Hax resistance during versus matchups

[Ryukama]

@DT I think we're mainly on the same page, however as I've said someone has directly resisted a hax due to them having powerful enough ki, and someone else has vastly more powerful ki than said person. So in my opinion in that particular case it should be fine to give that someone else the resistance as well. In other cases of course we shouldn't just assume someone can resist a hax from a person in their verse weaker than them or that they can beat.

 

[Golden_Void]

The proof by example fallacy states that because for an x in some set Y some statement is true that doesn't mean that the statement is true for some other y in Y as well.

That doesn't apply here, because there first quite simply isn't an example x and above that because the truth value of the statement "negates durability against the durability value y" is in its truth value independent of the the choice of y per definition of being durability negating.

Putting this on my fridge. Also I agree with Ryu who's pretty much saying what I'm saying. :^)

 

[Antvasima]

Given that I am not familiar with versus threads and their regulations, it might be best if I let the rest of the staff work out a solution.

 

[PaChi2]

In other cases of course we shouldn't just assume someone can resist a hax from a person in their verse weaker than them or that they can beat.

After reading this, I needcto ask: doesnt part of Gilgamesh's resistances come from beating BB offscreen? or am I mistaken?

 

[AKM sama]

Same hax ability can have different magnitudes depending on different users. Everything has limits, and that includes hax.

- Let's take an example of reality warping. Do all reality warpers work on the same level? Do Shenron and Mxyzptlk have the same magnitude of reality warping? No. Shenron has shown his reality warping on a much lower scale, he clearly has limits. While Mxyptlk has shown to do it on a much higher scale. Would you say that Shenro would have the same affect on Beerus as Jasper or Mxy or Super Shenro?

- Let's take Mind Control as an example. Is Babidi's mind control of same magnitude as Baby's? No. Again there are clear limits here too. Babidi has shown to posses much weaker opponents while Baby has shown to posses much stronger opponents. Would you say Lelouch and Charles would have same effect on Vegeta as Babidi or Baby?

- Let's take time stop as an example. Clearly Hit's time stop has shown to have limits as to which characters it can affect successfully. Now if Guldo has not shown that limit, would we assume his time stop is better than Hit? Would you say Esdeath, DIO, Hit and Guldo's time stop would've worked on Goku the same way for all?

- Transmutation. Since Vegito kinda resisted Buu's transmutation, do you think he would also resist transmutation from a being who has shown to affect much stronger beings with his transmutation say Wukong's or Molecule Man's? Would you also say Edward's and Monster Carrot's transmutation would work on him the same way as Buu's?

- Let's take an example of existence erasure. Would you say Beerus' EE is of the same magnitude as Zeno's? Since Zamasu was erased by Beerus, would you say Kenshiro would have done that too? Or since Freeza wasn't erased by Sidra, would you say Freeza can survive Zeno's or The Great Evil Beast's EE?

- Do you think Devil Ma would have beaten every villain up until now with his Devilmite beam? Since GP is "not pure of heart" lol, Devil Man would kill him if he gets a free hit?

Name one hax that works on the same magnitude irrespective of the user. Clearly, every hax works on different magnitudes, and like everything, it has limits too. Just because someone hasn't shown a limit to prove the effectiveness of his hax, we can't assume it would work the same way as others. We might as well say Saitama one-shots because he hasn't shown the limits of his strength. In that case, one has to determine the limits and effectiveness of his hax.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, creating well-worded regulations for all of this would obviously be difficult.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

@AKM sama Don't really see what that has to do with anything here, hax obviously comes in different magitudes and aren't equal, but as we have been saying if a 3-D character hasn't shown any resistance to a certain hax, it should logically work on the character regardless of how physically powerful they are, unless they have universe level+ durability since survivng the destruction a timeline goes beyond mere physical durability.

We are dealing with different systems here when talking about hax and durability, one being durability which is directly physical, and the other which is achieved through means that aren't directly physical per say. A soul isn't a physical thing, hence physical durability regardless of the level below Low 2-C, should be bypassed as it isn't the physical body that is being attacked, but the immaterial soul.

Someone's physical durability is irrelevant to a person who can cut through space, as it's space being cut, which again isn't a physical thing, their durability is bypassed by virtue of that. Stuff like atomization isn't targeting the targets outward durability, but the atoms within them.

