If Super Smash Bros. was true to canon: a tier list - Updated 9/12/18

aarchak

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
501
Location
The blast zone
#42
:ultfalcon:: Very overrated TBH, and he's my favorite smash character. Not only is the infamous Falcon Punch from the anime(which is non-canon to the main series games, but to be fair the anime does have GBA games), but it wasn't his falcon punch that caused that HUGE explosion in the galaxy. It was the generator. Main canon falcon is difficult to judge, because even if he was that powerful, he'd rather race. LMAO.

Yes, even when it comes to powerful beings. So I'll give him this, if anyone challenges him to a race, they're screwed.
After rewatching that scene, you're right. Still, not everyone can punch fire. He's going with Ryu until further canon proof is shown.

:ultrichter::ultsimon:: No idea why Simon's being put over him. Richter is definitely the stronger of the two in his prime. The only Belmont that probably surpasses him is Julius. Who in the games is past his prime and holding back. Yet is still portrayed as stupidly powerful.

The Belmonts are pretty tricky to rate in strength though, since you could argue that they're specialized, but I mean, we are talking about power from God. Though that does present a pretty powerful weakness, since if you're holy yourself they can't really do **** to you. I say this because of the holy armor Alucard can use to easily beat Richter. Still, the Belmonts do display superhuman strength and capabilities. So much so it freaks people out, hence why they're banished.

Dracula himself though is definitely very powerful, definitely way stronger than the Belmonts in raw power. He is basically Satan in Castlevania. Sure, he's mostly known for a simple teleport and fireballs in gameplay. But Kirby goes for the older Kirby bosses who are pretty powerful in the Kirby universe. Such as Nightmare and Zero.

Regardless I think they're both being underrated here. Simon's even trickier to figure out than Richter. Since gameplay wise he's the most simplistic, but he should logically be stronger than Trevor at least. Since it seems like each Belmont that attempts to stop Dracula in some shape or form seems to be stronger than the last.

Like Simon's still very powerful, but Richter is suppose to be even more so. At least in his prime. Only way I could see Simon being stronger. But then again, it's also younger Simon, since you could argue it's not him from Simon's quest based on his appearance.
him down.
Cool, didn't know how powerful he was. I only have a cursory knowledge of Castlevania, so this helps a lot.

Robin should be moved down a tier. He doesn't have any sort of superhuman power without his magic. He's merely a vessel for Grima, the god of destruction, so he has no control over it. By Awakening's endgame, Grima is either sealed away for future generations or destroyed by Robin himself. Either way, Grima no longer has any control over Robin either, so he's back down to B- tier.
You're absolutely right. Down to B-.

Diddy should definitely be higher up. He's always portraited as equal to DK, and even beat King K.Rool twice in DKC2. How you can rank him below Wii Fit Trainer and even DAISY is beyond me. He beats things 4 times his size all the time.

Lucario and Greninja should be at the same level as Charizard. Competitively, they are even objectively better.

Why is Ike also lower than Roy and Chrom? Doesn't make sense. He kills a literal Goddess.

Sheik also is rather strong due to her being able to seal up Ganon. This is Ocarina of Time Zelda after all, in the downfall timeline, she's responsible for sealing Ganondorf away with help of the other Sages.

Wario is HUMAN AVERAGE strenght? Lol....
The Donkey Kong series is one of the few series here I have little knowledge of, so anything helps. DIddy's moving up. I also forgot about how powerful Lucario and Greninja were, they go up to Charizard's level. After rechecking Ragnell's specifications, it does move him up to the other FE characters' levels. I also forgot Sheik is just as powerful as Zelda, so she moves up to Zelda's tier.

With all those changes, here's my canon tier list V2.1 (Super Smash Bros Ultimate Tier List Maker):

download3.png
 
Last edited:

Mogisthelioma

Smash Champion
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
2,970
Location
The Lor Starcutter
#43
After rewatching that scene, you're right. Still, not everyone can punch fire. He's going with Ryu until further canon proof is shown.



Cool, didn't know how powerful he was. I only have a cursory knowledge of Castlevania, so this helps a lot.



You're absolutely right. Down to B-.



The Donkey Kong series is one of the few series here I have little knowledge of, so anything helps. DIddy's moving up. I also forgot about how powerful Lucario and Greninja were, they go up to Charizard's level. After rechecking Ragnell's specifications, it does move him up to the other FE characters' levels. I also forgot Sheik is just as powerful as Zelda, so she moves up to Zelda's tier.

With all those changes, here's my canon tier list V2.1 (Super Smash Bros Ultimate Tier List Maker):

View attachment 163340
Move Dedede up a tier. Since there's no proof that he doesn't engineer his own machines, he must be smarter than he looks. And although he has no real administrative function of Dream Land, having an army at your disposal is pretty scary (Proof His side B in Brawl).
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
5,744
Location
California
Switch FC
SW-5361-1490-2247
#46
This will go well, surely. Nothing bad could come of this, nothing at all. This is a great idea. This will be a very civil discussion with no bias and purely fact based.

also where the hell is kirby
As long as people don't take things personally, things should be fine. As for Kirby, I've played some of the games. I don't see why Kirby would be top tier. If it has anything to do with Screw Attack, I take what they say with a grain of salt. They have been incorrect before.

