Arceus is not omnipotent/powerful

[Bishop’s Ring]

Then why do we add the Pokédex entries if they are not true.

Is it to make peopl catch more of these Pokémon thanks to exaggerations and myths.

Possibly! Alternatively, some of them are more just exaggeration and twisting facts - or a sort of fun "collectibles reward" thing for children looking to play the "catch em all" game. I'm sure that, were the pokemon world real, there'd be an alternative, scientific dex for people looking for real information to peruse through. And some of the dex facts seem fathomable enough to be true.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

Possibly! Alternatively, some of them are more just exaggeration and twisting facts - or a sort of fun "collectibles reward" thing for children looking to play the "catch em all" game. I'm sure that, were the pokemon world real, there'd be an alternative, scientific dex for people looking for real information to peruse through. And some of the dex facts seem fathomable enough to be true.

I guess the Pokémon scientists should take the opportunity to make a more accurate Pokédex.

Back to Arceus

Still wondering why some people say he's a monotheistic god.

 

[Bishop’s Ring]

I guess the Pokémon scientists should take the opportunity to make a more accurate Pokédex.

Back to Arceus

Still wondering why some people say he's a monotheistic god.

That's true.

But again, it's most likely the pushing of western perceptions onto an eastern game. People are more likely to apply their own societal norms onto unfamiliar topics because it helps them make sense of the world. Think of all those times people have found skeletons of warriors and presumed them to be male, only to find that an equal amount were female. We presume that as women aren't typically warriors in our society, that all other societies follow suit. The same goes for our views on race relations, or gender perceptions, or anything else that can be viewed through a social lens. Religion is the same - we assume Arceus must be a monotheistic god figure because we're accustomed to monotheism. It seems to have "more power" - ergo, it must be the sole god, when that isn't the case.

 

[w1f1pa55w0rd]

Firstly, I want to say that this thread is friggin hilarious. Great arguments, but I can't agree with many of the points made here, because they seem to be coming from the anime and stuff, which is anything but canon. Arceus, in my opinion, is not overrated. It does not have a large enough strong fanbase. Thing is, I'd say Arceus is meant to be the strongest Pokemon, and logically should be, but I can attribute any of it's shortcomings to this statement: it's a game (the anime's logic is just dumb, Pikachu can kill gods, but is defeated by a Snivy). Why do all the trainers in the same class look identical? Why do all Pokemon of the same species look like clones of each other? Why do all the trees look the same? Simple. It's a game. Legendaries can be captured for fun and because they're on the box. Gods are defeated because of game mechanics, not lore aspects. Let's look at some other games. In games like Destiny, you kill a god who sliced a planet with six people. The reason? Because it's a game. It's too damn hard to explain instances like these. If a Dialga is defeated by a Dizzy Punch from a Spinda, it's because the game allows it too. In "reality," Dialga can probably literally take us back to a time when we did not exist and destroy us. So while I do feel that it's stupid how GF would try to contradict their own lore, there's not much we can do. The game mechanics decide everything. As for the goddamn dex entries, I agree, those are just really weird. The newer ones are a bit darker and interesting, but some of the older ones make no sense. In one entry, Sharpedo can chew through steel, so why doesn't it just shred the Raticate you're battling?

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

Firstly, I want to say that this thread is friggin hilarious. Great arguments, but I can't agree with many of the points made here, because they seem to be coming from the anime and stuff, which is anything but canon. Arceus, in my opinion, is not overrated. It does not have a large enough strong fanbase. Thing is, I'd say Arceus is meant to be the strongest Pokemon, and logically should be, but I can attribute any of it's shortcomings to this statement: it's a game (the anime's logic is just dumb, Pikachu can kill gods, but is defeated by a Snivy). Why do all the trainers in the same class look identical? Why do all Pokemon of the same species look like clones of each other? Why do all the trees look the same? Simple. It's a game. Legendaries can be captured for fun and because they're on the box. Gods are defeated because of game mechanics, not lore aspects. Let's look at some other games. In games like Destiny, you kill a god who sliced a planet with six people. The reason? Because it's a game. It's too damn hard to explain instances like these. If a Dialga is defeated by a Dizzy Punch from a Spinda, it's because the game allows it too. In "reality," Dialga can probably literally take us back to a time when we did not exist and destroy us. So while I do feel that it's stupid how GF would try to contradict their own lore, there's not much we can do. The game mechanics decide everything. As for the goddamn dex entries, I agree, those are just really weird. The newer ones are a bit darker and interesting, but some of the older ones make no sense. In one entry, Sharpedo can chew through steel, so why doesn't it just shred the Raticate you're battling?

