• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

God of War: Ragnarok Discussion Thread

KLOL506 said:
Anyway, I'd suggest waiting for the supporters to put in their counterarguments before any actual voting happens, they're spread out across multiple time zones (And some of them are busy with IRL work) so it'll be a while before they see the thread and respond (And they will, I can guarantee that), I'd also strongly suggest people refrain from commenting until then to avoid derailing and clutter.
Click to expand...
Yes
 
Board game is still a year away so no point dwelling on that ATM.

Late pledges will be made available later so if you wanna buy the good stuff best to wait for that for now.
 
two thing that came in my mind
1. amulet of uroborus able to affect tisiphone enemies made from illusion
2. harpies in gow ragnarok valhalla able to absorb health, right ?


also greek enemies that exist in GoW ragnarok valhalla are pretty much same like enemies in kratos home world ?
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
vsbattles.com

God of war | Kratos's immortality Negation section.

Legionnaires & Their Counterparts Now, before we start, I know that Fuji wanted to handle this in one of her future threads, but this is mostly a re-justification of the ability that deals with its current problems instead of entirely removing it. To start off, we need to talk about the...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...
very good CRT, i am curious about someone that will downgrade Low 1-C stuff
 
So, I've been gone a while, and it looks like a lot has happened lol, what is this about a GoW board game? Also, I thought I saw someone say that apparently Thanatos fought Chaos at one point, is that correct, and if so when was that talked about? Also also, does anyone have a scan for the length of the GoW 3 game in-universe, I remember reading that it was apparently only like a day and change, which if true it's hilarious how Kratos did what the Titans couldn't in hundreds of years in a little more than a day.
 
So, I just finished putting almost every Guidebook in my gallery, and I have a bit of a question.

Why haven't you guys tried to get Greek myth as secondary canon or akin to it? The Guidebooks make it painfully obvious that you need Greek myth knowledge to fully understand the series, with them also using it while describing the characters, weapons and really anything.

I understand why you guys might not want it(it's not like I want it either) but it seems weird not to have established a thread on it.
 
It used to be canon, but it got removed because of Ragnarök's description of the well of urd being contradictory to the card game.

I did plan on re-adding it, but, eh. There's not much to get from the game without some mega thread establishing a complex explanation that removes its problems just so we can have infinite Timelines. Which is unnecessary because we already have L-1C.
 
Last edited:
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
I'm talking these two scans specifically, and every description because of the bs titles.
Click to expand...
I believe this is a matter of site policy as opposed to any issues with the canonicity itself. JTTW is far more reliant on religious context than GoW, but that still had to be removed before Sun Wukong was allowed on the wiki.

If you want to make a thread on Greek myth being secondary/tertiary canon, then I'd probably support it, but I think you'd get a lot of pushback from staff.
 
I can see why staff would push back against it, I mean, i would too if there isn't some direct statement about it.

But it would be odd to ignore it, after all the media itself considers it as something needed to understand the lore of the games, ignoring it would sacrifice the accuracy of our indexing just to satisfy site rules.

I might make a thread about it, but I would like the GOW supporters input so it can be something discussed before any actual attempt to get it passed.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
I can see why staff would push back against it, I mean, i would too if there isn't some direct statement about it.

But it would be odd to ignore it, after all the media itself considers it as something needed to understand the lore of the games, ignoring it would sacrifice the accuracy of our indexing just to satisfy site rules.

I might make a thread about it, but I would like the GOW supporters input so it can be something discussed before any actual attempt to get it passed.
Click to expand...
Not quite what I meant. We have rules against using real life religion on the wiki, which seems to extend to using it to provide context for verses (based on what I've seen with JTTW):
  • Do not create profiles for deities and other figures from religions with a significant quantity of modern day followers. This includes those described in Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam. Featuring these types of profiles is certain to upset large groups of people.
    • In addition, even dead religions, ones with an incredibly small amount of current followers, such as the Aesir faith, and ones for which the followers are agnostic, such as Shintoism, frequently contain myths and interpretations that are radically different and contradictory to each other, which makes it near impossible to pattern coherent information into statistical profile pages. As such, we only make exceptions for mythologies that are based on specific fictional works separate from any mainstream religion, such as Journey to the West and the Shanmeh, that can provide reasonably high coherence and accuracy for our purposes, and lessen the offence to religious believers.
Click to expand...
I've run into problems with this regarding Touhou, where the verse also heavily relies on religious context while encouraging readers to use it as a basis for canon info (while treating some aspects of religion/mythology as outright canon), and I'm not quite sure what to do there either. As I said before, I'd definitely take part in a thread discussing the topic further (and not just for my own benefit to be clear).
 
