- 1,306
- 625
A thought came to me—perhaps a smart one that no one in this community has considered.
If a character is capable of killing any concept, then naturally it would be able to bypass High-Godly regeneration, various types of immortality, and abilities as well. And do you know how? By killing the concept itself. If the character destroys the concept of regeneration and resurrection itself, then High-Godly regeneration would be negated for that character, because the concept of regeneration has been removed. The same applies to immortality. In this way, by targeting the concept underlying these things, they can be bypassed—and this applies to everything.
For example, a character with NEP 1 could be bypassed by simply killing the concept of nothingness itself. In other words, concepts are basically the foundation of everything. So a character that can kill any concept can bypass all abilities entirely.
What do you think? Honestly, this idea seems like something no one has considered before and it appears logically consistent. What would the staff respond to this now? How was this not taken into account?
If a character is capable of killing any concept, then naturally it would be able to bypass High-Godly regeneration, various types of immortality, and abilities as well. And do you know how? By killing the concept itself. If the character destroys the concept of regeneration and resurrection itself, then High-Godly regeneration would be negated for that character, because the concept of regeneration has been removed. The same applies to immortality. In this way, by targeting the concept underlying these things, they can be bypassed—and this applies to everything.
For example, a character with NEP 1 could be bypassed by simply killing the concept of nothingness itself. In other words, concepts are basically the foundation of everything. So a character that can kill any concept can bypass all abilities entirely.
What do you think? Honestly, this idea seems like something no one has considered before and it appears logically consistent. What would the staff respond to this now? How was this not taken into account?