 

[AKM sama]

@Celetial Pegasus Well in my comment I was just pointing out the abuse of NLF which is done regarding hax abilities which are similar but work on different scales. And I know hax and durability are two different things.

But as Matt said, it literally becomes a proof by example fallacy when someone says Monster Carrot can transmute Merged Zamasu, simply because he did that to Bulma and has never shown the limits and effectiveness of his ability.

Well, maybe he can, maybe he can't. But we'll never know. Neither has Merged Zamasu ever been exposed to it, nor has Monster Carrot ever shown to do it on that scale. But can we really extrapolate his ability to infinity like that?

For a character who has shown to only affect tier 9 characters with his hax, I know we can't just assume that his hax will stop working after tier 5, or tier 4, or tier 8, again we'll never know, so definitely tier 2 is a reasonable assumption and I agree with you and DT if the limit we want to put is tier 2. As you can see, that's what my whole stance on this topic is actually. I am just asking if it is a justified limit?

 

[Amexim]

Got permission from Ryu. Would like to post what I said to him.

So, imho, I do think that it's possible for other characters of a lower tier to hax characters of a higer tier, but the issue is that it should be up to the character with the hax to hold the burden of proof. Charles Xavier has mind hax that can affect characters on a planetary scale, right? And Itachi can place almost anyone in the Narutoverse under genjutsu-- and if he hits you with Tsukuyomi, it's GG, right? Neji has limited durability negation by dealing internal damage via Gentle Fist. Normally, hax like these would work aganist anyone of their tier for sure. But how do we know that Neji's Gentle Fist can actually hurt Beerus?! Can Itachi place Beerus under Genjutsu?! Can Charles Hax gods?!


I think that, instead of attacking the idea that the target has to prove resistances to character A's hax, a character of whatever tier has to prove their hax is capable of reaching that tier of the target, otherwise it's "NLF" and proof by example.

 

[Amexim]

I mean, I can't be the only one who thinks some tier 10-C with Mind hax can body the Sage of Six Paths or Kaguya. Normally, there wouldn't be battles across tiers without hax coming into play anyway, and I personally feel that proof of resistance should only be required on the target's part if they fall within the scope of the user's power. Resistance should (as always) be evaluated based on the level the character resists. This prevents strange things like Itachi haxing Beerus with Genjutsu. The idea stems from me not really buying the idea that any random character from other verses with sharingan/Geass haxing people like the Marvel's Celestials and Thanos and shit-- for a horrible example. I find it hard to believe, personally. Sure, we can't just decide where it will stop-- like AKM said, but it should require more proof to use it on people stronger than the user-- than just simply having the hax work on anyone up until Universe+ durability.

I understand it's based on 2-C characters being able to resist timeline collapses and stuff (if that's not what you said, then why tier 2), but the logic and mechanics of the idea falls apart when you ask if this is just Durability and resisting an unknowably powerful amount of force, or not, and it being because they're able to exist in a world without time(I guess? Being able to survive a 2-C explosion would require that, or its just 3-A, right?). The former would mean that the rule becomes redundant, as hax usually has nothing to do with durability anyway. And the latter implies tons of other things-- like the 2-C somehow exists beyond time without being actually physically beyond time. That's still irrelevant though, because if 2-C chars can still be touched, then why not haxed without specification. regardless, I am against scaling resistance across verses, but I do think that this rule should be applied. Otherwise, this would imply that the Sharingan can be 2-C or 1-A in potency because it can affect a character who hasn't shown explicit resistance to it. And I can't buy the Sharingan being that powerful in this example.

There's gotta be some limit to what the ability can do, and if it's shown to exist in their verse, all the more reason to use the tier of whatever resisted it or that person's AP to set some kind of standard-- otherwise we assume that characters can only resist hax they have shown resistance to instead of questioning if the had user's powers are that effective!

For example, we know that Sasuke can hax Biju with ease, and in the Naruto verse, that's supposed to be a feat-- being able to place a powerful monster like this under genjutsu like the Nine Tails is insane-- we all understand how mind hax and general hax feats work here. Why not ask for feats on behalf of the User? Same for people of a low tier, having to ask them for proof of being able to resist hax of a certain AP/Tier.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

DontTalk already refuted why the proof by example fallacy is applicable here, let me repost what he said "The proof by example fallacy states that because for an x in some set Y some statement is true that doesn't mean that the statement is true for some other y in Y as well.

