Are fan calcs headcanon?

So I've been thinking about this for a little while when I use the battle forums.

Basically what I'm asking is when are calculations done for a character's feats usable as a real and valid argument for a debate?

And also how should we interpret ambiguous feats and character statements? What I mean by ambiguous is that there is no way to give a definitive answer to how good or bad a feat or character statment is due to some missing and/or unkown variables.

They only have some value when you have number to use as a something relevant for the calc, such as the size of something, it's speed and the distance that it crossed in -- seconds, but I consider calcs that try to calc KE using several assumptions and several mathematical formulas head-canon, but I'm okay with Pixel scales since they are not trying to apply any complex calc, only scaling the size of something.

I believe calcs have their place as long as other things support their validity.

Their are some exceptions(Like Speed, as Speedboat = Distance/Time, which we can determine most times), but generally, you shouldn't be trying to apply physics to a series which defies Physics.

Otherwise, things get messy, very, very quickly.

So, if the user uses Common sense, then no, it isn't Headcannon.

@jko1: If no assumptions are made and the correct formulas are used in the calculation (practically never happens) it is only the quantification of a feat so not just head-canon. If the calc includes assumptions like “lets say that mountain was 1km, a reasonable height” “lets assume the height of the clouds were 3km” “lets say low end timeframe was 1 minutes” its just head canon. And most fan calcs (id say %99.9) use wrong values for impact or explosion damage, fracture energy of material etc.

@jko1: yes like a bankia being a 10x amp. Or if one character scales to another. The only exception is if the feat contradicts another. Like kakashi cutting a lighting bolt with chakra lighting and reacting to it when itachi could barely react to it. Using data books is also bad when it contradicts statements and feats in the series

Yes. No matter how good your math is you can't use it when all of these fictional series find a way to break them any way or the author didn't have numbers in mind. How many street levels have consistently dodged lightning?

Calcs are totally viable if they are done to multiple feats.

For example, if you calculate 3 feats, and 1 is way above the others. It's probably an outlier, and not really usable. But if you calculate 3 feats and they are all consistent; then I feel like they are completely viable. Calculations are a great way to find a character's baseline average, their maximums, and what's PIS.

Thanks for reading,
Floopay

@floopay: Sadly, users nowdays don't care about consistency anymore.

The only time I consider calcs useable is when the numbers are directly given in the medium. For example, how Goku’s kaioken was directly stated to multiply his stats.

But yes, fan calcs are head canon. That’s why they are called “fan” calcs.

I don't think we should brush off all assumptions as incorrect. Sometimes the assumption isn't based on anything and it's basically just a guess, but other times you can have decent assumptions based on what's shown. You can often make perfectly reasonable low-end assumptions for a value or two and I think it's fine. But I do see where you're coming from and some assumptions are just pulled out of someone's ass lol.

@maestromage: @nwgzsjuwhm96y2:That's kind of what I was thinking. I had the idea that if you don't make any assumptions and use the numbers that the author gives us and plug them into a formula properly, then it would not be headcanon.

So then by that logic, any assumptions made in a calc are headcanon. However, is it wrong to logically deduce an approximation of how good or bad a feat might be? Sure it may be headcanon but at the same time it's a reasonable assumption.

Like for example, let's say that in a comicbook a character lifts a car. Now how many pounds did that character lift? We can't say for sure since we don't know how much the car weighs. However, when we debate fiction, we are to assume that eveything in a fictional world is the same as the real world unless stated otherwise. An average car in the real world weighs roughly 4,000 pounds. So then by that logic, when that character lifted that car, is it safe to say that they can lift approximately 4,000 pounds?

I mean like I said before, we wouldn't know how much that character lifted for sure unless the author gave us an exact number of how much that car weighs, but should we still use the assumption of how much a car weighs in the real world as an approximation of how good that feat is in a debate until we have a definitive answer?

This.

Depends on how good the calc is, and if it makes sense or not. If you calc something to be like a country buster and the actual attack looks street level, then you dun goof'd. If you calc an attack that obviously blew up a city to be like street level, then you also dun goof'd. If you have a calc that is sourced by author/direct statements, measured meticulously, calculated with the right equations, and fits with what is shown on screen? Then sure, that calc is perfectly viable.

Yes, but head canon can override canon on these forums.

Anyone remember my boy Wally West?

This, but I've always thought calcs should be an absolute last resort when it comes to quantifying feats.

@rajjar said:

Yes, but head canon can override canon on these forums.

Anyone remember my boy Wally West?

Contradictions? Don't even get me started on that...

@jko1: Not a battle.

100% accurate.

For example the speed calcs from the seraphs in Baastard. There was a number how much lightyears they have coverd in distance and the timeframe how long they take. Fancalcs that uses numbers from the canon, are far more accurate, then any fanmade numbers.

Other example is the meteor calc (Deus Sema) They using panel calcs and the physical logic, but ignore the same logic on the same point. Also the timeframe and the fact that even fodder see the meteor shows, that they aren´t sub-relativistic. To inconsistent, to use this as a fact.

Another example are statements, or feats if they showing somenone crossing galaxys in one panel, or a very short timeframe. We have no numbers, but we have a possible imagination how fast they are. Those calcs are often "ok".