I can see how this can problematic when making profiles for those religions, but not when it comes to verses where they are secondary canon or tertiary canon too.

After all, God of War, Touhou(I'm assuming when it comes to Touhou) and likely a lot of other verses have a primary canon, with an established and coherent story line, events and Lore.

So when it comes to taking context, Lore or events from these mythos, only interpretations that would be consistent and uncontradictory would be actually taken, so the problem of contradictory interpretations gets erased.

And if there are two or more interpretations that are consistent and provide different outcomes (such as hax) the events would simply be taken as a possibly.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
I can see how this can problematic when making profiles for those religions, but not when it comes to verses where they are secondary canon or tertiary canon too.

After all, God of War, Touhou(I'm assuming when it comes to Touhou) and likely a lot of other verses have a primary canon, with an established and coherent story line, events and Lore.

So when it comes to taking context, Lore or events from these mythos, only interpretations that would be consistent and uncontradictory would be actually taken, so the problem of contradictory interpretations gets erased.

And if there are two or more interpretations that are consistent and provide different outcomes (such as hax) the events would simply be taken as a possibly.
Click to expand...
This is more or less my take on the matter, though I guess it'd vary somewhat based on the verse and the religion and mythology it draws from.

Feel free to ping me if you make a thread on this and I'll throw my support behind it.
 
Generally, we don't allow verses to extrapolate information from religious inspirations unless that information was stipulated within the lore itself. It may be fine to use it for understanding something, but it wouldn't generate new tiers or abilities. This is especially true with something like Greek Mythology which isn't a uniform corpus of clearly defined works.

Part of that is because fiction pretty much always deviates from the inspiration, so using it is often pretty specious. For instance, someone noted that "Sisyphus" was mentioned in GoW at some point, and in one version of the Sisyphus myth (there are several) he chained Hades and as a result no one could die, and this was being used as a justification for concept manip in GoW just due to the bare fact that Sisyphus got mentioned at some point. The problem there is obvious.
 
Deagonx said:
Generally, we don't allow verses to extrapolate information from religious inspirations unless that information was stipulated within the lore itself. It may be fine to use it for understanding something, but it wouldn't generate new tiers or abilities. This is especially true with something like Greek Mythology which isn't a uniform corpus of clearly defined works.

Part of that is because fiction pretty much always deviates from the inspiration, so using it is often pretty specious. For instance, someone noted that "Sisyphus" was mentioned in GoW at some point, and in one version of the Sisyphus myth (there are several) he chained Hades and as a result no one could die, and this was being used as a justification for concept manip in GoW just due to the bare fact that Sisyphus got mentioned at some point. The problem there is obvious.
Click to expand...
I can see your point Deagnox when these verses are simply inspired by said Mythos. But I fail to see how that applies to verses where said Mythos are treated as canon, or something akin to it.

And I see the problem you're talking about in the Sisyphus example, I do. After all, there's too little mention of him to use fully to propose any ability as something definite, but here's the thing, there's nothing contradictory to said myth or the others, so I see no reason why it can't be used as a possibly.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
but here's the thing, there's nothing contradictory to said myth or the others, so I see no reason why it can't be used as a possibly.
Click to expand...
It can't be used as a possibly because it isn't in the verse. Our standard of evidence for a "possibly" is considerably higher than what would be met by just mentioning a figure who -- in some version of his real life myth -- did something that might be considered Concept Manip. Also, there are many versions of most Greek myths. There isn't a "canon" version of Greek mythology.
 
Deagonx said:
It can't be used as a possibly because it isn't in the verse. Our standard of evidence for a "possibly" is considerably higher than what would be met by just mentioning a figure who -- in some version of his real life myth -- did something that might be considered Concept Manip. Also, there are many versions of most Greek myths. There isn't a "canon" version of Greek mythology.
Click to expand...
That's not what I'm saying. The Greek mythos are said to be canon according to the Guidebooks.

What I'm suggesting is using non-contradictory, consistent with the story and events, interpretations to accurately index the series.

And if there's two or more interpretations that fit this category, we index them both as possibly.
 
Personally speaking, I believe the mythos should only be used to contextualize what is already present in the series. If something is left vague and up to interpretation, then I think it's fine to fall back on the original myth to try and discern what happened in the series itself (assuming no contradictions would arise as a consequence of doing so, of course). I think the Sisyphus thing is a good example of where this approach shouldn't be used, given the amount of extrapolation and varying interpretations involved.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
That's not what I'm saying. The Greek mythos are said to be canon according to the Guidebooks.
Click to expand...
There is no consistent "Greek mythos." Again, every story in Greek mythology has several versions. Also, what line in which guidebook used the word "canon" to describe non-GoW greek mythology?

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
And if there's two or more interpretations that fit this category, we index them both as possibly.
Click to expand...
No, that's far far below our evidence threshold for "possibly."

Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Personally speaking, I believe the mythos should only be used to contextualize what is already present in the series. If something is left vague and up to interpretation, then I think it's fine to fall back on the original myth to try and discern what happened in the series itself (assuming no contradictions would arise as a consequence of doing so, of course). I think the Sisyphus thing is a good example of where this approach shouldn't be used, given the amount of extrapolation and varying interpretations involved.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don't mind it informing minor things, like for instance the meaning of the story about Ixion and Nephele, but this should be very limited.
 
Deagonx said:
There is no consistent "Greek mythos." Again, every story in Greek mythology has several versions. Also, what line in which guidebook used the word "canon" to describe non-GoW greek mythology?
Click to expand...
Deagnox, I'm not saying that Greek myths are consistent with themselves, I'm saying we should use the ones consistent with God of war to index the series proper, and here's the main statements I'm talking about. There are others, such as every character description having "classical Mythology" on top.
Deagonx said:
No, that's far far below our evidence threshold for "possibly."
Click to expand...
There are two interpretations, both are equally possibly, how do you index them?
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
Deagnox, I'm not saying that Greek myths are consistent with themselves, I'm saying we should use the ones consistent with God of war to index the series proper
Click to expand...
That doesn't really make sense, because if you're using Greek myths to fill in the blanks, then none of them are going to be "inconsistent" and we'll still be left with several possible versions of the same story.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
here's the main statements I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
"Stories of Ancient Greek History and Mythical Lore give you insight behind the world and game!" just tells us its Greek mythology inspired, which we already knew.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
There are two interpretations, both are equally possibly, how do you index them?
Click to expand...
Depends on context, there's no way to answer that universally. If it's nothing more than the bare possibility then neither would get indexed.
 
Deagonx said:
That doesn't really make sense, because if you're using Greek myths to fill in the blanks, then none of them are going to be "inconsistent" and we'll still be left with several possible versions of the same story.
Click to expand...
The possibility of those stories having any major difference is negligible at best, and probably no major difference between the indexing.
Deagonx said:
Stories of Ancient Greek History and Mythical Lore give you insight behind the world and game!" just tells us its Greek mythology inspired, which we already knew.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's if the statement was taken in a vacuum. The Guidebooks constantly label character descriptions with "classical Mythology" and utilizes things such as the giant war with the gods to mention events in the series as if they happened.
Deagonx said:
Depends on context, there's no way to answer that universally. If it's nothing more than the bare possibility then neither would get indexed.
Click to expand...
You can just index them as "possibly X(Used X in this interpretation, while didn't use it in X interpretation, it's unknown which canonical happened I'm the series)"

Or if they are different abilities "Possibly X or X (used X ability in said in X interpretation, while used X ability in X interpretation, it's unknown which canonically happened in the series)"

