Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,447
- 13,636
In a recent thread, both @KLOL506 and @DarkDragonMedeus staked out claims that atomisation is both an AP feat and a feat of durability negation. I think this highlights a tension in the system as-is.
Since that idea's largely irrelevant to that thread, and deserves its own handling, I've made this.
We know from past calculations that atomising a human skull lands in 9-B, at 3.661e6 joules, or 0.88 kg of TNT.
Thus, every character who can focus such energies into a head-sized area can atomize that portion of the human body, and negate durability.
However, every character who can withstand such energies to a head-sized area can resist durability negation.
So, how do we resolve this?
Since that idea's largely irrelevant to that thread, and deserves its own handling, I've made this.
We know from past calculations that atomising a human skull lands in 9-B, at 3.661e6 joules, or 0.88 kg of TNT.
Thus, every character who can focus such energies into a head-sized area can atomize that portion of the human body, and negate durability.
However, every character who can withstand such energies to a head-sized area can resist durability negation.
So, how do we resolve this?
- Give almost all characters at that energy value or greater Durability Negation and Resistance to it?
- Remove Durability Negation, and Resistance to it, from all feats that simply involve high levels of destruction like this?
- Recontextualise those cases of Durability Negation to only be of a limited degree, like attacking organs, such that it would naturally fail to effect characters with durability beyond ~1 kg of TNT without feats?
- Draft up rules for when Durability Negation can be given for statements of atomisation; keeping it in some cases, and not allowing it in others?
- Some other idea that I haven't thought of?
Last edited: