Goku/Vegeta were explicitly unable to block it. So do you think they'd have any issue at all deflecting a planet-buster from the likes of 1st form Freeza? Yes or no.
I mean, how many examples do I really need to post for people to understand that collateral damage is not always a reliable measuring stick when it comes to determining the potency of a character's attack? This is wild. 😕
Originally posted by Galan007
You guys are going too fast and loose with my viewpoint here.Of course showings of high-end collateral damage *can* exist in DB -- that's how we get statements/feats like moon-busting, planet-busting, solar system-busting, galaxy-busting, universe-busting, etc. I'm just saying that we don't *need* a huge amount of collateral damage to be present 100% of the time, in order to know that an attack can logically be FAR beyond those kind of levels in terms of potency.
For example, do you think Gas would have been at all affected by a planet-buster from Saiyan saga Vegeta or 1st form Freeza? Yes or no.
Or how about SS2 Vegeta's kamikaze? Do you think him releasing the sum total of his energy(to the point where it literally killed him) only contained nuke-level potency? Yes or no.
Or how about the Kamehameha Goku used to drop FP Jiren. Do you think OG Roshi's moon-buster was the more potent attack simply because it caused greater collateral damage? Yes or no.
Or how about the Spirit Bomb that Goku used to perma-kill Pure Boo. The attack only damaged a small portion of the planet, yet Boo was destroyed just the same(even though he had previously regenerated from his own planet-busting attack.) So do you think the Spirit Bomb contained less than planet-busting potency? Yes or no.
Speaking of Boo's planet-buster: it 'only' destroyed the earth, but Goku/Vegeta were explicitly unable to block it. So do you think they'd have any issue at all deflecting a planet-buster from the likes of 1st form Freeza? Yes or no.
I just asked if the same can be applied for kryptonians, we know Monarch's universe buster attack didn't leave a scratch on Superboy prime yet Conner Kent drew blood from him. So can we conclude Conner>universe busting?
This is just one example, there are countless such examples in comics but we don't accept Chain scaling like we do for DBZ.
I mean, how many examples do I really need to post for people to understand that collateral damage is not always a reliable measuring stick when it comes to determining the potency of a character's attack? This is wild. 😕
How many examples from comics do you want???
Originally posted by abhilegendOkay, so you agree that attack potency is clearly a thing in DB, despite saying this:
I just asked if the same can be applied for kryptonians, we know Monarch's universe buster attack didn't leave a scratch on Superboy prime yet Conner Kent drew blood from him. So can we conclude Conner>universe busting?This is just one example, there are countless such examples in comics but we don't accept Chain scaling like we do for DBZ.
How many examples from comics do you want???
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So I know Galan talked about potency etc - is that actually said in the manga, or is it something fans have thought up to explain discrepancies?
Originally posted by abhilegend
Entirely fan made from what I know.
Thank god, because there's no reason to lowball or ignore the obvious here.
But anyway, I'm sure there are several instances where DB-esque power-scaling could also apply to comics. I'm just saying that as a general rule of thumb, it's a lot more complicated to accurately scale comic characters in that kind of way. That is to say: you're bound to get a LOT more pushback.
Yeah I see what you're getting at, and tbh it's nothing new to comics (see Beyonder with his blasts etc). We see this when DC and Marvel Earth don't get blown up etc.
The issue then becomes we have one rule for manga characters and one for comic characters, but they're mixed together in these threads. Fully agree we should continue having them mixed here btw, as the anime forum is even deader.
We should just look at each side through the same lens, is what I'm saying, through the same tropes. And it goes further, right? Just as, for example, the Endless don't have any battle board type feats - yet we'd still see them as pretty damn powerful. Same with the Preacher verse.
In THIS thread, yes, comic inconsistencies mean that Spidey is suddenly tanking the UN, or Universal Puma's punches, or Silver Dagger with the power of Satannish despite getting KOd by aunt May with a vase.
I still see it as a valid answer, without trolling Carver, because at the end of the day they are all fictional, and it all happened canonically.
Originally posted by Galan007
Okay, so you agree that attack potency is clearly a thing in DB, despite saying this
I never said that.
Thank god, because there's no reason to lowball or ignore the obvious here.
But anyway, I'm sure there are several instances where DB-esque power-scaling could also apply to comics. I'm just saying that as a general rule of thumb, it's a lot more complicated to accurately scale comic characters in that kind of way. That is to say: you're bound to get a LOT more pushback.
Why's it more complicated? Give me an in universe reason why such chain scaling can't be accepted?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Yeah I see what you're getting at, and tbh it's nothing new to comics (see Beyonder with his blasts etc). We see this when DC and Marvel Earth don't get blown up etc.The issue then becomes we have one rule for manga characters and one for comic characters, but they're mixed together in these threads. Fully agree we should continue having them mixed here btw, as the anime forum is even deader.
We should just look at each side through the same lens, is what I'm saying, through the same tropes. And it goes further, right? Just as, for example, the Endless don't have any battle board type feats - yet we'd still see them as pretty damn powerful. Same with the Preacher verse.
In THIS thread, yes, comic inconsistencies mean that Spidey is suddenly tanking the UN, or Universal Puma's punches, or Silver Dagger with the power of Satannish despite getting KOd by aunt May with a vase I still see it as a valid answer, without trolling Carver, because at the end of the day they are all fictional, and it all happened canonically.
Like for example, Fate(Type-Moon) franchise. It works similar way like Star Wars does. It gets games, manga, anime, novels etc, and the characters are also written by different writers in that franchise.
Do we treat it like comics or manga?
Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
I also think the line also will get more blurry when we take more manga/anime on the tableLike for example, Fate(Type-Moon) franchise. It works similar way like Star Wars does. It gets games, manga, anime, novels etc, and the characters are also written by different writers in that franchise.
Do we treat it like comics or manga?
Obvious answer, comics. Different writers ruins a characters potential.
Originally posted by abhilegendFor starters, dozens of people writing dozens of stories. Hundreds of highs and lows from different writers to cherry-pick from... Trust me, that's where the complication would start. Always does.
Why's it more complicated? Give me an in universe reason why such chain scaling can't be accepted?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85Tbf, that anime clip aligns with the manga.
Well this thread uses an anime clip that has different writers from Toriyama so......
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Maybe the easy thing to do, then, is specify the comic writer in these threads?Jason Aaron's Spiderman is capable of tanking the Ultimate Nullifier. He survives.
Tom DeFalco's Spider-Man is capable of getting punched by a Universal empowered Puma (who could also kill the Beyonder). He survives.
That's not how I made my thread. In your opinion, is Pak Superman equal to Joshua Williamson Superman based off what you've seen from both writers. Be honest.
Originally posted by carver9
That's not how I made my thread. In your opinion, is Pak Superman equal to Joshua Williamson Superman based off what you've seen from both writers. Be honest.
No, the different writers give their own spin on things.
Whilst that's not how you made your thread, that's how things are shaping up. Aaron clearly thinks Spidey can tank the UN, for example. DeFalco clearly thinks Puma was powerful enough to kill the Beyonder, yet Spidey could take his blows.