Interpreting the Lore of the Digimon Reference Book

TMS

Super Moderator
Staff
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
12,131
Age
31
Location
Ohio
If her backstory is the same as the character’s she’s based on, she probably got banished after making a drunken pass at Ophanimon.
 

Bancho

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,798
Age
24
Location
Seattle
I ship it
 

Muur

How deep the rabbit-hole goes
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
4,338
Age
28
Location
Bolton, England
That does indeed sound like a good ship
 

Rohan

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Aug 13, 2016
Messages
1,376
Location
England
Speaking of ChoHakkaimon's DRB Lore, it would be cool if she got a Mega form that represented either her uncorrupted angel form or her "Zhu Wuneng" ("pig (reincarnated) who is aware of ability") Buddhist name, given by Bodhisattva Guanyin. :unsure:
 

sirtao

Junior Commander
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
307
is there an Angel tied to the Milky Way? IIRC Cho Hakkai's original title was Marshal of the Milky Way
 

Unknown Neo

You got in
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
12,063
Age
37
Location
Unknown
I like both TMS and Rohan's ideas. A mega would be really interesting.
 

Sparrow Hawk

How deep the rabbit-hole goes
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
4,481
Now I'm sure Leviamon's official profile actually isn't too far-fetched although he is well known to be pretty huge one.
But I hope they will show how gigantic Leviamon, Examon, Titamon (Maybe around VenomVamdemon's size? Or way bigger?), GraceNovamon and Odugomon/X forms are! In their next appearances hopefully!

Imagine that! I wonder what did I missed? Maybe Belphemon forms...? Arkadimon Super Ultimate was already shown how huge he was in Cyber Sleuth Hacker's Memory. Hmm still, what did I miss? Oh boy tons of profiles always talk about how strong and powerful they are but never mention about the size. Very fewer profiles than I thought...
 

Chimera-gui

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
1,211
Location
United States
If her backstory is the same as the character’s she’s based on, she probably got banished after making a drunken pass at Ophanimon.
Either her or Dianamon since I recall Cho Hakkai hitting on Goddess of the Moon in the source material.

As for a Mega stage, I could see her getting LovelyAngemon given the latter's personality:
It is always bright and cheerful, and adorns itself in a fashionable manner, and has a lovely personality that enjoys eating delicious things while walking about.
 
Last edited:

Muur

How deep the rabbit-hole goes
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
4,338
Age
28
Location
Bolton, England
Dianamon wouldn't be in the same Digital World as Ophanimon and Cho-Hakkaimon.
 

TMS

Super Moderator
Staff
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
12,131
Age
31
Location
Ohio
That doesn’t really follow. Neither Dianamon nor Cho-Hakkaimon is a Royal Knight.
 

Chimera-gui

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
1,211
Location
United States
Not sure what the Royal Knights have to do with this since Muur is was talking about Dianamon being native to Digital World: Iliad while Cho-Hakkaimon and Ophanimon are presumably not.
 
Last edited:

Bancho

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,798
Age
24
Location
Seattle
if you're saying the world thing doesn't matter because they're not Royal Knights, it's hard to imagine the three great angels existing in Iliad since Homeros does not care for lawful control like Yggdrasil does and instead promotes the concept of free will to the point that he punishes the Olympos XII when he discovers they act out of morality instead of neutrality (Jupitermon probably gets the worst of it like we see in Crusaders where he gets degenerated as a punishment for not being neutral, which makes sense as Jupitermon sees itself as a judge, jury, and executioner).
So Homeros having the same kind of angels, especially angel figureheads, would be odd
 

sirtao

Junior Commander
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
307
Shakamon is the Mon Closest to Yggdrasill, so I'd say Cho-Hakkaimon and the Saiyuuki mons aren't from Iliad
 

Ragnalord

I'm going digital
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
497
Shakamon is the Mon Closest to Yggdrasill, so I'd say Cho-Hakkaimon and the Saiyuuki mons aren't from Iliad

There are many digimon who are close to Yggdrasil, for example seraphimon profile says the same thing as shakamon.

Any digimon found in the kernal which is located in the digital worlds core are close to Yggdrasil, meaning the 3 archangels and its companions.
 

e105zeta

I come from the net
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 4, 2018
Messages
1,212
The lore shouldn't have stopped at sequestering the Olympus 12 to their own server.

Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, and Asian pantheons should all have their own servers (and Chinese and Japanese should really have their own servers and myths separate from each other - but Susanoomon stands alone and the Four Holy Beasts are shared by both cultures).
 

Darklabo

Junior Commander
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Nov 30, 2020
Messages
211
Age
25
Location
France
I always have to roll my eyes when people start talking about “feats” in fiction and trying to use them to prove absolutes. The author is free to ignore anything or make up anything.

Making up arbitrary rules like, “Mercuremon can only reflect weak attacks” (something that’s never been stated or even implied) is also pointless.

I’d also like to point out that Hybrids are Hybrid-level, not Adult-level or anything else, making arguments based on a Digimon’s level even more irrelevant than usual.

« Making up arbitrary rules like, “Mercuremon can only reflect weak attacks” (something that’s never been stated or even implied) is also pointless. »

Just as much, if not more, is to consider a statement to be true.
The characters are subjective by nature, and their claims are often biased.
And even the author is not immune to a contradiction.

Personally, I tend to trust feats more, seeing one character beat another is more concrete than hearing him say that he can do it.

You make a point about hybrids, I'm just trying to find a logic in their evolutions even if there is not necessarily.
Most media, however, try to associate them with more common levels (video games, V-Pets or even card games).
When you're skeptical of everything, it just comes out as denial.
Huh ok, but what does this have to do with what I wrote ?
Denying what is factually wrong is called common sense.
- Well these articles and these publications were relevant in their time, but are no longer today, so there is no reason to take them into account.
And again, relevant does not mean truthful.
I'd say there's plenty of reasons to take them into account if the newer publications don't actually go into detail about the same topic and generally a single aspect of the older publications being updated does not inherently indicate anything else about them having been overturned.
In regard to truthfulness, the fact that in the end we're dealing with fiction should in some ways modify the way we think about sources; since generally any untruthfulness in fiction exists for a specific narrative purpose and otherwise I'd be skeptical about being skeptical for reasons elaborated further down.
And I say there are even more reasons not to consider a source that has already proven to be unreliable.
Being skeptical of a source, whether fictitious or not is legitimate, if one were to take everything for granted the canon would be obvious to everyone and this kind of discussion would be pointless in the first place.
- And my point is the exact opposite, a reference has to be absolute to be canon and reliable.
Hence the interest of updates.
Well, that's simply your personal view of canon and clearly not everyone shares your standards on that topic.
Plenty of settings don't bother being absolute about anything whatsoever and don't provide proof for much at all, yet that doesn't stop them from having a canon, and people having discussions about said settings and its canon and so on.
That Digimon even offers the concept of Digimon research going on and its results being released is already far more generous in its specificity than what we get from many other franchises, even if the data isn't flawless.
There is no point in taking into account a source that contradicts itself.
Indeed you can consider it as canon, and I can consider that it is not, for quite legitimate reasons, the result is that we will all stay on our positions, making this discussion useless in the first place.
Feats by their nature are much more credible in that they fit into a specific context, which is not the case with DRB descriptions which will always be subject to interpretation if not factually false.
Observations must be proven by examples, that's all.To say that such a star is the brightest or that such a monster is the strongest without providing objective and irrefutable proof has no value.
Then 99% of fiction will never have value to you since "objective and irrefutable proof" aren't really a thing around these parts.
Sure, a random claim by a fan may (and probably should) be subject to such scrutiny but that's not the context we're talking about, as you seem to attempt to apply that kind of extreme skepticism to statements that have already been published. And that just seems bizarre, because then how can you believe anything?
If a book contains the statement "his eyes were green" we can assume that this in fact the case. No one would make the argument "well... the book didn't include a detailed analysis of the waveform of the light bouncing back from his eyes that would have irrefutably proven that they would indeed be seen as being green, therefore they could be actually any color".
Like, I'm absolutely of the opinion that once a fictional setting establishes something you can dissect and analyze it all day, that's the whole reason I'm on this forum, but at some level fiction has the right to state its facts and rules in somewhat of an axiomatic way; at some point the fact that those were the words that were officially published and not some other words that they could have just as easily published has to count for something.
If you want to reject a direct statement from a source, the burden of proof is totally on you to produce an "objective and irrefutable" reason for why you believe something else to be true.

