The mythology profiles on VBW are all unreliable garbage without exception. To fix this, we need:
1. Citations for every supposed feat, description, or ability in mythology, from reputable sources on ancient or modern mythologies (primary sources, of course, being the best). If we're quoting primary mythological texts (such as the Iliad) directly, then the specific translator of the text should be noted as well. The citations should obviously have links.
2. Detailed explanations for the cosmology of each mythology. I don't want to have to hear about 4-B Norns or the High 1-B Hindu-Buddhist multiverse without a proper explanation as to why.
3. The separation of "normal" and "abnormal" conceptions of various mythological figures into multiple keys (e.g. no conflating Hellenistic Dionysus with Orphic Dionysus and Dionysiaca Dionysus, as the character profile does)
4. A standard of dealing with the various names, titles, and epithets of mythological figures. In ancient cultures, such names, titles, and epithets were extremely important theologically speaking.
5. A standard of dealing with various "high-concept" descriptions of deities (I.e. descriptions of them being "exalted beyond the heavens" or "infinite and eternal" or "spaceless and timeless"). Should we take them at face-value (as the ancient cultures most likely did, for the most part), or should we consider them as mostly hyperbole, or should be try to "contextualize" them in a modern philosophical context?
6. A standard of dealing with ancient theologies, especially for mythologies without a specific "canon" (like classical mythology). I don't understand why we should have to consider Amaterasu as equal to Amenominakanushi based on an unnamed and unsourced old Japanese religious text that doesn't even seem to exist.
Apologies to bother you, but could you please do a quick Calc of this feat performed by Superman in the DC Animated Movie "Justice League Throne of Atlantis"? it would be appreciated if you did so! Have a good day, or night.
Hey there is an Overlord CRT going on and I'd like your conclusion on it please. It seems my original post was too long for some of the participants so if you're interested I could make a tldr (too long didn't read) post here or there if you're interested...
Right, we couldn't think of a good feat to scale fodder too, my first point was that this feat is invalid due to the mud being, well 'supernatural' as it has a level, meaning added durability while also being sentient. If we count fodder that are lower than that feat, the only water destruction (ordinary water) we've seen was of a small scale and it wasn't vaporization, more like erasing it from existence. I was pointing this out just in case people try to tear me apart if I do a calc on fodder that exceeds this calc.
My second point was covering a certain fodder being able to harm a mid-end character, my whole point covering the degree of damage being inconsequential but LSirLancelotDuLacl worded it perfectly and the person arguing against it stopped...This is where I post what LSirLancelotDuLacl said but I'm trying to keep this short :P. But if you request I will paste it
Then the thread headed towards upgrading God-tiers to tier 6, this was the consensus from the general thread of the series and we even have a knowledgeable member in agreement. Basically these two feats1 & 2 scaling to god-tiers. The argument against it was first comparing it to the highest feats but well the argument falls apart if you scrutinize those feats, then it was if it was combat applicable and yes, god-tiers (certain type) can generate any kind of weather, snow, storm, thunders, etc. I tried to cover it in the thread but someone elses worded it perfectly, actually two people did and again you can request for me to paste those replies.