Dedicated Immunity Page Creation

[Jin2188]

Permission granted by @Agnaa.

This thread is in response to the recent discussion on this thread, in order to resolve the debate surrounding a potential metaphysical/conceptual immunity page, a potential draft of which was provided by @DontTalkDT:

Metaphysical Immunity is the ability to be immune to certain attacks, abilities or more generally effects due to lacking or not being able to participate in certain metaphysical aspects connected to that effect. An example would be the inability to be burned due to not being able to participate in the concept of being burned. As they can't participate in the concept of being burned, no matter how strong of a fire is directed at them, the result of being burned couldn't be realized.
Frequently this is also less formally formulated as "lacking a concept", such as an entity being immortal due to lacking the concept of death.
Note that this ability should only be granted to things that usually would be able to have the respective effect applied to them. E.g. minds and souls usually don't have such a thing as temperature and can hence, in the usual sense of the term, also not participate in things like being heated or burned. However, that wouldn't give them this ability, as that is the expected state of existence for these things.

A lot of progress has already been made regarding this discussion, so I will not go into further detail here; this thread exists simply to wrap things up and reach a conclusion on what should be done.

DT presented five options:

1. Make it a separate page.
2. Add it to resistance, like other immunity is.
3. Add it to invulnerability, as it's a similar idea.
4. Make a page for immunity and conceptual immunity together, as they are closer related than immunity is to resistance. Remove immunity from the resistance page.
5. Make a page for immunity, invulnerability and conceptual immunity together, as they are all the "unaffected" powers. Remove those from other pages.

Out of these options, I support 4>2>1>3>5. I don't think it's a good idea to lump Invulnerability in with Immunity, because while the concept might be similar, Invulnerability deals with AP, while Immunity deals with abilities. They remain distinct, and so should not be put together for the same reason why Durability Negation and Power Nullification should not be put together. On the other hand, however, I think Metaphysical Immunity overlaps too much with regular Immunity to have it as a separate page.

I think making a separate Immunity page and including the conceptual immunity stuff within it is the best option. I'm not a huge fan of Option 2 (appending it to the Resistance page), but I won't try to block that should that be what staff agrees on.

Option 1:
Option 2: @Agnaa, @DarkDragonMedeus
Option 3:
Option 4: @Vietthai96, @DontTalkDT
Option 5:

 

[KLOL506]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Mr. Bambu @Agnaa @Planck69 @Elizhaa @LephyrTheRevanchist @DarkDragonMedeus @LordGriffin1000 @Dereck03 @Maverick_Zero_X @Just_a_Random_Butler @Qawsedf234 @Firestorm808 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Celestial_Pegasus @Damage3245 @GrathOfLux @Everything12

 

[Agnaa]

I'd say 2>4>1>5>3

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'd say 2>4>1>5>3

Same idea.

 

[Jin2188]

I'd say 2>4>1>5>3

If we're gonna do Option 2, then we really should expand on our definition of Immunity. We mention it in passing on the Resistance page, but I think we should have a dedicated section for it at the very least.

Another reason why I prefer 4 above 2 is because it just makes sense to have Immunity as a separate ability page. Our standards for Immunity make it a wholly separate concept from Resistance:

Qualifying for Immunity is difficult, as no simple show of resistance is enough, and statements could easily be hyperbole or only apply in-verse. Immunity should only be given when the user in question entirely lacks what would normally be affected. An inorganic being, for example, has no biological components to manipulate, and an entity without a soul won't be harmed by Soul Manipulation.

Whereas simple Resistance is essentially just being unaffected by a specific ability, generally without further context. Immunity, as we currently define it, is much more specific and complicated, and so deserves its own explanation/ability page.

 

[Agnaa]

I'd think that integrating it into the current page would involve fleshing out Immunity a bit more.

Or heck, even subsuming it into this idea.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I have to say I'm split. I feel like 4 or 5 are the cleanest option, but I don't know if there is a reliable way to find all the current immunity users to do the migration or how many profiles that would be.
The resistance page is really big enough as is.

If we can't handle the migration, I guess 2 is best, followed by 1, then 3.

 

[Vietthai96]

I personally go with 4 or 1 only

 

[Qawsedf234]

Or heck, even subsuming it into this idea.

I'd probably go with the following then:

Resistance (Changed from Summary)​

Resistance is the power to withstand the effects of certain abilities through varying means. Of course, simple resistance to one showing of an ability isn't enough to ignore all uses of that ability, as some applications may be far stronger, while others may work differently, meaning they must be resisted differently. As a result, when resistance is listed on a page, it's important to describe the specifics.