And going back into the specific example of Digimon, it's just not feasible to expect anything to be proven or disproven as exactly as you demand it. The entire structure of the franchise isn't really suited for accumulating evidence "irrefutably" since for example different continuities portray Digimon differently and have wildly different rules. In Zero Two Mummymon's gun shoots warped lightning, in X-Evolution it shoots red lasers. In Tamers Orochimon was taken down by Leomon using LadyDevimon's power, so basically by the power of a single perfect if not less, while in Adventure: It takes the combined power of 8 perfects to take it down, etc.
This means that you cannot reliably use the abilities and/or strength of a Digimon in a certain setting to predict their ability or strength in a different setting.
So from this perspective it is questionable if any "feats" shown in the anime or manga would actually even apply to the setting of the DRB profiles in the first place, or at least not with the absolute certainty that you seemingly demand.
You don't have to know a lot of works of fiction to think so, well-written ones stay consistent from start to finish and concepts like power scales between characters are well established and don't contradict each other.

The DRB is not a reliable source, not because it is only made up of claims, but because these claims are contradicted by other sources.
To take your example, if the character's eyes are repeatedly described as green, but a character sees them blue, it is legitimate to consider that the latter is wrong.
Same thing, if they were blue but have turned green in the course of history, those who still consider them blue will be wrong.

"If you want to reject a direct statement from a source, the burden of proof is totally on you to produce an" objective and irrefutable "reason for why you believe something else to be true."

It's true, and that's exactly what I did in this case.
The statement claiming that Mugendramon is the strongest Digimon is objectively and irrefutably dismantled by his numerous defeats.
And the statement claiming (indirectly) that Ardhamon is stronger than Wargreymon is dismantled by the fact that Ardhamon was powerless against Digimon that WG easily defeated.
And some sources directly view the Beast Spirits as equivalent to Adult-Levels, including the anime, the most recent source we have.

Demanding that all sources agree with each other is indeed complicated in Digimon's case, but in this case the best solution, in my opinion, is to only consider the most frequent scenario.
For example, Omegamon has already been defeated by AeroVeedramon and MetalPhantomon, two Perfect-Levels.
But in most cases, Omegamon easily beats Mega-Levels like Diaboromon, Argomon, Dukemon, Nidhoggmon or Mugendramon.
It therefore seems wiser to me to take into account only the most frequent scenario.
It is not a question of "for me", this is how research works in all fields.
If you claim that the Sun revolves around the Earth, not only is it wrong but it always has been, it is only the truncated observations of a bygone era that could have made people think otherwise.
As much as I believe that particular transition to be a very interesting topic, it simply does not apply here as you cannot equate basic addition of data into an existing system with a complete paradigm shift revolutionizing not (just) the data but the entire methodology including principles and methods of an entire discipline.
If you think it does apply and you truly want to claim that, even if adjusted, the data presented in older profile isn't applicable due to some large scale paradigm shift in the fictional science of Digimon research, you'll have to present independent evidence of such a paradigm shift actually having occurred.

And good luck with that, because if that were the case it's unlikely that just the results would change but also the entire discourse surrounding them. Different concepts and perspectives, different terminology, different properties and factors that are that are taken into consideration and so on.
The point being that it would be pretty easy to pick out if some astronomical description was is based geocentrism or heliocentrism, one might bring up things like equants and epicycles or, well, the general assumption that the earth doesn't move, the other model does not.

As my evidence for such a shift not having occurred, I would point to the concepts and terms used in the profiles being pretty much stable. If a difference existed that was significant enough to make all statements basically incommensurable, I'm pretty sure it would have involved some very noticeable changes.
Hey, you're going too far for me.
My example was just intended to demonstrate that an outdated source is not only not credible but potentially never has been.
I think this applies to the DRB which is designed as a research journal. Mugendramon has never been more than the strongest Digimon known to the general public at given time, no more and no less.
Besides, science tends to avoid value relationships, or else it pays great attention to the choice of words.
We would not have had "the brightest star", but rather "the brightest star observed to date", which changes everything.
At no point did I claim that the profiles in terms of their use of terminology their exactness or rigor would fully satisfy the requirements of actual scientific research papers.
My main point in bringing up the topic was simply that, even as research moves on, prior articles and the papers they're based on remain archived in their original form and are not continually updated.