That doesn't apply here, because there first quite simply isn't an example x and above that because the truth value of the statement "negates durability against the durability value y" is in its truth value independent of the the choice of y per definition of being durability negating.

Or simpler said, some hax, like space cutting, is only hax exactly because the durability has no influence on wether or not it does damage. If that weren't the case it wouldn't be durability negating in the first place."

Hax is hax because durability has no influence on whether or not hax does damage, which is precisely why saying that because this person has a certain level of durability, the other persons hax won't work isn't correct, as durability is irrelevant in the first place.

I think the idea with surviving timelines being destroyed granting that lower level hax doesn't work is that, at this point characters are going beyond mere physical durability, surviving a timeline being destroyed means your durability allows you survive not just physical things, but metaphysical things like like time and space being completely erased on a universal scale. In this sense if you can survive a universal metaphysical thing like space-time being destroyed, other metaphysical things which is what hax most often takes the form of, in this case would be hax below a universal space-time destruction which is metaphysical, should require proof of being able to affect such a being who can survive that.

DontTalk can probably explain why timeline destruction is so important, but i was more so thinking in the vein of higher dimensional beings, which is ultimately the same as what he is saying anyway as a 4-D being is Low 2-C, and can survive timelines being destroyed.

It requires proof imo that a lower dimensional being can affect a higher dimensional with hax, as in that case you can't say that the hax of a lower dimensional being will automatically work without proof, i mean the idea of higher dimensional beings are that they have an extra/more dimension/dimensions, a 1-D being only has what? Only length i think but even if it's infinite it will never be equivalent to a 2-D being which has both length and width, so a 4-D being who has more dimensions than that of a 3-D being, hence requires proof that such a 3-D being can affect a being who is 4-D, and utterly beyond the 3-D, and a 4-D isn't just a physical being i would say anymore, it's not just a matter of being 3-D being where the being in question has length, width, depth, but now the 4-D being has all those in addition to another one which isn't physical as the 4th dimension is theorized to be time, no matter large those dimensions of the 3-D being is, it will never be greater than the 4-D being, hence it requires proof that a 3-D being can affect a 4-D being with hax.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Perfect way to summarize this, hax works regardless of the level on a 3-D scale, because hax like say fate manipulation, spatial manipulation, is metaphysical, it's not a physical thing, however once characters become higher dimensional, they aren't just physical beings anymore, they themselves become metaphysical, so it requires evidence that metaphysical abilities below the level of the higher dimensional being, can affect the higher dimensional being.

Though in this reasoning means some hax abilities would require proof it can affect more powerful beings, as not sure if transmutation, changing one thing into another is a metaphysical thing, and in this case is directly affecting the physical being, changing the being from one thing into another, which in this case i guess needs proof since you're dealing with people who have durability or more specifically physical bodies above what you have shown you can transmute.

Not sure on that though, something like atomization might also fall under this too since you're directly affecting the physical being, even though you're just bypassing their durability to affect their atoms, but in the end all of this is physical, it's not like it's concept manipulation when you're affecting a metaphysical thing like your opponents concept, and not directly their physical body.

So metaphysical stuff like concept manipulation, fate manipulation etc works regardless of durability on a 3-D scale, but things which directly affect the targets durability only work on the level they have been shown to, and not above it i guess.

 

[Antvasima]

What do the rest of the staff think of Celestial Pegasus' analysis?

 

[Kaltias]

I agree that it probably depends from the hax. Something like subatomization could probably be countered by hilariously higher durability, given that at the end of the day, it's energy, but there are a lot of haxes that just outright ignore it (talking about 3D characters) like soul, mind, spatial, conceptual manipulation.

So in short its more making a distinction between those that negate durability completely and those that negate it only to an extent, think.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Agreed, stuff like transmutation, atomization etc is dependent on energy, energy is required to say change one thing into another, to shatter atoms etc, which can feasibly be overcomed by higher durability, thus requires proof that a lower tiered being can affect a higher tiered being.

While stuff like mind, soul, fate manipulation has nothing to do with energy, and doesn't care about durability/the physical body of it's target. In the case of transmutation, you need energy to convert one thing into another, and thus changing someone with say town level durability into a rock doesn't mean you can do the same to someone with planet level durability, would in this case be an NLF to say someone who only changed a person with town level durability, can do the same to one with planet level durability.