Calamity Ganon proves that Ganondorf isn’t all that powerful really. He can be hurt by regular things, and certainly things that Mewtwo would be able to dish out towards him. Calamity Ganon is also Ganon at his very strongest. So that settles things quickly.
I wasn't considering Calamity Ganon, since the first rule is to use the best incarnation. Unless Calamity Ganon is the best, but then that would be the one you see during the events that take place 100 years prior to Link's awakening. (That Zelda reference was unintentional, but I like it.) Let's also be clear on one thing. "Hibernating within a cocoon, [Calamity Ganon] attempted to regenerate a physical form after Link awoke but was forced to confront him in an incomplete state." This explains why Calamity Ganon is vulnerable to other forms of attack that lack evil's bane. Being in an incomplete state would be anything but at ones prime.

In general, Mewtwo is full of hax because of a few moves he learns as Me First, which allows him, if predicted right, to use a attack his enemy would use back at them with either 1.5 or double the strength. Are we gonna allow him to have more than 4 moves? Cause then it’s set.
Yes. Mewtwo and all other Pokémon have more than four moves.

I don’t know what Cloud is capable of, neither Dark Samus, but am down to learn. Bayonetta seems pretty powerful however, not sure if she’s better than Mewtwo just yet.
I don't know what Cloud is capable of, either. I just hear that he's supposed to be powerful. I've yet to see the reasons why, so I was hoping others more knowledgeable could give me some information. As for Dark Samus, be sure to check the original post. I'll have that part updated.

Ness is also powerful as ****. And I believe Ike and even Donkey Kong should also be at least in “High Tier”.
I don't know how powerful Ness is, but his power is often related to the battle of Giygas. My issue with this is that it was Paula who stopped Giygas, not Ness. Maybe there's something I'm missing.

:ultshulk:-killed a god who created the Xenoblade 1 & 2 universe
I need more than this. A "god" can be anything that is superhuman, so it doesn't say much.

:ultness:-went toe to toe with Gigygas who became one with the universe
I think you mean Ness went toe-to-toe with a universal threat. But, it was Paula who really saved the day.

:ultcloud:-withstood Sephiroth's supernova attack
I find this dubious. There are plenty of weaker attacks that can harm Cloud, and if Zack Fair was killed by soldiers with firearms, there's no reason to think Cloud is any different. He might be stronger than Zack, but that doesn't tell us anything. In fact, it's rather peculiar that Cloud would even bother dodging bullets at all. What you have is a meteor that destroys planets. Consider that if such meteor even did such a thing, it would have been stopped. Passing through the atmosphere would have broken it down. But even if it was able to destroy a few planets along the way, it would have vaporized before hitting the Sun. Consider that this cut-scene can be played numerous times, and every time that happens, the planets that were destroyed are perfectly intact. Not only that, but the Sun is, too. If a meteor could be controlled and the person controlling it even attempted at moving the Sun, it would be akin to a fly crashing into a cargo ship.

SSS...............(lots of S's)SSSSS::ultkirby: (No I'm not kidding play a Kirby game)
S::ultbayonetta::ultshulk::ultsamus:/:ultdarksamus::ultpalutena::ultrob::ultrosalina:
A::ultsonic::ultlucario::ultmewtwo::ultkingdedede::ultmetaknight::ultness::ultlucas:
B::ultcloud::ultcorrin::ultzelda::ultbowser::ultzss::ultgreninja::ultinkling:

Aaaaand that's where things stop being relevant
I have played some Kirby games. I even own the first one for the Game Boy. So, why is Kirby so high on your list? Why are any of them where you labeled them?

Something tells me you're taking Screw Attack's Kirby vs. Buu prima facie. Is this correct?

S+++ :ultlink: Defeated Dark Beast Ganon - the literal being of infinite Hatred and Malice Incarnate 2 times!
Link has the tools to defeat Ganondorf, but that doesn't mean Link has the tools to defeat everyone else.

Rosalina simply because when Bowser destroyed the entire Galaxy she had the power to create a brand new universe.
Did Rosalina reset the entire galaxy? Where is this stated?

I know Mario isn’t incredibly high tier or anything, but didn’t he pick up an entire castle in SMW?
It was a rather small castle.

:ultvillager: Villager can sort of canonically time travel and mess with their reality as they see fit...? I wouldn't normally count it, but characters mention it, warn of it, and suffer consequences for it, so...

Ooh, after a catch, they can fearlessly show off things like scorpions and sharks - AND, I don't know if it's the heaviest in the game - but Villager lifts up Whale Sharks with one hand and the game canonically lists them at around 275 inches aka like 23 ft, and that's heavy, that's one-handed, and Villager is strong.