Still the creation trio hasn't shown much feats.

In the anime, they barely destroyed a city.

Probably PIS but still they only destroyed like a single city.

 

[remer]

Actually,i think that arceus's status is different in the game and movie.In the movie,he is depicted to be invincible,as he is damaged by pikachu and the creation trio as he lacks their respective life plates.And,he wasn't allowed to use judgement that many times by the creation trio.It was also shown that the plates were a part of arceus and not separate items.But in games,it us completely changed,the plates were made a separate item and also,due to the game mechanism,arceus wasn't invincible.(But still,i think unown is the one to be regarded as a god,as they seem to have created even arceus)

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

Actually,i think that arceus's status is different in the game and movie.In the movie,he is depicted to be invincible,as he is damaged by pikachu and the creation trio as he lacks their respective life plates.And,he wasn't allowed to use judgement that many times by the creation trio.It was also shown that the plates were a part of arceus and not separate items.But in games,it us completely changed,the plates were made a separate item and also,due to the game mechanism,arceus wasn't invincible.(But still,i think unown is the one to be regarded as a god,as they seem to have created even arceus)

Unknown are not one of the most powerful Pokémon.

Arceus and others are very inconsistent.

 

[Bishop’s Ring]

A couple of interesting points have been brought up since I last posted. I agree that the games, anime and other sections of the franchise are inconsistent - and any pokemon can be fainted in-game while not necessarily being so easily defeated in the anime. Look at wobbuffet, for instance, a pokemon that, by all means, isn't so difficult to triumph over in-game - yet in the anime, it poses serious threat whenever it decides to battle.

However, this is, I think, a discussion of two parts: the anime and the game. Both rarely interweave, so I'm trying to keep the two as separate as possible because attempting to push them together makes no sense. Pikachu's power levels are wholly unique on their own, but that could be down to a multitude of other factors that would completely derail this discussion. Point is, the games aren't complex enough for every unique trait of each and every pokemon to be accounted for - it's not feasible for them, so GF has to simplify them in-game for the sake of playability, hence why Dialga can be defeated, hypothetically, by any level 1 pokemon in-game, but in the anime can hold its own against other gods.

As for sharpedo's abilities, I always just figured that "wild" battles and trainer battles were completely different, i.e. when pokemon are hunting or battling for territory, dominance or some other animalistic desire, they duke it out like irl animals do, with their steel-crushing teeth and bone-shattering punches. In trainer battles, to limit damage, moves (and maybe extra factors that could be technological) are used in place of raw physical traits.

Ultimately, though, it's difficult to determine a "one size fits all" answer to a lot of these questions.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

A couple of interesting points have been brought up since I last posted. I agree that the games, anime and other sections of the franchise are inconsistent - and any pokemon can be fainted in-game while not necessarily being so easily defeated in the anime. Look at wobbuffet, for instance, a pokemon that, by all means, isn't so difficult to triumph over in-game - yet in the anime, it poses serious threat whenever it decides to battle.

However, this is, I think, a discussion of two parts: the anime and the game. Both rarely interweave, so I'm trying to keep the two as separate as possible because attempting to push them together makes no sense. Pikachu's power levels are wholly unique on their own, but that could be down to a multitude of other factors that would completely derail this discussion. Point is, the games aren't complex enough for every unique trait of each and every pokemon to be accounted for - it's not feasible for them, so GF has to simplify them in-game for the sake of playability, hence why Dialga can be defeated, hypothetically, by any level 1 pokemon in-game, but in the anime can hold its own against other gods.

As for sharpedo's abilities, I always just figured that "wild" battles and trainer battles were completely different, i.e. when pokemon are hunting or battling for territory, dominance or some other animalistic desire, they duke it out like irl animals do, with their steel-crushing teeth and bone-shattering punches. In trainer battles, to limit damage, moves (and maybe extra factors that could be technological) are used in place of raw physical traits.

Ultimately, though, it's difficult to determine a "one size fits all" answer to a lot of these questions.

Hmm. Maybe that's the reason why people treat the anime and the games as separate things.