Yes and no. As long as you are using basic physics in relation to the character and not going craaaazy with advanced formulas then it's mostly okay.

Pixel scaling is almost always flawed due to artists not drawing to scale in multiple panels so I'd automatically consider that to be pure headcanon.

So yeah, it mostly boils down to common sense which, sadly, isn't very common...and that's why we get crap like light speed Naruto or universal Ichigo.

We're trying to calc characters from anime and comics who regularly ignore the laws of physics using the laws of physics.

Seems like there's an issue there.

@undre: @skysanji: Not gonna lie, when I was making this topic, Bleach was one of the verses I had in mind. I'm not trying to bash on Bleach or anything but honestly when people say that Bleach characters have bad feats or that their practically featless or that their feats gets highballed, they're kind of right. I think Bleach has got to be the most ambigous series in history when it comes to feats and character statements. Since you guys debate Bleach you probably know what kind of stuff I'm referring to.

Fan calcs are meaningless 95% of the time so there not canon or head canon they are irrelevant CBs and live action do not obey our laws of physics and yes they are cool but still pointless

@jko1: Yeah I get where you are coming from

@jko1: You're right but on all fairness Bleach has plenty of feats that require almost no calcs. The only really ambigious feats are mostly involving Yhwach vs Ichigo since without a 2nd reference point to see how they scale directly, we have to rely on indirect scaling.

Such as Yhwach being sub relativistic (at bare minimum) thanka to scaling off of Ichibei and Mimi.

Or EoS shikai Ichigo scaling to light speed via Sternritters dodging Yhwach's light and the Captain Commander dodging Lille's trumpette.

I think this site just hates Bleach, if any other series had multiple feats that, for example, imply light speed or sub relativistic speed, that would be enough but in Bleach? You need a 3000 page doctoral thesis from WoG stating why those speeds are valid and even then you'd still have half the forun scream bloody murder.

They're not headcanon, but I still don't trust them in general.

How fast is Naruto and Sasuke using that scaling? Cutting a Mach 300 lightning bolt is a mach 30-50 speed feat, and without that feat it changes things IIRC

Fan Calcs are only garbage when it involves physics like trying to figure out the amount of force aka what VS Battles does since the author didn't intend that. Any other instance is a piss poor counter to a valid argument.

@jko1: funny only confirmed speed we got form naruto was Zetsu saying 100s of machs other than that no other speed feat, im bleach we get distances like how long it takes to get from point a to point B. We have gigajoules,We have ichigos sword melting sea, ichigo vaping moutains with no contact we get a 10x multipler for bankia. Gins bankia mach 500 and it can attack you cells. Kenny cutting a meteor ect.

All im saying if you think bleach is featless same can be said for naruto. Both series have about the same feats

Depends on the Calc and the amount of assumptions that have to be made for it.

Depends

Fans calculations are the best way to decide what a character is capable of. Ambiguous feats should just be seen as outliers.

Yep.

@skysanji: For ichigo and Kenpachi their bankia amps their base stats.

Its clear his speed gets amped he blitzed bykuaya to were he couldnt react. But when byakuaya went bankia just his raw power gets amped. Instead of having one sword he gets 1000s. Ichigos bankia speaclizes in his base stats getting a 10x amp

Yeah I 100% knew what he was trying to do, and was gonna respond to it, but decided that this wasn't the thread for that.

@jko1: Calcs are fine as long as they're mathematically accurate and don't rely on too many assumptions. When it comes to statements, their credibility rely on context and the character making the statement. Databooks are a little more tricky than that, but id say when it comes to manga, a majority of the things stated are fact unless they are some type of literary device. Comics on the other hand, are typically dependent on the people writing them and can be written off or ignored, unless its consistent between many authors.

@diydeath: True. From what I've seen bleach gets tons of disrespect and downplay on this thread for no reason at all. I'd go as far as to saying at least the god tiers were ftl if it didn't start a flame war every time those words are uttered.

@skysanji: @hypebeastcsb15: lol the downplay. Then what gets the 10x amp if its not the base stats. Plot armor?

My answer would be, it depends.

While obviously, most fictional verses show a blatant disregard for the rules of physics (or just about any other branch of science), there must always be a base assumption that with respect to feats, real world values apply else just about every feat in fiction can be considered "unquantifiable".

With that out of the way, I think other REASONABLE assumptions can be made taking into account the description of said feat, context, character statements (since they best reflect the views of the author) and consistency (I. E. Said feat should be reasonably consistent with what can be reasonable expected of the character performing said feat)

And even with the above, I believe a standard of using "low ends" should be applied (low end refers to using values so thoroughly downplayed that even an opponent cannot reasonable oppose the results).

That's my take.

@undre: I never said it wasn't 10x to stats. That was him. All I was gonna address was your blatant Naruto downplay.

It gets split similar to how Aizen described it when he fought Dangai Ichigo

Fan calc. Fan made calculations. Fans idea (head) of what a,b,c and d in the story(canon) mean.

Fan calc = headcanon.

Yes.

Absolutely not.

We can use science to measure fiction but we can't use science to limit it.

Yeah it pretty much is tho that doesn't mean it can't be used within REASON but it's much better 2 approach things as a writer than a scientist ESPECIALLY wen talking about FICTIONAL worlds (imo at least)