Also they can like...carry anything in their pocket. Beds, statues, cars, puts em in their pocket and leisurely walks away. That's strong. That's canon.
I never took changing the date or time of a game as time traveling or messing with reality. That's entirely up to the player, not Villager. As for a whale shark, that would probably be the heaviest thing. The question is, is Villager really holding it over his head, or is he standing beside it like you see in pictures where fishermen stand beside their catch? As for carrying anything in one's pocket is kind of silly. Link can carry a variety of things, but no one says he's physically strong because of it. Even if Villager was granted the whale shark "feat", being able to lift or pull 20.5 short tons won't be enough to win. There are plenty of physically strong characters who can do more than that.

This is always a silly topic in part because the one obviously correct greatest character is consistently neglected. The single most powerful character to the point that "everyone else together is a joke" is obviously :ultgnw:.

Mr. Game & Watch doesn't really have much we can discern from the actual G&W series, but what we see in Brawl's SSE is pretty convincing. For those who didn't follow that plot, what happened was that Tabuu extracted the LCD fluid from G&W to create the Primid army. At some point late in the plot, you recruit G&W himself by rescuing him and he's absolutely 100% of what he ever was... but the Primid army still exists which incidentally is a pretty massive group of guys. This gets down to the single most broken power I think in all of fiction that G&W alone possesses. G&W can violate the law of conservation of matter and simply create additional matter from himself without limit. He uses this when fighting in Smash too; where else could you begin to explain his various tools he spawns (turtles, packages, signs for Judgment Hammer, the crew for Fire, etc.) come from? For anyone who isn't versed in physics, it might not be as obvious why this is insane, but remember that G&W has mass and that the force of gravity is proportional to how much mass is present. Since G&W can just spawn infinite amounts of mass, he could at a whim simply spawn enough material to create a universe ending black hole thanks to the extreme gravity. None of these other characters can begin to match this.

I'd also like you to consider that G&W is truly 2d. He has absolutely no thickness at all, and yet he still is able to freely move about a 3d world. This has a lot of implications. A truly 2d object would be infinitely sharp. In combat the obvious advantage is that he could cut any material by applying almost no force; he just has to make contact to slice through anything. However, a secondary implication is that he should by logic slice through the ground and instantly sink to the center of the Earth, but clearly he does not. This suggests that G&W can arbitrarily float which I suppose explains why when he's using Fire there seems to be no conservation of momentum pushing the Fire crew downward when G&W is thrown upward (G&W can just move upward freely). Likewise G&W's plunging dair must use these properties; other characters with plunging dairs presumably make themselves more aerodynamic, but since G&W is perfectly flat, he's also always optimally aerodynamic so his ability to alter his fall speed can only be explained as a special ability to negate yet another fundamental law of physics at a whim. Broken stuff.

Speaking of him being 2d, let's look at some other implications. As an infinitely thin object who is also absolutely pitch black. no light at all would refract off him; he would be invisible to all of the other fighters. You might consider that those with psychic powers could detect him, but how would that work? My understand of what psychic powers are supposed to be is some sort of special brain powers in which you use some sort of a wave from your brain to interface with an opponent's brain, but since brains are 3d objects, clearly G&W's mind works via completely different and not understood mechanisms so it seems more plausible than not that he would be simply immune to all of the psychics. Even if he has some strange 2d analogue to a brain, how could a normal psychic possibly be equipped to interface with it? In terms of other interactions, even if someone were directly orthogonal to him, you have to consider his thinness from another angle. Things like sound waves or the wave properties of any particle would have a wavelength infinitely larger than his absolute zero thickness. It's unclear if there's any physical mechanism initiated by a 3d object or person that could possibly even detect his presence. Exerting a force on him might also be a tricky process, but since we do see he's highly rigid, perhaps that would work a little better so long as you approached from the flat side... not that you'd ever know he was there before he destroyed you at his leisure.

Lastly, as though he weren't already totally outclassing everyone else, consider his movement. Most other characters move by translating their location from one position to another in a smooth way, but we see very clearly that G&W simply instantaneously teleports in a sort of stuttered "frame by frame" animation. If you consider what this means on an instantaneous basis, it means that G&W can impart infinite velocity upon himself for brief periods of time. Since he possesses mass, infinite velocity means infinite momentum. Infinite momentum means infinite force. G&W can impart literally any amount of force he wants at any time; it's the only possible conclusion one can draw from his method of movement. Of course his sharp side would instantly simply slice any material even with very low force, but his flat side could likewise just break any material freely by exploiting this property. If you consider quantum mechanics, this gets even more extreme. Remember the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The more precisely an object's speed is known, the less precisely its position is known. By imparting infinite speed upon himself, it would seem that the uncertainty of his speed goes to zero which would mean the uncertainty of his position goes to infinity which means his individual particles would simultaneously affect the entire universe at once. Unlike other things here, this isn't clear and seems like something that doesn't happen; G&W already freely breaks several fundamental laws of physics so it's possible he is able to function completely outside of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, but that is also an insane property as it would suggest that in interactions between his particles and the particles of the rest of the universe his simply impose their properties freely and completely override the properties of everything else changing the basic mechanics of the entire universe to suit his existence. The second is a plausible interpretation; presumably this is why Flat Zone flattens anyone who visits? Yeah, don't try to tell me someone like Kirby is on this level; G&W can't even merely just destroy the universe but also rewrite its laws to his own convenience...

