Regarding Resistance Negation

[Theglassman12]

Alright, this has been bugging me for some time. So the resistance negation page needs a bit of a rework. The page itself mentions how RN can essentially bypass natural resistances which is true, however what I believe it should have, is the fact that the specific types of resistances you negate needs to be specified.

For example, if I have an onscreen feat of being able to deal damage to a being naturally immune to fire with fire, of course that would count as resistance negation. However if that’s all there is too the RN and there’s no mentions, no lore or any additional abilities to indicate the Resistance negation can lead to negging other types of resistance that has no onscreen showings like Mind or Soul resistance, this will lead to NLF territory. It also doesn’t really help when a decent chunk of pages on the site just have resistance negation listed but don’t elaborate on what resistances exactly it negates.

My proposition is that we should add in the page that the specific types of RN that’s proven/shown needs to be mentioned otherwise it will lead to a big NLF to assume someone can negate all resistances. This also applies to every page that has resistance negation as they need to specify what it is they negate to begin with.

Agree: 16 (DragonEmperor23, Overlord775, Mister6ame6, Antoniofer, Rabbit2002, AKM sama, Qawsedf234, Ogbunabali, Antvasima, Damage3245, LordGriffon1000, Elizhaa, DarkDragonMedeus, Bobsican, The Axiom of Virgo, Delta333)

Disagree:

Neutral:

 

[DragonEmperor23]

That makes sense.

 

[Overlord775]

Seems good, though how exactly would you go about separe the types ? Based on what criteria ?

 

[Theglassman12]

I’m not exactly separating the RN by types. I’m proposing that the specific resistances that can be negated needs to be specified. Like if you have only shown to negate elemental resistances and that’s it, and nothing else suggests you could negate other resistances, you specify what abilities you negated the resistance for with scans to back it up (obviously).

Here’s a basic example: Resistance Negation (Is shown to harm beings who are naturally immune to the 4 elements with said elements)

 

[Antoniofer]

I pressume we already do that, not like we simply write Resistance Negation and do not elaborate about the subject. If not, welp, yes, we do need to elaborate what resistance it does negate.

 

[Theglassman12]

There’s numerous pages that just has resistance negation and that’s it, not only that but we don’t specify that needs to be said in the RN page itself, which it should be given it’s very important to explain how it can lead to NLF territory like how Invulnerability can be.

 

[Mister6ame6]

Agree with this.

 

[Antvasima]

This thread should probably be in our staff forum. Is it fine if I move it?

 

[Tago238]

I mean this argument applies to power nullification just as much.

 

[Rabbit2002]

Agree with this

 

[AKM sama]

I already agree with it.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. So should we move this thread to our staff forum then?

 

[Overlord775]

Ant, you shouldn't ask the if it should be, you should say the why you think it should be moved

 

[Antvasima]

Well, it seems to be a thread about a policy change, which should go to our staff forum, and it will receive more staff attention that way as well.

 

[Theglassman12]

You can just tag the staff members here to comment. We can still let normal users comment as long as it doesn’t get out of hand.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

@SomebodyData @Dragonmasterxyz @Celestial_Pegasus @Soldier_Blue @Saikou_The_Lewd_King @DarkDragonMedeus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000

What do you all think about this?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Yeah it needs to be added. Just because you can negate intangibility doesn't mean you can suddenly harm Superman or something like that. The power should clarify what it does or what it applies to. Unless its some universal think like 616 Leech or Dispel Bounds.

 

[Ogbunabali]

I agree with this.

 

[Antvasima]

For the record, I am also inclined to agree with this.

 

[Damage3245]

Sure, makes sense to me.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I agree with this, though that should have been common sense to add when giving a character said ability.

 

[Elizhaa]

The proposal seems fine.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree to this.

 

[Bobsican]

I also agree with this.

 

[The_Axiom_of_Virgo]

I wholeheartedly agree, tbh I'm surprised the RN page was like that since a similar P&A Power-null already had specific types and applications.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems like this revision has been accepted then.

 

[Delta333]

A bit late but yeah this idea totally makes sense

 

[Theglassman12]

@Antvasima Can the RN page be opened so I can add the additional info?

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. Tell us here when you are done.

 

[Theglassman12]

Does this look good or should there be any changes?

 

[Overlord775]

for first thing, i think there should be a "For exemple" before then, you know, exemple

furthermore, the "ALL" shouldn't be capitilized as i feel that's not proper form

 

[Theglassman12]

How about now?

 

[Overlord775]

gud

 

[Theglassman12]

Anything else or is that it?

 

[Antvasima]

ElixirBlue made some apparent improvements to the flow of the page:

Resistance Negation

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Overlord775]

looks smoother

 

[Theglassman12]

Yeah it looks good to me

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Is there anything left to do here, or should we close this thread?

 

[Theglassman12]

Nothing else I can think of, that’s the main thing I wanted to change in the page.

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

so in anutshell, if you can negate resistance to poison manipulation, you can't negate resistance to time manipulation, correct?