But we do know that many if not all of the profiles are based on what can be assumed genuine research, as they do mention Digimon researchers, facilities and experiments (KoKabuterimon's strength was said to be demonstrated in an experiment that involved him lifting a Tortamon for instance), so reasonably, statements that are not clearly designated as hearsay are already proven by in-universe research. Of course we don't have the exact experimental results, or the (fictional) research papers, and what we end up in the profile is more of a kind of second-hand account obviously targeted at non-specialists.
But I don't think all evidence or all claims need to be already science grade specific in order for for some theory or some model to be applied to it.

So it rubs me the wrong way to see some rejection based on exactness standards that simply can't be expected to apply, and I would argue that much of the process of science or rather logical discussions and systematic analysis (as nothing we do here is proper science either) should consist of establishing patterns and models to process, interpret and account for as much of the available data we have at our disposal and not just to throw away data you don't like until whatever is left fits your theory.
What theory ?
All of the points that I have advanced are based on straight facts.
Mugendramon has already been defeated, it is a reality.
Its description in the DRB is therefore factually false.
Ardhamon was weaker than Wargreymon in Xros Wars II, that's a fact.
The DRB claims that Ardhamon is as strong as AncientGreymon AND that AncientG is stronger than the current Megas.
At least one of these claims is false.
To say that the DRB is not a reliable source is not a theory, it is an observation.
The brightest star observed at a T-time is not and never has been the brightest star in the Universe.
It's just that it was the only one we could observe from our limited perspective.
Since we cannot see into the future and the profiles are not written from an omniscient perspective, "until now" and "as far as we know" is always implicitly true for any statement ever made except perhaps highly theoretical abstracts. There is no need to explicitly add that qualifier to every statement.
And that's why the DRB will never be an absolute reference, at best a notebook serving to better understand the functioning of Digimon as portrayed in the various media.
Which is my point from the start, if the DRB says "white" and the anime says "black", well "black" is the correct answer.
I'm not really following you in your cat example.
It was meant to describe a situation where absurd problems arise by ignoring obvious context.
If you look at a photo of a cat sitting in my office taken at 11:00 and a photo of my cat in my kitchen taken at 12:00 you might ask yourself how the cat can be both in the office and in the kitchen.
Except you probably don't ask yourself that at all because you can reasonably infer that my cat moved from the office to the kitchen at some point between 11:00 and 12:00, which accounts for the discrepancy of the cat's position.

The same applies for DRB profiles. From A profile written in 1999 describing Mugendramon as "the strongest" and a profile written in 2006 describing Leviamon as "the strongest" we can reasonably infer that progressively stronger Digimon have debuted between 1999 and 2006, accounting for the statements in both profiles as the practical meaning changes with time.

Both cat pictures and profiles remain "valid" in their respective contexts.
Your example does not work.
Your cat was indeed in both places at two different times.
Mugendramon has never been the strongest Digimon, being a man-made Digimon it can be deduced that he is much younger than other much stronger creatures.
The DRB has always been wrong, either out of ignorance, or because it is biased, or certainly because it is subject to the IRL evolution of the license, but the fact remains that it is propagating incorrect information.
And again, the fact that it's never updated makes it an unreliable source.
If you claim that your cat is in your office without giving the date and time, that information is very likely to be false.

This is why in science the choice of words is important, and why the information is regularly updated.
If you apply the logic of any science to the DRB, Mugendramon was never the strongest Digimon, he was only the strongest to have been observed at one point in time.
Exactly, and that's all we need to know to confirm that his profile does indeed hold canonical and valuable information.

Your notion of completely dismissing old data is far too broad in proportion to the actual criticisms you present for it since the faults you point out relatively easy to correct for.

You main criticism for profiles such as Mugendramon's basically boils down to "things are no longer how they used to be back then" ...but so what? Change rarely happens randomly, it's often a definite pattern. If you identify a pattern chances are you can reverse it. If the meaning of words has changed you can understand from context how much the meaning has drifted, and translate. If units have changed, you convert. If values have shifted, you counteract with an offset.
People, especially in science, don't just just give up and throw all their accumulated knowledge away the moment they have to merely recontextualize something.