Think of it like this, just cause you can transmute a house into a pebble, doesn't mean you can do the same to an entire city. Why? Cause it requires a lot more energy to do the latter.

In the case of metaphysical stuff like mind, soul, fate manipulation, it completely ignores physical durability on a 3-D scale and has nothing to do with energy, cause it's metaphysical/abstract, it defies the laws of physics entirely, you can't even normally see souls or touch them, same thing with concepts, and fate.

 

[Amexim]

I will agree with the last point-- you put what I was going to allude to into words just now, though I was trying to work out the whole "energy requirement thing". However, my reasoning for agreeing with this goes towards my retort.

My retort to the argument that being 2-C is a rational stopping point for questioning for evidence goes as follows;

First off, having 2-C durability doesn't necessarily mean that you have anything beyond impossibly tough physical durability. I'm under the impression that all we do when we adopt the concept of universal+ durability (or multi-Universal, whatever 2-C we're talking about) is that this character is capable of resisting an impact or any generated energy with enough Force behind it that it could destroy a Space-Time continuum (if I am mistaken, correct me if I'm wrong). We operate under the hypothetical idea that there is some incredible amount of power/force/energy that is capable of destroying Space-time through raw power-- it would be through hax if done otherwise (right?). I liken this to The Flash and him breaking the "Time Barrier"-- the writer operates on a similar hypothetical assumption to ours, where there is a speed you can reach that "breaks time" or some shit. The point is, I figure that, since being 2-C in durability is supposed to mean that you can resist a powerful force that can bust a Space-Time of a Universe or multi-Universal tier stuff, and if this is the case, then when it comes to hax that produce change in physical objects (like transmutation) or, even more so, when hax comes in contact with another character's energy (like tier 9-A Soul Manipulation on a DBS level Chi Manipulator), the question becomes "Does the Hax user have enough energy to affect the Target?"

An example.

Soul hax from a 10-C vs a 2-C with Chi Manipulation and Universe+ levels of power in AP and some kind of Energy enhanced or "Spiritual Energy Durability" or something. Basically ask yourself if Soi Fon could instant kill Beerus-- who has some form of Spiritual Energy that is on a completely different tier from her that is capable of Universe busting shit-- when Soi Fon has to use her Spiritual Energies to not only activate and use the attack, but to make the attack produce change in someone as powerful as Beerus, who has far more raw power/energy than she does. Energy is also known as the ability to do work. Are you telling me that, if Beerus was 3-A or even just planet level, Soi Fon can use Suzumebachi to produce change in the Spiritual Energy of someone who has far more capability to "do work" than she does? It's like asking a Transmuter who can turn a house into a rock to do that with a planet, like Pegasus said. A better example is with Itachi vs Buu. Assuming Buu doesn't blitz or anything, since Genjutsu is done by Manipulating your opponent's Chakra/Ki/Spirit Energy into affecting their biology and therefore their senses, can you really say that Itachi can manipulate Buu's Solar System busting Energy???

If I'm wrong about what durability on a 2-C level is, then allow me to ask questions.

1. Are characters like Jiren and UI Goku 4th Dimensional? That doesn't really make a lot of sense if this is true, because physically, they should be 3-D beings. And it doesn't sound logical to be both Bound By Time as a 3-D being and be beyond/a part of time/able to move through time like space as a 4-D being. If being 2-C means also being able to exist beyond time and stuff, along with other higher dimensional perks, then shouldn't that just add to their list of power-- shouldn't that mean that all 2-C characters get powers they hadn't displayed or shown by nature of being able to survive Universe+ levels of force and that's it?

The point to 1 is that being 2-C in durability should be seen as nothing more than any other durability level, as all other higher dimensional aspects associated with being 2-C aren't inherently attached to being 2-C, by my understanding.

2. We have characters who are able to use abilities that have nothing to do with raw power and have their attack potency be extremely high. For example, Naruto and Sasuke are listed as Moon Level in AP, when the moon was hollow and they can only do stuff on Moon Level with Chibaku Tensei, blah blah blah, yet their AP is listed as Moon Level, as well as other characters having a similar issue where their AP scales to whatever they did without using an actual blast, yet we assume that they're able to channel that power from the ability they used into an energy attack.