Specific resistances do not necessarily translate to broad ones, though resisting a versatile power with many applications (such as Mind Manipulation) may provide a similarly expansive defense. Even then, when the same ability is performed differently, resistance may prove futile. For example, a character may resist mind manipulation that targets the brain directly, but would be in trouble against a power that targets some incorporeal idea of the mind itself.

With some characters, resistances and/or immunities may need to be activated, rather than something that is constantly up and useful. In these cases, it should be mentioned - the same goes if the resistance only applies to certain parts of the user's body.

Immunity (Between Resistance and Hax Layers)​

A higher level of resistance is outright Immunity or Metaphysical Immunity, making the user in question completely unaffected by such abilities.

Qualifying for Immunity is difficult, as no simple show of resistance is enough, and statements could easily be hyperbole or only apply in-verse. Immunity should only be given when the user in question entirely lacks what would normally be affected. An inorganic being, for example, has no biological components to manipulate, an entity without a soul won't be harmed by Soul Manipulation, a being made purely of fire has no blood to manipulate, and so on.

Metaphysical Immunity is a more robust version of immunity, as it is the ability to be immune to certain attacks, abilities, or more general effects due to lacking or not being able to participate in certain metaphysical aspects connected to that effect. An example would be the inability to be burned due to not being able to participate in the concept of being burned. As they can't participate in the concept of being burned, no matter how strong of a fire is directed at them, the result of being burned couldn't be realized.

Frequently, this is also less formally formulated as "lacking a concept", such as an entity being immortal due to lacking the concept of death.

Note: This enhanced version of Immunity should only be granted to things that usually would be able to have the respective effect applied to them. E.g. minds and souls usually don't have such a thing as temperature and can hence, in the usual sense of the term, also not participate in things like being heated or burned. As such, beings composed purely of those materials wouldn't give them Metaphysical Immunity, as that is the expected state of existence for these things.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I'd probably go with the following then:

That sounds ok.

 

[Elizhaa]

Adding it to the resistance page like above look fine, to me.

 

[Jin2188]

I'd reword the second part slightly:

Immunity (Between Resistance and Hax Layers)​

A higher level of resistance is outright Immunity or Metaphysical Immunity, making the user in question completely unaffected by such abilities.

Qualifying for Immunity is difficult, as no simple show of resistance is enough, and statements could easily be hyperbole or only apply in-verse. Immunity should only be given when the user in question entirely lacks what would normally be affected. An inorganic being, for example, has no biological components to manipulate, an entity without a soul won't be harmed by Soul Manipulation, a being made purely of fire has no blood to manipulate, and so on.

A more robust version of immunity is the ability to be immune to certain attacks, abilities, or more general effects due to lacking or not being able to participate in certain metaphysical aspects connected to that effect. An example would be the inability to be burned due to not being able to participate in the concept of being burned. As they can't participate in the concept of being burned, no matter how strong of a fire is directed at them, the result of being burned couldn't be realized.

Frequently (although not always), this is also less formally formulated as "lacking a concept", such as an entity being immortal due to lacking the concept of death.

This version of Immunity is referred to as Metaphysical Immunity, although it should just be listed as Immunity on profiles.

Note: This enhanced version of Immunity should only be granted to things that usually would be able to have the respective effect applied to them. E.g. minds and souls usually don't have such a thing as temperature and can hence, in the usual sense of the term, also not participate in things like being heated or burned. As such, beings composed purely of those materials wouldn't give them Metaphysical Immunity, as that is the expected state of existence for these things.

Because I don't really see the reason to split Immunity and Metaphysical Immunity, since they're basically the same thing.

 

[Agnaa]

I agree that they should both be listed the same way, the reasoning/description should make it clear which one is intended.

With it getting its own section, I think it might be useful to also include a brief aside about how such immunities aren't absolute, and can be bypassed in unconventional ways (granting them a soul so it can be altered, metaphysically rewriting them so they start participating in particular concepts).

 

[Vietthai96]

Should we also expand Resistance Negation section with Metaphysical Immunity Negation?, since if you are not participating in a certain metaphysical aspect made you immune to the effects of said aspect, there could be ability that forcefully drag you to participate back to said aspect, which in turn make you vunerable to the effects of said aspect. This is pretty much different from normal Resistance Negation which is simply the act of either nullifying or completely ignore one's resistance toward abilities

 

[Agnaa]

I think that would be better indexed under other abilities than Power Nullification. As you say, it wouldn't be nullifying the ability, it would be forcibly making them participate.

 

[Vietthai96]

Well, that mean if, for example, character A do not participating in concept, thus made A immune to concept. B have ability that force A to participate within concept. Then it would be indexed under B's concept hax justification?. Is that right?

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah, I think so.

 

[Vietthai96]

Yeah, I think so.