Let's look at an obvious example from economy: Inflation.

In 1953 the movie House of Wax was shot with a budget of around 1 million dollars. But well, time moves on and $1 in 1953 is not at all the same as $1 in 2021 and in terms of the amount of actual value that was spent on the movie the 1 million figure is only true as long as we are talking about the time around 1953 and is completely incorrect by today's definition of what the dollar is worth nowadays.
But only because it no longer applies doesn't mean that this one million has no meaning at all anymore and that we could somehow never ever know how much the movie actually cost in 2021 dollars. Rather, because we know when the movie was shot, we can take that value and process it, using some fancy math/economy and something called a "Market basket" of goods (that obviously can't be comprehensive) with prices tracked over time to arrive at a conversion rate that tells us that the value of the dollar has basically multiplied by ten since the fifties and we're looking at a value of around 10 million dollars in 2021.
So only because some definite value or statement has become obsolete doesn't mean that its practical meaning in the current context cannot be restored. So here I will demonstrate a way to adjust a DRB profile by inflation... or perhaps rather deflation in this case.

In the same way as "$1" means different values at different times, even though it still always "$1" the term "the strongest" denotes different things in different contexts as well. If we understand its intended context we can reformulate the statement it in a way that remains valid in our current context without contradictions.

So we start by asking the basic question: In which context was Mugendramon's profile supposed to apply?
The answer is simple: The Digimon franchise at the time of Mugendramon's debut, which is early 1999.
No statement in the profile can be said to apply at anything beyond that point, since neither the authors of the profile, in the out-of-universe sense, could know about any Digimon they haven't designed yet, nor could the Digimon researchers, whose discoveries the profiles are based on in-universe, be able to take into account the ability or even existence of any Digimon species they haven't even discovered yet.

So now we know the context. And while that context may change in the future, what stays the same are the practical qualifications that have to be met for a statement to be true in that particular context. The statement in this case is being Mugendramon being the strongest, and the qualification is simply all other Digimon in that context being weaker. Duh.
This sounds like a pointless reversal but it illustrates the factor of scope: Even once Mugendramon is no longer the strongest in general, it will not change the fact that these other Digimon are still weaker.
Because we know when Mugendramon debuted, we also know which other Digimon existed at the time and luckily for this particular example the setting back then was pretty limited. Ultimates as a concept were only recently introduced via the first few Pendulums and for simplicity's sake we can assume that Perfect levels and below aren't really competition.

So with that in mind here's what the profile actually tells us: HerakleKabuterimon, SaberLeomon, MetalEtemon, Holydramon, MarinAngemon, MetalSeadramon and Pukumon cannot equal Mugendramon in terms of power. I don't think that's a particularly shocking claim and the introduction of progressively more powerful Digimon doesn't change anything about it.

But since I feel you'd insist on doubting it anyway I have prepared another metaphor because that's how I like to spend my time: Let's say some European biologist who is for some reason completely unaware of other continents measures the top speed of animals on land. He compares the top speed of running turtles, chickens, cats, hedgehogs, pigs horses, you name it. And lets say he finds that hedgehogs are faster than turtles and chickens faster than hedgehogs, and cats faster than chickens and honestly I'm not actually going to google how fast all of them go so I'll just go out on a limb and say he finds out that the horse wins out.
Since he only knows about Europe he declares that the horse is the fastest animal.
But one day he finds out about Africa and he goes there and there he sees Cheetahs which are faster than horses (And I guess this thought experiment takes place in the future where the last Asiatic cheetahs are completely extinct).
That certainly disproves that the horse is the fastest animal, but does it disprove anything else? According to your logic, the moment that the Cheetah disproves the the statement "the horse is the fastest animal", we have to consider that turtles and chickens could be faster than horses. Hedgehogs could be faster than cats, because all previous data is completely worthless, right?
I think most would disagree with that. That cheetahs are faster than horses does not disprove the previous result of horses being faster than turtles. The biologist would have received the same results in those measurements with or without knowing about cheetahs. Put more abstractly: A simple shift of boundary values does not impact the relation between preexisting values in the same system.