The butchered point in #2 that I'm trying to make is essentially, energy is required to do things-- including produce change, affect, alter, destroy, whatever it might be. I think this concept should apply to all hax, physical, and metaphysical. Think of the metaphysical part being able to overcome or alter energy like wrestling, lifting, or altering something. It requires energy for a chemical reaction to take place (I would liken a lot of hax to chemical reactions, producing change in a rather indirect way). Same concept for hax. If you don't have the capability of producing change on the level capable of affecting a tier 3, then you probably shouldn't be able to hax them-- depending on the type of hax and their type of power. Haxing tier 2 Frisk's soul as a 8-C doesn't really seem thesible, even if you bypassed similar defenses to those Frisk put up. Frisk/Chara should be far too powerful to affect from that level-- like a baby bending steel.


Don't @ me about any changes to profiles, I just bring these facts up to say that, because energy is defined as "to do work", it would only make sense that a character requires a certain amount of energy to produce change in another character-- and if that character is able to resist and or put out the same kind of energy being used-- then their had shouldn't work because they don't have the energy necessary to affect these kinds of beings. Not all hax works independent of durability. I would argue most of it might not. Mind Manipulation requires biological stimulation in many verses, Soul and Spiritual Energy based hax might be combatable if the other user has Superior versions of either or.

Objections?

 

[Assaltwaffle]

This thread has some of the biggest walls of text I have seen in a while. Anyone able to give a TLDR?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Amexim is the one with the huge walls of text lol, it's a lot to go through.

@Amexim Having Low 2-C durability means you can survive attacks which can destroyed an entire space-time continuum. You're are under the wrong impression in thinking that a Low 2-C character is just capable of resisting an impact which can destroy a space-time continuum, as i already started talking about above, at this point characters are higher-dimensional/ or have higher dimensional powers, has nothing to do with energy per say. Our tiering system literally stops being energy based at this point, in fact before that from universe level, because after that we are moving away from 3-D power, you can be capable of nuking all the physical matter in an infinite universe, but you will only still be infinite 3-D.

A Low 2-C character whether by virtue of surviving Low 2-C attacks or being 4th dimensional, is no longer just a physical being anymore, a 4-D character isn't merely physical as the 4th dimension is time which is metaphysical, and a character with 4-D power has power which they can use to survive attacks which are 4-D.

As i already pointed out hax like transmutation shouldn't be assumed to be capable of affecting more powerful characters without proof as i used with the house example,just cause you can transmute a house into a pebble doesn't mean you can do the same to an entire city, as the latter requires a lot more energy.


Goku and Jiren have 4-D powers, but aren't themselves 4-D. The other stuff you posted is honestly too long to read, but i have stated the most important aspects of what i am saying.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Transmutation may not be the best example, as the example you used was more about surface area and volume rather than energy.

 

[DontTalkDT]

@Celestial Pegasus: I agree for the most part.

In regards to transmutation and subatomic attacks and stuff.

I think we can agree that it at minium would affect beings some amount more powerful than the user, simply because one focusses ones own AP on manipulating an extremely small part of the opponent.

Transmutation can also work completly different than just moving the particles, in which case it is a different story to begin with.

(The house and city analogy is kinda meh btw. as the same could be said for space manipulation: Just cause you can open a house sized space rift doesn't mean you can open a city sized one. Something like feathers opposed to brick would be better... but who cares about the quality of metaphors, if I am honest with myself)

That said in general I am not very fond of the line of reasoning stating that a characters usual durability infers durability for its atoms and stuff. Following that line of reasoning you would need super forces from super quarks to hold the matter together at high durability, meaning they wouldn't even be made from regular matter anymore. It makes sense on paper, but is in the end inventing new physiology for characters based on reasoning from their stats.

If an author didn't mention it, it probably didn't think that far.

The OBD actually had a debate about the same topic recently and I think the following reply there summarized it quite well:

Broadly speaking, transmutation and the like can be considered to function in an energetic manner, if you really boil it down. An argument of that line of reasoning isn't invalid. I wouldn't say that we should treat it like this, however, since.. this isn't really how the vast majority of fiction treats abilities like matter manipulation. After a certain level, you kind of have to step back and think about what actually happens in these stories we're evaluating, and whether or not we're missing the point and actually overanalyzing things.
	~ Regicide​

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Huh. Good job, OBD. Same to you, DT.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

@DontTalk Hmm, agreed, might have been over analyzing on the transmutation part.