But I kinda think everything in Pokémon is inconsistent

 

[w1f1pa55w0rd]

As much as I'd like to disagree, I can't. Some things just don't tend to make sense, and one of them is legendary pokemon. Every ten-year-old kid in the region walks around with gods in little balls, so there is little reason to speculate further on whether Arceus is really almighty or not. The anime makes no sense at all, and the lore is trumped by game mechanics.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

As much as I'd like to disagree, I can't. Some things just don't tend to make sense, and one of them is legendary pokemon. Every ten-year-old kid in the region walks around with gods in little balls, so there is little reason to speculate further on whether Arceus is really almighty or not. The anime makes no sense at all, and the lore is trumped by game mechanics.

Hmm you have a good point there.

I never really liked the anime because it's stupid and it does make no sense at all.

At least the manga provides pretty good feats for legendary Pokémon.

Like the time palkia deleted a pokeball/masterball from existence.

I wish all Pokémon could do that.

 

[w1f1pa55w0rd]

Lol yeah. Techincally, a Raticate should be able to eat its trainer if its teeth are that strong.

 

[Venia Silente]

Very good thread. Many interesting points are brought up and there's a recall and an acknowledgement of the status of the Pokémon franchise as a multi-canon thing and Bishops Ring makes a good account of how that is the case, though I am still weirded out that in 2019 there's people who say the anime is "non canon". Oh well. Thing is: with a multicanon and multimedia franchise, not all the aspects that apply to one canon (eg.: the games) need apply to the others (eg.: the anime), and that does not necessarily imply inconsistencies, but there I am just repeating Bishop's Ring's point.

Among some things I'd like to point out:

* Even in the games, capturing several Legendaries including Arceus is not canon (strangely enough, I think). It's an optional event you have to specifically make your way into, and even then the more recent Gens throw a wrench into the idea by just giving you already packaged Legendaries as gifts, so there's that.

* Down the line the games are games, and more than a reality they probably reflect an interface or a vision to a Pokémon world (the threes are all the same, the Trainers are all the same, the houses are all the same, everyone popups text bubbles to speak, etc). From that perspective, it makes perfect sense that even the highest-tier Legendaries can be caught or otherwise obtained somehow regardless of what flavor text or even plot says: it's an idealized version of an adventure intended to put the player on the forefront and as the sole hero. In a sensible reality, it'd have taken some police work in addition to a 10 yr old to take down Team Rocket, and come on how does a space suit specifically suit a 10yr old instead of, say, a trained, specialized adult with a degree on something spacenautics.

* People who consider Arceus to be a sort of monotheistic god are probably looking at a model of deitiness where being able to accomplish a feat X implies being able to accomplish any feat lower than X, but not only Eastern religions very explicitly do not work like that, even more in Christianity there's already a simple acknowledgement that that line of work does not always work out ("can god create a rock he can't lift?").

* At least in the mainline games, the only feats of Arceus that are stated in canon lore or displayed to the player are feats of Creation (eg.: the HG/SS event). The only potential feat next to those that is not battle related is the suggestion in PMD:Sky that he was the one to spare Grovyle's timeline.

* I might be missing something but doesn't one of the games state that Arceus had to use the power of either the Unown or the Plates to create things? As in, Arceus might be capable of such high feats but not on its own.

* The anime is weird.

* The HG/SS event is even weirder.

 

[Bishop’s Ring]

Venia summarises my thoughts perfectly. It's important to remember that game mechanics are there in order to make a game actually playable - and you can't exactly complete the pokedex, a quest which provides items and therefore must be possible, without capturing every pokemon, legendaries such as Arceus included. In other aspects of the franchise, things are going to be different due to the extra creative freedom provided.

And yes, Sinnoh's creation myths do suggest that Arceus didn't necessarily create this world on its own, but rather created other creatures that assisted it. One myth does state that Arceus created Dialga and Palkia, whose presences caused the expansion of space and time (as well as matter - Arceus, if we believe the creation myth, played no part in that), and it was the creation of Azelf, Uxíe and Mesprit that enabled those three to will "spirit" into existence (i.e. life). Looking at the myths themselves, Arceus' role was more a creator of beings that went out to make the world in its vision, which could explain the thousand arms when combined with the concept of the plates providing Arceus with the ability to nourish life, as indicated by its movie.

The HGSS event, however, is still very strange to me. All it confirms is Arceus' ability to manifest further members of the dialga, palkia and giratina species.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

Venia summarises my thoughts perfectly. It's important to remember that game mechanics are there in order to make a game actually playable - and you can't exactly complete the pokedex, a quest which provides items and therefore must be possible, without capturing every pokemon, legendaries such as Arceus included. In other aspects of the franchise, things are going to be different due to the extra creative freedom provided.