Now you could say "clearly G&W is just a fun character and they didn't consider the massive basic physics problems his existence suggests", and I'd say, sure that's true. However, the premise of the question of who is the most and least powerful I believe presupposes that every character must somehow exist, and assuming G&W exists as he's depicted in Smash can only allow for him to be effectively all powerful in a way beyond even what fiction usually suggests is a god. Therefore, G&W himself ends the question either way. You can deny considering seriously the implications of what he is and deny the question has value or you can consider it and place him at #1 in such a commanding fashion that the ranking of every other character seems uninteresting. Maybe almost everyone loses when we think this way, but at least :ultgnw: reigns as champion.
Super Smash Bros. Brawl isn't canon. Mr. Game & Watch would be rather weak. Actually, being a 2D character, he wouldn't be able to interact with the 3D world, much in the same way we 3D beings aren't able to interact with 4D.

One time Mario destroyed the sun by throwing a turtle shell at it.

That strikes me as pretty upper tier.
Link?

:ultkirby: is actually canonically stated to possess infinite power. He's on top.
What is even meant by that? Whatever this "infinite power" is, he's apparently not using it.

I'd just like to point out Dark Samus survived a planet collapsing on her. Also, according to scan data "Bioscans suggest that Dark Samus can reform her body short of total atomic disruption". This is ignoring how stupid OP phazon is. So yeah, DS would be up there to say the least.
It's never said that Dark Samus survived a planet collapsing on her, much less a dimension. Dark Samus is capable of teleporting, and early on in Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, she enters Dark Aether without access to a dark rift. As for reforming her body short of total atomic disruption, this is one reason why Dark Samus would be very powerful.

Personally I would put Rosalina in SS Tier. Didn't she recreate the universe at the end of Super Mario Galaxy?
There's nothing stating that Rosalina did anything.

Also Wario should be in the B Tier considering his moon feat against Shake King.
Link?
 

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#47
After seeing all this Kirby top tier talk, I just feel the need to say:

I'm still salty over Kirby beating Majin Buu in that Death Battle. ****ing bull****.
 

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#49
Yes. I think Screw Attack was incorrect, and now most think Kirby is a powerhouse.
They're incorrect somewhat often. Not necessarily always in the outcome, but they're very selective in their research.

For instance, in the Cammy/Sonya fight, they treated Test Your Might and Fatalities as canon, for some reason. Sonya can't actually break solid titanium with her bare hands. It's a mini-game.

Still entertaining to watch and debate though.
 

Mogisthelioma

Smash Champion
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
2,970
Location
The Lor Starcutter
#52
As long as people don't take things personally, things should be fine. As for Kirby, I've played some of the games. I don't see why Kirby would be top tier. If it has anything to do with Screw Attack, I take what they say with a grain of salt. They have been incorrect before.



I wasn't considering Calamity Ganon, since the first rule is to use the best incarnation. Unless Calamity Ganon is the best, but then that would be the one you see during the events that take place 100 years prior to Link's awakening. (That Zelda reference was unintentional, but I like it.) Let's also be clear on one thing. "Hibernating within a cocoon, [Calamity Ganon] attempted to regenerate a physical form after Link awoke but was forced to confront him in an incomplete state." This explains why Calamity Ganon is vulnerable to other forms of attack that lack evil's bane. Being in an incomplete state would be anything but at ones prime.



Yes. Mewtwo and all other Pokémon have more than four moves.



I don't know what Cloud is capable of, either. I just hear that he's supposed to be powerful. I've yet to see the reasons why, so I was hoping others more knowledgeable could give me some information. As for Dark Samus, be sure to check the original post. I'll have that part updated.



I don't know how powerful Ness is, but his power is often related to the battle of Giygas. My issue with this is that it was Paula who stopped Giygas, not Ness. Maybe there's something I'm missing.



I need more than this. A "god" can be anything that is superhuman, so it doesn't say much.



I think you mean Ness went toe-to-toe with a universal threat. But, it was Paula who really saved the day.



I find this dubious. There are plenty of weaker attacks that can harm Cloud, and if Zack Fair was killed by soldiers with firearms, there's no reason to think Cloud is any different. He might be stronger than Zack, but that doesn't tell us anything. In fact, it's rather peculiar that Cloud would even bother dodging bullets at all. What you have is a meteor that destroys planets. Consider that if such meteor even did such a thing, it would have been stopped. Passing through the atmosphere would have broken it down. But even if it was able to destroy a few planets along the way, it would have vaporized before hitting the Sun. Consider that this cut-scene can be played numerous times, and every time that happens, the planets that were destroyed are perfectly intact. Not only that, but the Sun is, too. If a meteor could be controlled and the person controlling it even attempted at moving the Sun, it would be akin to a fly crashing into a cargo ship.



I have played some Kirby games. I even own the first one for the Game Boy. So, why is Kirby so high on your list? Why are any of them where you labeled them?



Something tells me you're taking Screw Attack's Kirby vs. Buu prima facie. Is this correct?



Link has the tools to defeat Ganondorf, but that doesn't mean Link has the tools to defeat everyone else.



