- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Hidden
- Country
-
No, the stars aren't an exact measurement of power (being purely a measurement of achievement), but I don't think it's pressing it to use them as a measurement for what -tier or -level hunter a hunter is (mid-tier, low-level). I'd imagine, if I lived in that world, I'd use it as a rough estimate - i.e., if, say, two hunters whom I was unfamiliar with were fighting in a tournament and I was to place a bet, and one was 0-star and the other 3-star, I don't think it is not-intelligent at all to use the star as a basis for my bet. If I were a fighter myself, I might be more hesitant going up against a 3-star hunter based on the assumed experience (and skill and ability that comes from experience) that I would assume would have come with those high accomplishments.
Though yeah, there are faults with it - putting Kite and Morel in the 1-star being the most obvious. I'd rank them on the level of 2-star, but the nature of my choice of ranking naming kept me from it - because Morel IS a 1-star hunter, and I'd personally put him at least a bit above Kite, based on the fact that he is Knuckle's teacher, and Gon put Knuckle and Kite on the same level. The order I had put them is generally from weakest to lowest, and as said, they represent ranges.
Though yeah, there are faults with it - putting Kite and Morel in the 1-star being the most obvious. I'd rank them on the level of 2-star, but the nature of my choice of ranking naming kept me from it - because Morel IS a 1-star hunter, and I'd personally put him at least a bit above Kite, based on the fact that he is Knuckle's teacher, and Gon put Knuckle and Kite on the same level. The order I had put them is generally from weakest to lowest, and as said, they represent ranges.
but I prefer Feitan.