And yes, Sinnoh's creation myths do suggest that Arceus didn't necessarily create this world on its own, but rather created other creatures that assisted it. One myth does state that Arceus created Dialga and Palkia, whose presences caused the expansion of space and time (as well as matter - Arceus, if we believe the creation myth, played no part in that), and it was the creation of Azelf, Uxíe and Mesprit that enabled those three to will "spirit" into existence (i.e. life). Looking at the myths themselves, Arceus' role was more a creator of beings that went out to make the world in its vision, which could explain the thousand arms when combined with the concept of the plates providing Arceus with the ability to nourish life, as indicated by its movie.

The HGSS event, however, is still very strange to me. All it confirms is Arceus' ability to manifest further members of the dialga, palkia and giratina species.

So Arceus is more like xerneas in that it created life

 

[Bishop’s Ring]

So Arceus is more like xerneas in that it created life

That would probably be a more apt descriptor of it - a shaper of terrain and terrain-shapers alike, rather than the sole creator of everything seen in the universe.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

That would probably be a more apt descriptor of it - a shaper of terrain and terrain-shapers alike, rather than the sole creator of everything seen in the universe.

That seems more accurate of Arceus.

I'm wondering if yveltal can actually kill everything including even Arceus once it dies?

Since in yveltal's Pokédex entry it says it will cause the death of all life once it dies.

But yeah. It took so long for Pokémon to actually show mature themes such as death.

 

[Vragon2.0]

AYou know, they say Arceus is the most powerful Pokémon. Yes that may be true but he is not as powerful as you think he is.

Here are some reasons why.

1. If he was god then why are you able to capture him. This the problem with all legendary Pokémon as well. If the creation trio and Arceus are gods then why can they be captured into little balls by ten year olds to engage in cockfights.

If Dialga can control time, why doesn't he freeze you before you can catch him?
Comparing the game mechanics and all to the lore of the series isn't really...fair. Not to mention his catching event was never released and he was more a mystery gift that comes in a specific ball so I could argue this ball is a God send like a master ball.

2. The best feat of Arceus was he created the Pokémon universe. However that was only one universe, and he drained pretty much most of his power in doing it. Lots of people in fiction can create universes, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're powerful, especially if they waste almost all their energy in creating just one.

1) He created it as his birth to be fair. Also, he destroyed a meteor that was far bigger than one mega rayquaza destroyed which can be seen as one of the top three most powerful mons.
2) Do you know the lore? Even if we assume he used up a lot of his power to create the universe, that's still something impressive for that world unless something else can do that which last I checked, no one can. Plus, he is able to make another dialga, palkia, or giratina in a certain event with his own power so that entails some ability.
3) Because a lot of people can create universes doesn't invalidate that he's powerful. What do you even define as powerful? I mean, I'd say a pokemon that's good in battling and very strong could be deemed as powerful and Arceus is far stronger than that, not to mention invulnerable to moves if he has all his plates. I believe you mean more Godlike essence and in that universe it can be argued he is the most powerful since he can nullify anyone else's attacks with his plates.
4) Does everyone forget about the plates? I can argue him in the games is less powerful because he doesn't have all the plates. As for the meteor against him, well that still implies power since no one else could do it, he survived it and just needed his plates to fully heal, could change a land with just a few of them, has his own dimension that he made.

(Also the idea of every Pokémon game, being it's own universe is a fan theory. It does not mean Arceus is multiversal, because since when was Arceus a multiversal being.)

ORAS and RSE would like a word with you.

3. If he was god, then why did Arceus almost die from a meteor hitting him. I know a lot people say this is PIS, (plot induced stupidity), but still why did he almost die from a meteor. It's so stupid to see a so called god nearly die from a fucking meteor.

What is defined as "God". There can be many things that fulfill that statement that don't entail absolute omnipotence. Many things in fiction and games have this concept of a God that isn't completely invulnerable.
Regarding the meteor...he almost died because he lost all of his plates. He couldn't nullify the meteor's damage with his plates so he had to counter it. They all got lost and he needs them to heal himself from his wounds. Again, deserving a God status is via world mechanics rather than simply being more powerful than other beings in other worlds.

4. Arceus in order to be powerful, needs these so called plates. Since when does a god need something in order to be powerful.

I would list many but sadly some are spoilers so just stick with these.
Thor - hammer to channel his lightning till he learns how to use it himself
Kratos - weapons at his arsenal
Hades - underworld presence

Not to mention he doesn't need the plates to live. Else if that was the case he couldn't be in the games without dying. Notice how in the movie it was about damaging him while cementing him from moving and getting his plates out to heal. That's something I think you're getting wrong. You think he needs plates to live, but he doesn't, they're just additions to who he is as a being.