So there we go. We can adjust the data ourselves without Bandai doing it for us.
"The answer is simple: The Digimon franchise at the time of Mugendramon's debut, which is early 1999.
No statement in the profile can be said to apply at anything beyond that point, since neither the authors of the profile, in the out-of-universe sense, could know about any Digimon they haven't designed yet, nor could the Digimon researchers , whose discoveries the profiles are based on in-universe, be able to take into account the ability or even existence of any Digimon species they haven't even discovered yet. "

Exactly, so nothing that is written post 1999 DRB should be taken as true.
Applying this logic to Mugendramon but not to the other Digimon is an arbitrary decision.
The reality is that every Digimon profile is outdated the moment a newer one is added.
If on August 10 Yellowmon is added to the DRB which claims he is the fastest Digimon, but on August 11 Redmon is also added to the DRB, Yellowmon is already potentially not the fastest anymore.
And that's without counting the retcons, as you pointed out, one day Orochimon is beaten by Leomon and the next day, he competes with 6 Perfect-Level at the same time.
The DRB is simply never up to date.

"So with that in mind here's what the profile actually tells us: HerakleKabuterimon, SaberLeomon, MetalEtemon, Holydramon, MarinAngemon, MetalSeadramon and Pukumon cannot equal Mugendramon in terms of power. I don't think that's a particularly shocking claim and the introduction of progressively more powerful Digimon doesn't change anything about it. "

Ouch, that’s aged poorly.
I doubt any incarnation of Mugendramon can compete with Adventure 2020 Holydramon.

"That certainly disproves that the horse is the fastest animal, but does it disprove anything else? According to your logic, the moment that the Cheetah disproves the the statement" the horse is the fastest animal ", we have to consider that turtles and chickens could be faster than horses. Hedgehogs could be faster than cats, because all previous data is completely worthless, right?
I think most would disagree with that. That cheetahs are faster than horses does not disprove the previous result of horses being faster than turtles. The biologist would have received the same results in those measurements with or without knowing about cheetahs. Put more abstractly: A simple shift of boundary values does not impact the relation between preexisting values in the same system."

Your reasoning works in the real world, but not in Digimon's logic.
In Digimon a turtle can get faster than a horse.
Like when WG was stronger than Ardhamon in Xros Wars II or quite recently when Holydramon was stronger than Mugendramon.
- Regarding Mercurimon, it falls under the scope of "No Limit Fallacy".

To pretend that an ability or a hax is "invincible" has no value until it has been proven by feats.
I don't think I've ever heard of that type of fallacy in any actual theory of argumentation.
I would say your arguments would fall under the"Made up limits" fallacy where fans pretend there are some arbitrary limits to something even though there's no proof for their existence.

Personally, as long as we are talking about magical computer monsters that violate countless laws of physics by generally existing, I am completely on board with the idea of them being able to use any supernatural ability their profile ascribes to them to its fullest imaginable extent until shown or stated otherwise.

I mean they and their abilities are manifested computer programs. Computer programs have a tendency to apply their logic quite indiscriminately to any input they get. If efficiently written, the same a tiny compression program can compress both a kilobyte sized file and a gigabyte sized file. Even the biggest, meanest universe ending explosions are just a chunk of data in context of Digimon.
So if Mercuremon's ability simply cut-and-pastes any data it receives, I don't see why it should care about limits.
Except it's up to you to prove that a character can accomplish something, and not up to me to prove that it can't.
If we follow your logic, I can claim that Botamon can destroy the Multiverse since we have no evidence that he cannot.
This is all the more true in Digimon where abilities deemed "invincible" like All Delete or God Matrix have been countered more times than they have been effective.
The only people deeming those attacks invincible have always been idiots though. The actual wording of All Delete merely states that the blade erases all data it comes into contact with, which doesn't exactly make it invincible as there are plenty of Digimon capable of fighting in a way that avoids getting into the range of a sword.
Neither was invincibility of Dot Matrix/God Matrix ever any more than villainous gloating; Anyone who was surprised or felt cheated that the villain's data erasing ability would at some point be cancelled out by the hero's data rewriting ability just straight up doesn't understand foreshadowing.
It's not just a matter of dodging, Dexmon and Ogudomon X took All Delete head-on and barely felt it.
Tbh, I'm not even sure this technique has ever worked.
Except against the helpless Yggdrasil from X-Evolution.
You have the right to think that Mercurimon can deflect the attacks of Cherubimon and Lucemon, yes, in the same way that I have the right to think that Numemon is the most powerful Digimon and that he is withholding his strength so as not to destroy the Multiverse.
That Numemon is weak is explicitly stated in its profile.
That there are any limits to Mercuremon's Generous Mirror attack is not stated in its profile and we've already seen him kill an Ultimate with it.
So much for that.
Numemon's profile is irrelevant.
If Numemon is weak, it’s because the different medias prove it.
And if you're having trouble with that, replace Numemon with Botamon or Terriermon, you get the idea.