Did Rosalina reset the entire galaxy? Where is this stated?



It was a rather small castle.



I never took changing the date or time of a game as time traveling or messing with reality. That's entirely up to the player, not Villager. As for a whale shark, that would probably be the heaviest thing. The question is, is Villager really holding it over his head, or is he standing beside it like you see in pictures where fishermen stand beside their catch? As for carrying anything in one's pocket is kind of silly. Link can carry a variety of things, but no one says he's physically strong because of it. Even if Villager was granted the whale shark "feat", being able to lift or pull 20.5 short tons won't be enough to win. There are plenty of physically strong characters who can do more than that.



Super Smash Bros. Brawl isn't canon. Mr. Game & Watch would be rather weak. Actually, being a 2D character, he wouldn't be able to interact with the 3D world, much in the same way we 3D beings aren't able to interact with 4D.



Link?



What is even meant by that? Whatever this "infinite power" is, he's apparently not using it.



It's never said that Dark Samus survived a planet collapsing on her, much less a dimension. Dark Samus is capable of teleporting, and early on in Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, she enters Dark Aether without access to a dark rift. As for reforming her body short of total atomic disruption, this is one reason why Dark Samus would be very powerful.



There's nothing stating that Rosalina did anything.



Link?
Jeez man, this is just casual speculation. No need to go over literally everyone's posts and demand evidence.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#54
I don't see how Pokemon trainer can be placed below any of the Pokemon, consider he has defeated and caught each Pokemon alongside helping them tap into their potential. If you are going to place Shulk in S tier given he used a god blade (because he's nothing without his blade), you shouldn't exclude The trainer from the Pokemon he tames and trains.

Also I'm going to have to be the odd one out and make the claim that people are highly over rating Kirby. Kirby is indeed strong and has lots of potential, but he can also be K.Od by a falling apple. I don't care what all-mighty power you possess, If I can knock you out by throwing a bunch of fruit at you, you aren't omnipotent.
 
Last edited:

Mogisthelioma

Smash Champion
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
2,970
Location
The Lor Starcutter
#55
I don't see how Pokemon trainer can be placed below any of the Pokemon, consider he has defeated and caught each Pokemon alongside helping them tap into their potential. If you are going to place Shulk in S tier given he used a god blade, you shouldn't exclude The trainer from the Pokemon he tames and trains.

Also I'm going to have to be the odd one out and make the claim that people are highly over rating Kirby. Kirby is indeed strong and has lots of potential, but he can also be K.Od by a falling apple. I don't care what all-mighty power you possess, If I can knock you out by throwing a bunch of fruit at you, you aren't omnipotent.
I'll speak for the entire fanbase that knows you are wrong:
Kirby has canonically been stated to possess infinite power. Hell, even in Planet Robobot he abosorbed the entire freaking Halberd and took down an enormous space robot hell-bent on literally eradicating everything in the known multiverse that lived. Being KO'd by an apple is the same thing as losing to a Goomba, a Bokoblin, or ending up being captured by the same Gerudo demon over and over again. Just filler.
 
Last edited:

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#56
Also I'm going to have to be the odd one out and make the claim that people are highly over rating Kirby. Kirby is indeed strong and has lots of potential, but he can also be K.Od by a falling apple. I don't care what all-mighty power you possess, If I can knock you out by throwing a bunch of fruit at you, you aren't omnipotent.
Not that I support Kirby being the strongest thing in the universe, but:

 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#57
I'll speak for the entire fanbase that knows you are wrong:
Kirby has canonically been stated to possess infinite power. Hell, even in Planet Robobot he abosorbed the entire freaking Halberd and took down an enormous space robot hell-bent on literally eradicating everything in the known multiverse that lived. Being KO'd by an apple is the same thing as losing to a Goomba, a Bokoblin, or ending up being captured by the same Gerudo demon over and over again. Just filler.
I know that, I am aware of his feats. But just as he's been shown to accomplish ridiculous all powerful feats, he has also been shown to been beaten by a waddle dee just as easily. The same can be said about Mario with Goombas, so on so forth. I just think if you are going to power scale characters you have to consider their weaknesses just as much as their strengths. Plus Kirby was never shown having the power to destroy the multiverse, just defeating an entity with the power to destroy the multiverse itself..... Pichu has accomplished a feat similar to that.
 
Last edited:

Mogisthelioma

Smash Champion
Joined
Aug 24, 2018
Messages
2,970
Location
The Lor Starcutter
#58
I know that, I am aware of his feats. But just as he's been shown to accomplish ridiculous all powerful feats, he has also been shown to been beaten by a waddle dee just as easily. The same can be said about Mario with Goombas, so on so forth. I just think if you are going to power scale characters you have to consider their weaknesses just as much as their strengths. Plus Kirby was never shown having the power to destroy the multiverse, just defeating an entity with the power to destroy the multiverse itself..... Pichu has accomplished a feat similar to that.
Oh, great. Another person who wants to advocate that Pokemon are the biggest baddest things out there.
You know what? I understand that Platforming characters can die to lame things. But so can everything. I can lose to a button masher online, but that doesn't make me bad.
 