Oke, but should we make a note on either Metaphysical Immunity or Power Nullification that the ability to force someone to participate in metaphysical aspects isn't any forms of negation and should be indexed under abilities instead. Kinda serve as a soft standard, guideline in case people thinking these abilities are Immunity Negation in the future?

 

[Agnaa]

I agree that they should both be listed the same way, the reasoning/description should make it clear which one is intended.

With it getting its own section, I think it might be useful to also include a brief aside about how such immunities aren't absolute, and can be bypassed in unconventional ways (granting them a soul so it can be altered, metaphysically rewriting them so they start participating in particular concepts).

I'm fine with putting it alongside this.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I'm fine with putting it alongside this.

My idea:

Note: This enhanced version of Immunity should only be granted to things that usually would be able to have the respective effect applied to them. E.g. minds and souls usually don't have such a thing as temperature and can hence, in the usual sense of the term, also not participate in things like being heated or burned. As such, beings composed purely of those materials wouldn't give them Metaphysical Immunity, as that is the expected state of existence for these things.

Additionally, Immunity to an attack is not absolute. If an ability can force a concept upon the character or they are forced to participate in a concept due to an ability, they would not longer qualify for Immunity; as the core justification of non-participation is no longer being fulfilled. For example, a user of Conceptual Manipulation can force the character to participate in that concept when they otherwise wouldn't (such as forcing the concept of burning onto a being typically lacking that concept).

 

[Agnaa]

Looks fine enough to me!

 

[Jin2188]

So I assume the consensus here is Option 2?

 

[Jin2188]

My idea:

Additionally, Immunity to an attack is not absolute. If an ability can force a concept upon the character or they are forced to participate in a concept due to an ability, they would not longer qualify for Immunity; as the core justification of non-participation is no longer being fulfilled. For example, a user of Conceptual Manipulation can force the character to participate in that concept when they otherwise wouldn't (such as forcing the concept of burning onto a being typically lacking that concept).

I would question the utility of an immunity which can simply be negated by users of the immune ability. If a Conceptual Manipulation user can just negate immunity to Conceptual Manipulation, then the immunity loses all relevance.

 

[Vietthai96]

I would question the utility of an immunity which can simply be negated by users of the immune ability. If a Conceptual Manipulation user can just negate immunity to Conceptual Manipulation, then the immunity loses all relevance.

1. Our site at least, from what i remember, do not index true immunity because that thing is hard to index, as immunity means you are completely unaffected by abilities regardless of how strong and good they are. Fiction often drop s statement about a character immune to a certain ability and then later get affected by that same upgraded power so it defeat the point of being immune. Thus immunity is mostly a character lacking or not participating in a certain thing thus unable to be affected by hax that target said thing, for example a robot will immune to soul hax cause it obviously do not have soul

2. While it is true that a CM user can force a character to lose their immunity to concept by forcing them back to participate in concept again. We index ability via what it show to us, so a CM user will not be default assumed to have the ability to negate metaphysical immunity unless they show they are capable of using CM in such way, or their CM shows such capability

 

[Qawsedf234]

I would question the utility of an immunity which can simply be negated by users of the immune ability.

So how I understand immunity is as follows:

• A robot like the T-800 is immune to the Soul Manipulation of Ghost Rider, as the T-800 lacks a soul entirely. If the T-800 was given a soul by Cosmo then he can no longer resist soul manipulation, as he is now forced to participate in that concept.
• Someone with Metaphysical Immunity, such as ORT who would have the concept of death normally but lacks that aspect, would be immune to dying unless someone with strong enough conceptual manipulation like the Beyonder is able to force that concept back onto him.
• What makes someone immune to the above happening is having Paraconsistent Physiology or Type 2 Non-Existence Physiology as you are incapable of even being forced to participate in a concept unless the other person has the ability to negate that physiology in some capacity. For example, Ragnarok Sung Jin-Woo has conceptual Non-Existence, unless you're someone like the Shifting Mound who can negate that power, you wouldn't be able to force him to participate in a concept, as his power means he lacks the capacity to be included in a concept in the first place.

That's how I understand it at least.

 

[Jin2188]

So how I understand immunity is as follows:

• A robot like the T-800 is immune to the Soul Manipulation of Ghost Rider, as the T-800 lacks a soul entirely. If the T-800 was given a soul by Cosmo then he can no longer resist soul manipulation, as he is now forced to participate in that concept.
• Someone with Metaphysical Immunity, such as ORT who would have the concept of death normally but lacks that aspect, would be immune to dying unless someone with strong enough conceptual manipulation like the Beyonder is able to force that concept back onto him.
• What makes someone immune to the above happening is having Paraconsistent Physiology or Type 2 Non-Existence Physiology as you are incapable of even being forced to participate in a concept unless the other person has the ability to negate that physiology in some capacity. For example, Ragnarok Sung Jin-Woo has conceptual Non-Existence, unless you're someone like the Shifting Mound who can negate that power, you wouldn't be able to force him to participate in a concept, as his power means he lacks the capacity to be included in a concept in the first place.