Also agreed that atomization does work on more powerful opponents due to the character focusing their own ap, on an extremly small area, the question is where do we draw the line though? How far does focusing your ap on a small area get you is the question, certainly will work on your tier no doubt, but 1 tier above? 2, 3? Where does it stop exactly? Same thing with transmutation.

I think i have drawn a sufficient line with metaphysical stuff like soul, fate, concept manipulation, not sure about the line towards other hax though.

 

[Amexim]

I should have made a TLDR...

When it comes to characters that physically exist in a 3-D world, I believe it still applies (what I said) and I challenge that definition of even Low 2-C. You just said "Low 2-C durability means you can survive attacks which can destroyed an entire space-time continuum." Then said that it's either you have 4-D existence or 4-D powers, and obviously Goku and Jiren aren't 4-D existences. Characters like that have no rationale behind being included in your rule. Them being able to exist in a time-less void has nothing to do with me being able to hit them with my instant kill hax.

TLDR of what I said earlier, I think the AP of a character's hax or their AP in general should be used to decide whether or not had works on beings of higher tiers. It's based on the same idea as what you said about Transmutation before. I feel that if the characters have metaphysical powers of a similar type to the hax used "Chi Manipulation for Chi based hax," Magic for magic, soul for soul, fate for fate. Hax that effects the physical body (anything not metaphysical), should check for durability unless power is demonstrated clearly to be used in a way that blatantly and basically ignores tiers. </div>

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I have already gone over this, just gonna repost what i said:

"It requires proof imo that a lower dimensional being can affect a higher dimensional with hax, as in that case you can't say that the hax of a lower dimensional being will automatically work without proof, i mean the idea of higher dimensional beings are that they have an extra/more dimension/dimensions, a 1-D being only has what? Only length i think but even if it's infinite it will never be equivalent to a 2-D being which has both length and width, so a 4-D being who has more dimensions than that of a 3-D being, hence requires proof that such a 3-D being can affect a being who is 4-D, and utterly beyond the 3-D, and a 4-D isn't just a physical being i would say anymore, it's not just a matter of being 3-D being where the being in question has length, width, depth, but now the 4-D being has all those in addition to another one which isn't physical as the 4th dimension is theorized to be time, no matter large those dimensions of the 3-D being is, it will never be greater than the 4-D being, hence it requires proof that a 3-D being can affect a 4-D being with hax."

The space-time argument is just one aspect i was looking at it, i am more so focused here, on the dimensional aspect. A 3-D being will never be able to beat a 4-D being, a 4-D being isn't merely a physical being, it's metaphysical, hence proof that a lower level metaphysical ability can affect this metaphysical being is required to say the lower level character can affect the 4-D being.

A lower dimensional being affecting a higher dimensional being is utterly absurd and impossible in reality, but this is fiction so we have 3-D characters who aren't themselves higher dimensional, but can affect higher dimensional entities, thus they clearly have higher dimensional power.

Goku and jiren have 4-D powers, but aren't themselves 4-D, their abilities are superior to a 4-D being, that being infinite zamasu who literally fused with a timeline, hence they have 4-D power and thus defenses as well, as they can survive 4-D attacks.

What i am saying is goku and jiren have metaphysical attacks and defenses, but aren't themselves metaphysical. Think of it like this, a sheet of paper is 2-D, and you are a 3-D being can do whatever you want to to that piece of paper, as the paper is 2-D and can't resist you.

It's flat, it has no depth like you the 3-D being. Now imagine the piece of paper could fight back, this is what i am saying with 3-D characters having 4-D powers. Like the paper has no depth but can fight back against you the 3-D being, goku who is a 3-D being, and doesn't have time like a 4-D being, but can still fight the 4-D being.

 

[Antvasima]

@Celestial Pegasus and DontTalk

Do you have any suggestions for how to word an appropriate Versus Thread Rules regulation text?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

We seem to agree that on a 3-D scale, metaphysical hax abilities aren't NLF's cause the durability of the target is irrelevant in the first place as they aren't physically attacking them, but their souls, fates, concepts etc, which are abstract things that aren't even tangible.

Also when it comes to where is the line to be drawn with hax like atomization, thinking about it, gonna have to agree with what Donttalk said "That said in general I am not very fond of the line of reasoning stating that a characters usual durability infers durability for its atoms and stuff. Following that line of reasoning you would need super forces from super quarks to hold the matter together at high durability, meaning they wouldn't even be made from regular matter anymore. It makes sense on paper, but is in the end inventing new physiology for characters based on reasoning from their stats.