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#59
I know that, I am aware of his feats. But just as he's been shown to accomplish ridiculous all powerful feats, he has also been shown to been beaten by a waddle dee just as easily. The same can be said about Mario with Goombas, so on so forth. I just think if you are going to power scale characters you have to consider their weaknesses just as much as their strengths. Plus Kirby was never shown having the power to destroy the multiverse, just defeating an entity with the power to destroy the multiverse itself..... Pichu has accomplished a feat similar to that.
Again, not endorsing Kirby being the strongest thing ever, but we can't base canonical conversations on gameplay conventions.

You can beat Akuma in Street Fighter with Dan. That doesn't canonically make Akuma capable of losing to Dan. That's just gameplay.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#60
Oh, great. Another person who wants to advocate that Pokemon are the biggest baddest things out there.
You know what? I understand that Platforming characters can die to lame things. But so can everything. I can lose to a button masher online, but that doesn't make me bad.
No I'm not, I think pokemon are eh IDK maybe average fighters, but we can't cherrypick facts. I mean, fact is, Pichu has the potential to defeat the very dieties that control time, space, and dimensional travel.

In regards to Durability, its not the say all be all, but it is a factor that should be considered. Dan beating Akuma may not be a good indicator of Akuma's power, but it does show how much health Akuma has and how much he can endure. I'd say handling a fury of punches by Dan is much more respectable than getting wrecked by a bunch of apples dropped casually by Wispy Woods. Gameplay may not be exact in determining power, but it shows precedent.

As for Goku, you have to take that scene with the understanding that yes, he can get hurt by a rock. He has a weakness of dropping his guard and it is made clear that is a weakness in the series. However his strengths are so much greater than this one weakness that it becomes practically mute.
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
5,744
Location
California
Switch FC
SW-5361-1490-2247
#61
I don't see how Pokemon trainer can be placed below any of the Pokemon, consider he has defeated and caught each Pokemon alongside helping them tap into their potential. If you are going to place Shulk in S tier given he used a god blade (because he's nothing without his blade), you shouldn't exclude The trainer from the Pokemon he tames and trains.
I figured Pokémon Trainer would just have the current generation starter Pokémon, since we don't know what other Pokémon he has on his team.

Also I'm going to have to be the odd one out and make the claim that people are highly over rating Kirby. Kirby is indeed strong and has lots of potential, but he can also be K.Od by a falling apple. I don't care what all-mighty power you possess, If I can knock you out by throwing a bunch of fruit at you, you aren't omnipotent.
Of course Kirby isn't omnipotent. I think a lot of people get this idea that Kirby is extremely powerful, due to Screw Attack's Kirby vs. Majin Buu. I question a lot of what Screw Attack says, and treating them as fact is ignorant.

I'll speak for the entire fanbase that knows you are wrong:
Kirby has canonically been stated to possess infinite power. Hell, even in Planet Robobot he abosorbed the entire freaking Halberd and took down an enormous space robot hell-bent on literally eradicating everything in the known multiverse that lived. Being KO'd by an apple is the same thing as losing to a Goomba, a Bokoblin, or ending up being captured by the same Gerudo demon over and over again. Just filler.
Infinite power, which he doesn't exhibit. While Kirby took control of the Halberd, he wouldn't have access to it here. See Rule 2. It would seem Robobot would be Kirby's current best incarnation, but I'm not certain on that, since I haven't played any Kirby games past Kirby's Return to Dream Land. Having access to equipment to assist Kirby into winning isn't by itself evidence that Kirby could not be harmed by weaker attacks, though. No more than someone wearing armor, who could be harmed outside of it.
 

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#64
Dan beating Akuma may not be a good indicator of Akuma's power, but it does show how much health Akuma has and how much he can endure. I'd say handling a fury of punches by Dan is much more respectable than getting wrecked by a bunch of apples dropped casually by Wispy Woods. Gameplay may not be exact in determining power, but it shows precedent.
Except gameplay can't show precedent against canon. The game is only a game if the player can win or lose. If the game were based on canon, any matchup between Akuma and Dan would result in a very quick Dan death. But that wouldn't be a game; it'd be a show. So even though there is absolutely zero chance canonically for Dan-- a guy who was weaker than the high school girl Sakura who was just learning how to really fight-- to beat Akuma-- the epitome of an obsessed fighter of can punch an island in half-- for the sake of gameplay, a player using Dan can defeat a player using Akuma.

So even though Kirby is stronger than every waddle dee he finds, he can still lose because the player needs consequence. Mario can lose to a goomba, Kratos can lose to a harpy. Super Saiyan 4 Goku can lose to Mr. Satan in a jetpack. Treating these possibilities as relevant in a discussion of canon ruins the discussion.

As for Goku, you have to take that scene with the understanding that yes, he can get hurt by a rock. He has a weakness of dropping his guard and it is made clear that is a weakness in the series. However his strengths are so much greater than this one weakness that it becomes practically mute.
I'm very aware of the context. Super Saiyan Goku getting hurt by a gently tossed rock is just another example of someone getting hurt by an inanimate object that definitely shouldn't hurt them due to outstanding circumstances for plot or comedy's sake. Like Kirby getting hurt by an apple.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
5,744
Location
California
Switch FC
SW-5361-1490-2247
#65
Nah, Screw Attack sucks ***, it’s mainly these two clips.