And ignoring just seems like improper indexing.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
The possibility of those stories having any major difference is negligible at best, and probably no major difference between the indexing.
Click to expand...
These seems to be an entirely ad-hoc assertion. Versions of Greek myths vary considerably, and again: We will never index based on information that is completely absent in the verse.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
The Guidebooks constantly label character descriptions with "classical Mythology" and utilizes things such as the giant war with the gods to mention events in the series as if they happened.
Click to expand...
Without the scans I'm not in a position to evaluate these claims. All I can say for sure is that the cover you linked isn't very compelling evidence.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
You can just index them as "possibly X(Used X in this interpretation, while didn't use it in X interpretation, it's unknown which canonical happened I'm the series)"
Click to expand...
We could, but we wouldn't. Our standards for "possibly" are much higher than that.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
And ignoring just seems like improper indexing.
Click to expand...
I disagree, if we do not have conclusive evidence we shouldn't be indexing based on theories. "Possibly" is for when there is strong, but not conclusive evidence for an ability. If it were used for bare possibility our profiles would be littered with endless "possibly" abilities and ratings.
 
Deagonx said:
These seems to be an entirely ad-hoc assertion. Versions of Greek myths vary considerably, and again: We will never index based on information that is completely absent in the verse.
Click to expand...
Sure, but how much would Greek myths that are consistent with Gow vary? Not much.
Deagonx said:
Without the scans I'm not in a position to evaluate these claims. All I can say for sure is that the cover you linked isn't very compelling evidence.
Click to expand...
Okay, here's two. There are a lot more where they are more explicit that information and description came entirely from the mythos.
Deagonx said:
We could, but we wouldn't. Our standards for "possibly" are much higher than that.
Click to expand...
Don't see why, both are possible.
Deagonx said:
I disagree, if we do not have conclusive evidence we shouldn't be indexing based on theories. "Possibly" is for when there is strong, but not conclusive evidence for an ability. If it were used for bare possibility our profiles would be littered with endless "possibly" abilities and ratings.
Click to expand...
These are not theories, they are two interpretations of Greek myth that are consistent with Gow, which we don't have any way to be discerning which canonically happened.

Anyway, I'm gonna stop responding here because of immo Negation thread.
 
Pepsimanslover_69 said:
Sure, but how much would Greek myths that are consistent with Gow vary? Not much.
Click to expand...
Again, this appears to be an entirely ad-hoc assertion.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
Okay, here's two. There are a lot more where they are more explicit that information and description came entirely from the mythos.
Click to expand...
I don't have any issue with using those quotes where they do not conflict with the game, but that does not provide a sufficient basis for saying we can just grab the Iliad and just grab what we want and assume it's canon to GoW so long as there's not some direct contradiction.

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
Don't see why, both are possible.
Click to expand...
Our "Possibly" ratings do not literally mean "possible."

Pepsimanslover_69 said:
These are not theories, they are two interpretations of Greek myth that are consistent with Gow, which we don't have any way to be discerning which canonically happened.
Click to expand...
This is addressed by what I said earlier in this comment.
 
Deagonx said:
Again, this appears to be an entirely ad-hoc assertion.


I don't have any issue with using those quotes where they do not conflict with the game, but that does not provide a sufficient basis for saying we can just grab the Iliad and just grab what we want and assume it's canon to GoW so long as there's not some direct contradiction.


Our "Possibly" ratings do not literally mean "possible."


This is addressed by what I said earlier in this comment.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry that what I'm asking isn't related to what you were just talking about, but do you have any information on Thanatos apparently fighting Chaos at some point and have a scan for it? Also, do you know if there is a scan for the length of the GoW 3 game in-universe, I heard it was a little over a day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
The Commoner's Thread: Removal of God of War's "Type 1 Concept Manipulation"
Replies
8
Views
633
Georredannea15
Georredannea15
ShadeyD
  • Locked
Kratos fights a hag.
Replies
6
Views
1K
Planck69
Planck69
Baken384
The Stardust Crusader vs The God of War (0-0-0)
2
Replies
55
Views
3K
Unknownnah
Unknownnah
OlafThorsson
  • Locked
Sauron(LOTR) vs Kratos(GOW)
Replies
14
Views
2K
Planck69
Planck69
CiscoTheSoto
Freya Fights Odin Alone
Replies
21
Views
3K
CiscoTheSoto
CiscoTheSoto
Back
Top