Acausality Question

[Arcker123]

Type 1 Acausality has this disclaimer

Note that only characters explicitly depicted as immune to time paradoxes in their past by feats and/or direct statements qualify for this power. Fiction commonly features time travel systems where time-travelers, for no explainable reason, retain their memories of previous timelines even after changing the past, and merely existing in a work with such mechanics doesn't mean the character inherently has such an immunity, especially given how they would still be affected if someone else was time-traveling instead.

However, if a verse explicitly acknowledges these timeline paradoxes/changes in their verse caused by time traveling, and still say and show the character has memories and was unaffected (Unlike other characters), would this qualify? My thinking is that this disclaimer doesn't apply, as the in verse acknowledgement does make it explicable.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

Type 1 Acausality has this disclaimer

However, if a verse explicitly acknowledges these timeline paradoxes/changes in their verse caused by time traveling, and still say and show the character has memories and was unaffected (Unlike other characters), would this qualify? My thinking is that this disclaimer doesn't apply, as the in verse acknowledgement does make it explicable.

Well it does say "For no explainable reason". If it's portrayed as an anomaly it should be fine.

 

[Arcker123]

Hmm. Here's the exact context