I tend to avoid mini-games. Even if you wanted to grant these, you'll notice Kirby has to set these things up. Not only that, these planets being destroyed, as well as Pop Star splitting in half doesn't remain consistent when you try again.

Anyway, I have information for Dark Samus' physical strength in the original post. This is applied to Samus as well. I still look forward to reasons for why certain characters belong at certain spots of the tier list. Please try to flesh out your reasons.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#69
Except gameplay can't show precedent against canon. The game is only a game if the player can win or lose. If the game were based on canon, any matchup between Akuma and Dan would result in a very quick Dan death. But that wouldn't be a game; it'd be a show. So even though there is absolutely zero chance canonically for Dan-- a guy who was weaker than the high school girl Sakura who was just learning how to really fight-- to beat Akuma-- the epitome of an obsessed fighter of can punch an island in half-- for the sake of gameplay, a player using Dan can defeat a player using Akuma.

So even though Kirby is stronger than every waddle dee he finds, he can still lose because the player needs consequence. Mario can lose to a goomba, Kratos can lose to a harpy. Super Saiyan 4 Goku can lose to Mr. Satan in a jetpack. Treating these possibilities as relevant in a discussion of canon ruins the discussion.


I'm very aware of the context. Super Saiyan Goku getting hurt by a gently tossed rock is just another example of someone getting hurt by an inanimate object that definitely shouldn't hurt them due to outstanding circumstances for plot or comedy's sake. Like Kirby getting hurt by an apple.

Fair enough, however part of game design is using game elements to tell the story. Notice In the Kratos example, Kratos is never threatened, by say, a kitten. If that were to happen, all of Kratos character and strength would be made unbelievable. The challenges a player goes against, or the enemies a player faces, says just about the same about the character as their hitboxes or vitality. You say you can't use game mechanics to express character power and to me that makes as much sense as trying to compare the power of television characters using only character descriptions on a website. There may be out of character moments, true...but that just comes into play with fiction.

Lets go back to the Akuma example real quick. You claim the game doesn't showcase Akuma's canon superiority over Dan, but I'd argue that its the opposite. Akuma's in universe power is expressed through his damage, overpowering hitboxes, and speed. Dan is well Dan. Even if it isn't one-to one there is correlation with gameplay to story. Now obviously fighting games are less trustworthy simply because game balance, but even then there is still info that can be gathered from gameplay. Still, I would stray away from using fighting games as means of character relationship, as balance usually does interfere with story (which is why this thread exists).

However that is not the case with platformers. All enemies are created in relation to the protagonist. That means that the game designer already knows how their character interacts wiith the world and can appropriately create necessary obstacles. I'm not saying Kirby is pathetic because he can die to apples, rather I am saying that when we take into account the threats Kirby deals with, its not all that impressive. Things that challenge Kirby would never pose a threat to character like Samus or Cloud. If Samus was pelted by an apple and lost 1/8 of her power, people wouldn't accept it for a second.

Its all about how the character acts in relation to their world, The real question I would consider is how often is Kirby shown in the light of being world destroying and in what instances are these at play? In comparison how often is a considerable non-threatening obstacle a potential problem for Kirby? Now lets say if an average boxer were to punch Kirby compared to Ganondorf, would Ganondorf or Kirby be in more pain?

Sorry but I am unwilling to not use gameplay to evaluate character strength, to me gameplay is more revealing of a characters power than a scripted cutscene is. Part of a game designer's job is to relay character through the characters actions, environment, mannerisms, etc.
 
Last edited:

staindgrey

The One True Kahnum
Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
9,011
Location
The 90's
3DS FC
0130-1865-3216
NNID
staindgrey
Switch FC
SW 1248 1677 4696
#71
Fair enough, however part of game design is using game elements to tell the story. Notice In the Kratos example, Kratos is never threatened, by say, a kitten. If that were to happen, all of Kratos character and strength would be made unbelievable. The challenges a player goes against, or the enemies a player faces, says just about the same about the character as their hitboxes or vitality. You say you can't use game mechanics to express character power and to me that makes as much sense as trying to compare the power of television characters using only character descriptions on a website. There may be out of character moments, true...but that just comes into play with fiction.

Lets go back to the Akuma example real quick. You claim the game doesn't showcase Akuma's canon superiority over Dan, but I'd argue that its the opposite. Akuma's in universe power is expressed through his damage, overpowering hitboxes, and speed. Dan is well Dan. Even if it isn't one-to one there is correlation with gameplay to story. Now obviously fighting games are less trustworthy simply because game balance, but even then there is still info that can be gathered from gameplay. Still, I would stray away from using fighting games as means of character relationship, as balance usually does interfere with story (which is why this thread exists).

However that is not the case with platformers. All enemies are created in relation to the protagonist. That means that the game designer already knows how their character interacts wiith the world and can appropriately create necessary obstacles. I'm not saying Kirby is pathetic because he can die to apples, rather I am saying that when we take into account the threats Kirby deals with, its not all that impressive. Things that challenge Kirby would never pose a threat to character like Samus or Cloud. If Samus was pelted by an apple and lost 1/8 of her power, people wouldn't accept it for a second.

Its all about how the character acts in relation to their world, The real question I would consider is how often is Kirby shown in the light of being world destroying and in what instances are these at play? In comparison how often is a considerable non-threatening obstacle a potential problem for Kirby? Now lets say if an average boxer were to punch Kirby compared to Ganondorf, would Ganondorf or Kirby be in more pain?

Sorry but I am unwilling to not use gameplay to evaluate character strength, to me gameplay is more revealing of a characters power than a scripted cutscene is. Part of a game designer's job is to relay character through the characters actions, environment, mannerisms, etc.
Agree to disagree, then. I really don't think that anything that can completely derail a canonical storyline can be considered canon in itself. Yes, Kratos can be defeated by a single harpy in gameplay, but in canon, he never is, because your game over as a player is not indicative of Kratos's actual story. His actual story involves killing every damn god he finds.

That's what I mean by not letting gameplay influence canon. Gameplay involves hypotheticals that are determined by player input, not by the character's merits. What you're referring to in this post is aesthetic design, it seems, and even that argument is tricky. Kirby is part of a cartoonish design, but still deals with things like a magical entity that can travel between alternate universes and has conquered many of them. Samus, while in a more clearly defined scifi world with realistic proportions and more threatening looking enemies, hasn't technically dealt with something like that.

I'm not even pro-Kirby. Majin Buu would kick his ***. But using a stage obstacle as part of a canonical argument is just not something you'll be able to convince me to do.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#72
Nah its cool, I knew from the get-go that we would have a difference of opinion on that front. I guess what I was getting at is that I don't think game design and story are necessarily divorced. But I wouldn't call it aesthetic design either, as you can have a cutesy design and still sell concepts like power and strength. Kirby oddly enough is a good example of this as pretty much every move he does is made to feel powerful and destructive. I personally see Kirby as a glass cannon to be honest, powerful but not one to take too many powerful punches. (Though his series isn't consistent so its hard to define)

And I don't expect you to accept my reasoning. I'm not trying to be persuasive, I was just throwing out my opinion. I was personally taught that in designing a game, I should account for every aspect as to how it influences the narrative and sells particular concepts. It's just a personal design mentality I have and it influences my critiques of other games. I can see how it might sound ridiculous, but I can't see it any other way. To me the great things about games is that it is an interactive narrative so there is no true set canon, just variances. Kratos could be an almighty god slayer if you are good enough, or he could be a crippling buffoon that dies to a harpy. Its just that some characters have higher highs and lower lows.
 

IronTed

Smash Ace
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
772
Location
In a dark, locked room
#73
Can anyone provides links and/or quotes to Kirby being omnipotent?

I do think it raises a question, with respect to canon and gameplay. Numerous times I've seen people use the latter to dismiss the former, and to an extent it's justified, but game mechanics are something that has to be considered when discussing feats.. The most obvious instance of this would apply to characters from games that are turn-based (i.e. Pokemon).
 

Meritocracy

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
179
Location
HFMS
#74
Just to put things in perspective, don't forget the actual goddess, the space princess that can reset universes, and the salmon pink gumball that can eat them.
 
Last edited:

IronTed

Smash Ace
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
772
Location
In a dark, locked room
#76
I don’t believe he’s been said to be omnipotent, but the games do say he has infinite power. I don’t believe it holds any merit, though.

View attachment 163412
Hmm, that is very vague, and could apply to many things. Strength? Durability? I definitely agree, that's something that should probably be disregarded, given how debatable and nonspecific it is.
 

aarchak

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
501
Location
The blast zone
#78
I know this is all kind of meaningless, but I think it's fun to speculate on feats and potential ability.

Also, **** Screwattack, Death Battle is VERY poorly researched. The only reason I watch it is for the cool fight scenes. One of my many complaints about the show is the overreliance on physical stats, like every winner wins because they were stronger, faster, or tougher than their opponent. But I digress.

Also, until anyone can show me Kirby taking actual physical damage (not taking game damage, he just flinches and is knocked back a bit), I'm sticking with Kirby being overpowered.
 

SmashBro99

Smash Champion
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
2,177
Location
CT.
3DS FC
4957-2747-2945
#79
Mario can be defeated by touching an enemy.

Touching Bowser's spiky shell would make Sonic lose all his rings or kill him if he has none...

Ryu has a health bar, after so many hits he is defeated and he takes chip damage.

Always an interesting discussion to read, though I can never take it seriously. Too many variables make this like trying to compare apples to orang---no...apples to a ham sandwich.

Anyway, it's time for a DEATH BATTLEEEEEEEEE
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
1,924
Location
right here...at smashboards
3DS FC
5455-9417-5731
#80
well that's the thing about debates in fiction. Unless the world is clearly defined by hard rules that are consistent there can never be a clear answer, its all up to interpretation. If there is anything about nintendo games, characters jump in power by the game and sometimes by the chapter.
 
Top