Not to mention even if he needed them to live that's hardly a crutch since they can adjust reality and be able to enact on his command. So even if you wanted to strike at them you'd need to damage him enough to get those out and then make sure he doesn't have a single one which is very circumstantial.

5. He had to struggle to fight the creation trio. He created the creation trio which means he is more powerful than them, yet he had to put up a struggle with them. If he was god he would have just instantly defeated them.

Did we watch the same fight? He was owning them and many of their attacks did nothing. Like, if you're asking why he couldn't just snap and they all disappear then he would have done that with the others. He doesn't have the ability to delete all that's around him instantly, he's still a pokemon, but he's still able to not only nullify their attacks but use an attack that can damage everyone at the same time super effectively depending on how many plates he has and which ones.

Those are just some of the reasons why I believe Arceus is powerful alright but he is a weakling compared to other gods in fiction. He's just not the powerful god many Pokémon fans believe he is.

I dunno it looks like he could handle many greek Gods and honestly I think you have a bit of his abilities/lore incorrect as well as not considering what his plate powers entail. Moves are extensions of matter and things. Water type is like using water, meaning with a water plate he's invulnerable to any water attacks. The meteor isn't like that since it's not an extension or could be argued not a matter he has a plate for. Many God's in fiction us an elemental thing for combat so he could be invulnerable from the as well as countering with all 18 elements he has.
Plus of course he isn't the most powerful when compared to others. The title "God" appeals to specific universes. Would you say that Kratos is weak because Arceus could beat him? Or others are weak because they need a vessel or some tool to do their more powerful attacks? If we get into crossovers of course but that's being unfair since you're judging him not on the rules of merit of "his" world but of whatever mythos fanfic OP powers you think are stronger.

One other thing that I say about Arceus was the fact that He was subdued by regular Pokémon and molten Lead or some other metal. I find that both stupid and funny.

1) It was cement and he was taking damage so likely he couldn't react to it
2) despite the damage he responded but couldn't move due to being buried
3) he didn't die since well...the future him remained the same and well (even if that's not how time works) it would entail Arceus of the future stopped existing
4) subdued is a strong word to use since he was still resisting
5) in the end he got out and just sat there angry. Like no joke, he just sat there angry and probably healing himself.
6) If you find a God being put in a predicament with current used weaknesses being used against him as well as the basis of being caught by surprise by someone you lent something to and trusted for their roles in helping you...then man you'd have fun with other stories where more powerful Gods by your own admission got into that role to.

Honestly, I don't think this is a good case on your part


Edit: I'm not saying Arceus could beat other God's in fiction that are clearly more powerful and all, I'm saying the way you're analyzing him is rather weak in arguing. I bring up the elemental abilities since that is a core factor when talking about the deity himself.

 

[Pokedigifan1178]

If Dialga can control time, why doesn't he freeze you before you can catch him?
Comparing the game mechanics and all to the lore of the series isn't really...fair. Not to mention his catching event was never released and he was more a mystery gift that comes in a specific ball so I could argue this ball is a God send like a master ball.


1) He created it as his birth to be fair. Also, he destroyed a meteor that was far bigger than one mega rayquaza destroyed which can be seen as one of the top three most powerful mons.
2) Do you know the lore? Even if we assume he used up a lot of his power to create the universe, that's still something impressive for that world unless something else can do that which last I checked, no one can. Plus, he is able to make another dialga, palkia, or giratina in a certain event with his own power so that entails some ability.
3) Because a lot of people can create universes doesn't invalidate that he's powerful. What do you even define as powerful? I mean, I'd say a pokemon that's good in battling and very strong could be deemed as powerful and Arceus is far stronger than that, not to mention invulnerable to moves if he has all his plates. I believe you mean more Godlike essence and in that universe it can be argued he is the most powerful since he can nullify anyone else's attacks with his plates.
4) Does everyone forget about the plates? I can argue him in the games is less powerful because he doesn't have all the plates. As for the meteor against him, well that still implies power since no one else could do it, he survived it and just needed his plates to fully heal, could change a land with just a few of them, has his own dimension that he made.


ORAS and RSE would like a word with you.


What is defined as "God". There can be many things that fulfill that statement that don't entail absolute omnipotence. Many things in fiction and games have this concept of a God that isn't completely invulnerable.
Regarding the meteor...he almost died because he lost all of his plates. He couldn't nullify the meteor's damage with his plates so he had to counter it. They all got lost and he needs them to heal himself from his wounds. Again, deserving a God status is via world mechanics rather than simply being more powerful than other beings in other worlds.