That's how I understand it at least.

I see. That seems more sensible. I assume we'd be judging this stuff on a case-by-case basis then?

 

[Antvasima]

I also think that Qawsedf234 seems to make sense here.

 

[Antvasima]

So what should we do here?

 

[Agnaa]

The current leading idea has three solid agrees, one soft agree (from DT), and one disagree.

Qawsedf has drafted an implementation of that leading idea, but as far as I can tell, hasn't explicitly voted.

So I'd want just a slight bit more input before applying this.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. If you wish, feel free to ping the staff members who commented here previously regarding what they think about Qawsedf's idea.

 

[Agnaa]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Vietthai96 @DontTalkDT What do you think of Qawsed's draft (and this proposed note for it)?

 

[Vietthai96]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Vietthai96 @DontTalkDT What do you think of Qawsedf's draft?

Looks good to me

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Vietthai96 @DontTalkDT What do you think of Qawsedf's draft?

Looks good to me as well.

 

[Agnaa]

Oh shit, I didn't properly link it, I just linked the note at the end.

My post now links to both the main part, and the addendum.

Vietthai and DDM, please reread if you haven't seen both already.

 

[Vietthai96]

@DarkDragonMedeus @Vietthai96 @DontTalkDT What do you think of Qawsed's draft (and this proposed note for it)?

Oh shit, I didn't properly link it, I just linked the note at the end.

My post now links to both the main part, and the addendum.

Vietthai and DDM, please reread if you haven't seen both already.

Great, I got trolled by Agnaa, truly the event of the year
Anyway Qaw draft is fine, though i want to change something in his draft

A higher level of resistance is outright Immunity or Metaphysical Immunity, making the user in question completely unaffected by such abilities.

We should remove the "or Metaphysical Immunity". Not all Immunities are Metaphysical, wording like this make people think that Immunity is also Metaphysical Immunity but it isn't the case obviously

Additionally, Immunity to an attack is not absolute. If an ability can force a concept upon the character or they are forced to participate in a concept due to an ability, they would not longer qualify for Immunity; as the core justification of non-participation is no longer being fulfilled

Change to

Additionally, Immunity is not absolute. If an ability can force an aspect upon the character or they are forced to participate in an aspect due to an ability, they would not longer qualify for Metaphysical Immunity; as the core justification of non-participation is no longer being fulfilled

I think the "concept" part is too specific while metaphysical immunity should cover all metaphysical aspects, and we already have an example with Concept right after. Thus i change "concept" to "aspect" to make is more general and broad, as how a guideline suppose to be. Of course my wording isn't great so if anyone have better wording, then i'm fine with updating my version

 

[Agnaa]

We should remove the "or Metaphysical Immunity". Not all Immunities are Metaphysical, wording like this make people think that Immunity is also Metaphysical Immunity but it isn't the case obviously

I don't think this wording implies that. And to the contrary, I think it's important to point out that there are about to be two categories discussed.

Change to

I think the "concept" part is too specific while metaphysical immunity should cover all metaphysical aspects, and we already have an example with Concept right after. Thus i change "concept" to "aspect" to make is more general and broad, as how a guideline suppose to be. Of course my wording isn't great so if anyone have better wording, then i'm fine with updating my version

I think that update is fine.

 

[Vietthai96]

I don't think this wording implies that. And to the contrary, I think it's important to point out that there are about to be two categories discussed

Because the wording "Immunity or Metaphysical Immunity" made me think it mean Immunity is also Metaphysical Immunity since from my experience it is how we usually using the word "or". If it is Immunity and Metaphysical Immunity then i would not be confused. Though if you say it is fine then oke

 

[Agnaa]

Thinking about it carefully, even in cases like this it can be a bit ambiguous. "A higher level of X is Y or Z" can either be listing Y and Z as different things, or saying that Z is a different name for Y. (Although, in the cases you're probably more familiar with, like "X (or Y or Z), is an ability..." always means that Y and Z are different names for the same thing).

Alas, I don't think there's a great way around it, without causing other issues. "Immunity and Metaphysical Immunity" more strongly ties them together as the same thing, imo.

 

[Random-Helper323]

I'd say 4>2>3>1>5.

Qawsedf's draft looks good to me.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

The stuff looks good, and between what Agnaa and Viethai were also adding, I agree with Agnaa's conclusions.