- Mercuremon's profile is also irrelevant.
- Even if it was noteworthy it would be false, the profile indicates that Mercuremon can repel attacks in general, but in Frontier he is unable to repel physical attacks.
- He has never shown to be able to mirror an attack more powerful than Seraphimon's Seven Heavens.
- Frontier's Seraphimon also lost to Ardhamon, so not a big deal for an Ultimate.
 

TMS

Super Moderator
Staff
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
12,131
Age
31
Location
Ohio
It’s weird that you call out the Reference Book for being inconsistent and point to something equally inconsistent as the only thing that should be taken into consideration. In the anime, Agnimon defeats a Perfect-level Digimon in episode one. Two episodes later, he can’t even overpower Child-level Digimon. By your reasoning, then, shouldn’t the anime be discarded for inconsistency?

The truth is that power levels are not absolute things. Everything is situational. This is true of the anime especially.
 

Muur

How deep the rabbit-hole goes
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Feb 21, 2017
Messages
4,338
Age
28
Location
Bolton, England
Which is my point from the start, if the DRB says "white" and the anime says "black", well "black" is the correct answer.

the 2020 anime said that sandyanamon is yellow, but the DRB says its gray. since everything else, games, cards etc say its yellow the anime is wrong here and the drb is right.

also, just cuz youre the strongest doesnt mean you cant lose. the #1 ranked tennis player isnt undefeated
 

Darklabo

Junior Commander
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Nov 30, 2020
Messages
211
Age
25
Location
France
It’s weird that you call out the Reference Book for being inconsistent and point to something equally inconsistent as the only thing that should be taken into consideration. In the anime, Agnimon defeats a Perfect-level Digimon in episode one. Two episodes later, he can’t even overpower Child-level Digimon. By your reasoning, then, shouldn’t the anime be discarded for inconsistency?

The truth is that power levels are not absolute things. Everything is situational. This is true of the anime especially.
I have referred to this case with my Omegamon example, If 2 sources contradict each other, the one that best matches the trend should be considered.

Agunimon can beat a Perfect-Level and lose to a Rookie, okay, but which scenario is more common?
In the majority of cases, Agunimon is comparable to an Adult, so it is this idea that we should remember.

The problem with DRB is that it is only made up of descriptions devoid of context, as long as one of them is wrong... well it is wrong, there is no way of explaining or ignoring it.
Which is my point from the start, if the DRB says "white" and the anime says "black", well "black" is the correct answer.

the 2020 anime said that sandyanamon is yellow, but the DRB says its gray. since everything else, games, cards etc say its yellow the anime is wrong here and the drb is right.

also, just cuz youre the strongest doesnt mean you cant lose. the #1 ranked tennis player isnt undefeated
Are you sure you haven't made a mistake somewhere, I'm not following your logic.

In fiction, when the number one gets beaten once he usually loses his title.
In real life it's a matter of ratio, but it hardly exists in fiction because it would be boring to watch.
 

TMS

Super Moderator
Staff
Show User Social Media
Hide User Social Media
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
12,131
Age
31
Location
Ohio
So, if Agnimon is always an Adult, how does that square with him being either weaker than a Child or stronger than a Perfect? It’s obvious that power can’t be quantified. In one of the art books this was demonstrated by showing a series of matchups and stating which Digimon would win. The first Digimon listed would beat the second, the second would beat the third, and so on. But the last (who, if power was a static number, should have been the weakest of all) would beat the first (who, if power was a static number, should be the strongest of all).
 
Top