If an author didn't mention it, it probably didn't think that far."

So it seems to even be able to have durability for your atoms due to being durable you need to not even be composed of normal matter anymore, in which case would be a massive assumption to say characters who have never been stated to have resistance due to being durable or anything like that, are composed of irregular matter.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay then, but we still have to work out some concisely worded regulations from your conclusions.

 

[Amexim]

I understand your reasoning for 2-C, though I slightly disagree with your assessment. I don't think it should just stop at 2-C. I think it's up to the hax user to prove they can affect someone from a higher level. As I said before, you can think of using any hax (in a physical or metaphysical way) as requiring a certain amount of energy to produce the change/affect that their hax requires to work. We can find a middle ground between presupposing super forces and super quarks and understanding that it would take a great deal of power to hax anyone at 3-A, especially if you're tier 10.

I would like to say that I understand why you don't want to apply ideas never covered in the Verses themselves (like having 3-A characters not be made of regular matter any more). I would also like to point out the fact that we already add more to what the authors intended in the first place. Do you really think authors care about feats and outliers and stuff? We blatantly disregard intentions of authors and other things similar and take on portrayals of characters as they demonstrate what they can do. I mean, bugs bunny with large planet level striking and durability? Who (of the original authors) wrote that to be canon? No one. But he's still planet level by our standards.

I think we should legitimately consider AP/Energy or Skill requirements for hax. Because the ongoing standard means that anyone can hax anyone without that person having specific hax resistance. Which is ridiculous. I agree with the 2-C idea, but I'm pushing for more than that, at least for when it comes to hax that affects characters who have powers of the type that they're being hit by. Like, Edward Elrich's alchemy vs A sleeping Beerus. The guy who's body is tough enough to survive planetary explosions. If his durability would mean his atoms work differently than real matter, then so be it-- that doesn't mean we have to state the reason or go in depth into the science, because then we'd have to give FtL characters immense durability by being able to resist the force of stuff. We can just stop at "Prove that this hax ability is that potent" instead of the current system of, "prove they can resist this potent hax".

 

[Dark649]

Amexim, we cannot do it because it would take a lot of energy for the staff to revise all the profiles because of something that would end up abusing NLF.

 

[Antvasima]

This is also a staff only discussion. Ryukama gave you permission to make a single post, not to drown the thread in walls of text and prevent it from reaching a conclusion.

I would appreciate if you stop responding, and let us work this out by ourselves.

 

[Golden_Void]

I feel like halfway through this entire thread stopped making any sense lol.

I think a decent summary would be characters in DB who resist a hax, should have characters even stronger than them or on their level with the same resistances. (Why wouldn't Grand Priest or Goku be able to resist the absolute zero Vegeta busted, why shouldn't Vegito have resistance to poison since Goku has shown it via a barrier, etc).

And extremely physically strong people should only have resistance to physical abilities, but can still be susceptible to mind hax, soul hax, biological manipulation, etc., though the case is different for tiers 2+. It would also depend on the hax though.

 

[Dark649]

Goku, Vegeta and Gohan developed a Resistance to Poison for Barrier in order to counter Lavender poison, so Vegito does not get the ability since it would apply only if they currently fuse.

 

[Golden_Void]

Vegito had a barrier which prevented Majin Buu from absorbing him inside his body. There's no difference. This is just another application of the same ability.

 

[Dark649]

No, it's not. All forcefields in fiction does not have said resistance and Gohan was stronger than Vegito, but he did not knew said forcefield resistance since he would have used it against Lavender, instead he developed it for the Top since he suffered from that poison before, which makes far sense.

 

[Golden_Void]

We're not talking about all fiction, just the same series. Resistance to getting absorbed by Buu via ki shield after allowing himself to be transmuted > resistance to poison. Gohan being stronger yet not having the technique is irrelevant. It's the same ability.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not have the impression that this thread will ever lead anywhere if it is derailed from the main topic.

 

[Golden_Void]

We're supposed to make a regulation out of this right?

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, ideally.

 

[Golden_Void]

We forgot about this.

So first and foremost before we move further with the revisions, have we reached a conclusion that some DB hax resistances that are power-based, should indeed be scaleable?

 

[Dark649]

It's a similar thing to what is turning out on the vice shout thread.