I would list many but sadly some are spoilers so just stick with these.
Thor - hammer to channel his lightning till he learns how to use it himself
Kratos - weapons at his arsenal
Hades - underworld presence

Not to mention he doesn't need the plates to live. Else if that was the case he couldn't be in the games without dying. Notice how in the movie it was about damaging him while cementing him from moving and getting his plates out to heal. That's something I think you're getting wrong. You think he needs plates to live, but he doesn't, they're just additions to who he is as a being.

Not to mention even if he needed them to live that's hardly a crutch since they can adjust reality and be able to enact on his command. So even if you wanted to strike at them you'd need to damage him enough to get those out and then make sure he doesn't have a single one which is very circumstantial.


Did we watch the same fight? He was owning them and many of their attacks did nothing. Like, if you're asking why he couldn't just snap and they all disappear then he would have done that with the others. He doesn't have the ability to delete all that's around him instantly, he's still a pokemon, but he's still able to not only nullify their attacks but use an attack that can damage everyone at the same time super effectively depending on how many plates he has and which ones.


I dunno it looks like he could handle many greek Gods and honestly I think you have a bit of his abilities/lore incorrect as well as not considering what his plate powers entail. Moves are extensions of matter and things. Water type is like using water, meaning with a water plate he's invulnerable to any water attacks. The meteor isn't like that since it's not an extension or could be argued not a matter he has a plate for. Many God's in fiction us an elemental thing for combat so he could be invulnerable from the as well as countering with all 18 elements he has.
Plus of course he isn't the most powerful when compared to others. The title "God" appeals to specific universes. Would you say that Kratos is weak because Arceus could beat him? Or others are weak because they need a vessel or some tool to do their more powerful attacks? If we get into crossovers of course but that's being unfair since you're judging him not on the rules of merit of "his" world but of whatever mythos fanfic OP powers you think are stronger.

1) It was cement and he was taking damage so likely he couldn't react to it
2) despite the damage he responded but couldn't move due to being buried
3) he didn't die since well...the future him remained the same and well (even if that's not how time works) it would entail Arceus of the future stopped existing
4) subdued is a strong word to use since he was still resisting
5) in the end he got out and just sat there angry. Like no joke, he just sat there angry and probably healing himself.
6) If you find a God being put in a predicament with current used weaknesses being used against him as well as the basis of being caught by surprise by someone you lent something to and trusted for their roles in helping you...then man you'd have fun with other stories where more powerful Gods by your own admission got into that role to.

Honestly, I don't think this is a good case on your part


Edit: I'm not saying Arceus could beat other God's in fiction that are clearly more powerful and all, I'm saying the way you're analyzing him is rather weak in arguing. I bring up the elemental abilities since that is a core factor when talking about the deity himself.

i do agree with some of the things on your list

but what i meant about other gods owning him was me referencing that a ton of gods from marvel and dc would destroy him as well as a ton of digimon gods like zeedmillenniummon and lucemon.

also this thread is pretty old. so why are replying on a 46 day old thread?

 

[Vragon2.0]

i do agree with some of the things on your list

but what i meant about other gods owning him was me referencing that a ton of gods from marvel and dc would destroy him as well as a ton of digimon gods like zeedmillenniummon and lucemon.

But that's not the issue I had. The issue I had wasn't that he could be reasonably beaten by other beings in fiction, but that you use that to then discredit the being he is in that world. You say what kind of "God" would get owned by [insert situation you put here] and while some of the information I was trying to correct others I was challenging your reasoning.

I don't disagree there are other more powerful beings out there but I don't think you can then just thread titled "Arceus is not omnipotent/powerful" without addressing the different degrees that Gods have existed (which takes out your powerful statement up there) nor is Arceus supposed to be omnipotent. It comes off as not being fair in the analysis of Arceus.

If you don't like him, fine I don't challenge that, but I just think your points here are rather weak with the claim you were making in the initial post.

also this thread is pretty old. so why are replying on a 46 day old thread?

well for one thing only really like 2 or 3 peeps have participated so I was throwing my hat in the thread and what would be the problem with that. Most of what I noticed in the thread seemed to be talking about his limits which is fine though I think that's forgetting it was his birth that brought about things to happen even if he didn't cause them specifically.

I just was addressing the points you made initially and coming with my own thoughts on the matter.