• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

"Realms with starry skies" feats

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is already in the staff forum. Regular members started responding anyway.
 
Creating starry sky dimensions via magic is indeed 4-A via magic. However, it is not a default that magic powers scale to physical stats unless said character or verse in question treats physical skills as very much a 1 to 1 power source scaling or even characters have durability feats from the other characters magic attacks and also trade physical blows accordingly.

And furthermore, I already went into detail the difference between pocket reality creation, illusion creation, or simply teleportation.
 
I kind of also disagree with magic scaling from this tbh, though I can't really formulate an argument about it past "I just don't think the authors intended this man"
 
Characters like Sephiroth or Doctor Strange I mean; former it does scale to physical stats since there's other details to back it up. For Strange, his creation feats do scale to his fireballs, lightning bolts, and forcefield, just not his physical stats.
 
What I think should be reiterated again is that the kind of PR feats (and creation feats in general) that should definitely be analyzed extensively are ones that are done via a technique or ability.

Because generally speaking, as common as these feats are, ones done with an ability or technique will be the most debatable on whether or not it scales to AP.
 
Matthew_Schroeder said:
1. It is made clear that what was created was an actual dimension with real space-time and not just some illusion, or distorted realm, or immersion effect

2. There's reason for you to believe the "shining dots in the sky" are actual stars.

3. There's reason to believe why this would scale to the character's offensive power.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree with this list, and it would a good basis to start working on more solid standards regarding this topic.
 
Matthew_Schroeder said:
I am fine with Starry Sky feats as long as:

1. It is made clear that what was created was an actual dimension with real space-time and not just some illusion, or distorted realm, or immersion effect

2. There's reason for you to believe the "shining dots in the sky" are actual stars.

3. There's reason to believe why this would scale to the character's offensive power.
Click to expand...
I’m gonna have a field day with Mewtwo’s page
 
Armorchompy said:
I kind of also disagree with magic scaling from this tbh, though I can't really formulate an argument about it past "I just don't think the authors intended this man"
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure 99% of the time authors aren't really intending the results that come out of what they put out. Butch Hartman is a pretty good example of this, but it shouldn't invalidate it off that alone or else you'd be affecting more than just starry sky feats here. I think DDM's interpretation is pretty spot-on how this should be.
 
Last edited:
Yeah fair enough, I didn't mean it to get out of the wiki or anything, just stating personal dislike of it.
 
Last edited:
As I mentioned previously, regular members should not respond here any more, unless they get permission for specific posts, and we will likely have to start deleting their posts to get anything done. My apologies,
 
I'm fine with not talking here anymore, this is my last post, but I believe deleting non-staff's posts here will delete a huge part of the arguments that have been made.
 
We don't really need to delete the posts that were genuinely supportive or contributive, but I agree future comments should be kept as staff (Current, Retired, or Honorary) and users who were simply given permission to speak.
 
Matthew_Schroeder said:
I am fine with Starry Sky feats as long as:

1. It is made clear that what was created was an actual dimension with real space-time and not just some illusion, or distorted realm, or immersion effect

2. There's reason for you to believe the "shining dots in the sky" are actual stars.

3. There's reason to believe why this would scale to the character's offensive power.

If we applied this level to scrutiny to fictions in general, 90% of Starry Sky feats would be bunk, but the concept wouldn't be overrun entirely.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Not every starry visual effect should automatically be considered as real stars just because "if it looks like a duck it must be a duck". A blatant example of this would be Toppo using the destruction energy that gave the world of void a clear starry sky effect, but it was basically just a void. Any such feat should be scrutinized according to the above points.
 
AKM makes sense to me as well.

We would need a plan for how we should apply the new standards though.

Should we create a new page called "Starry Skies and Pocket Reality Creation Feats" (or something similar) and move the current relevant information from the pocket realities powers and abilities page to there, combined with writing new rules for starry skies?
 
Starry skies can be a visual effect, but usually assuming them to be stars is the more sensible option. If the visuals are really weird, cartoonish, trippy etc they may not but even that can be artstyle.

I do see the point of changing the background to be starry not being a legitimate 4-A feat tho
 
A created alternate world/dimension that has visual showings of what you expect from a sky; this includes sun, moon, stars, nebulae, a galaxy in some more extreme cases, ect. It's logical treat it as such unless explicitly stated to be illusory or if the specific size in question argues against this. A void obviously shouldn't have any real stars inside it yes.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
A created alternate world/dimension that has visual showings of what you expect from a sky; this includes sun, moon, stars, nebulae, a galaxy in some more extreme cases, ect. It's logical treat it as such unless explicitly stated to be illusory or if the specific size in question argues against this. A void obviously shouldn't have any real stars inside it yes.
Click to expand...
So, do you agree with Matthew's points in conjunction with this?
 
Pretty much yes, but as said prior; it is a really bad time to be making site wide revisions. Summer 2021 is pretty much the next best time to be attempting anything like that.
 
Personally I barely ever see when "magicked a pocket dimension into existence" is actually treated like a feat that matters for a character's physical strength or even normal magic/whatever-fictional-energy-equivalent attacks in a work of fiction, and most of the time "good reason for scaling" is "they use energy for this, they use energy for that, scales, right?"

Sure, conservation of energy would lead you to believe that the character has this "energy pool" that they can "channel" into accomplishing it and thus channel into other things, but this is contrived battleboarding logic that basically zero successful authors care about, with a very few select exceptions. I have the same opinion for storm feats and generally scaling non-destructive attack energy calculations to stuff like punching hard.

I'd be against any use of small-scale (read: below creating a planet) pocket realities as a feat of power purely due to fictional trends (for example, Puella Magi Verse for a variety of reasons including the methods used to "calc" those pocket realities).
 
Well like I've said before, I don't see how arbitrarily deciding 5-B sized pocket realities are any more accurate than 7-B is something we should go on.

It's also a bit out of topic on this thread, I think.
 
Last edited:
We make policy based on trends in fiction all the time. I also can't take the "arbitrarily decision" argument too seriously when the last time pocket realities were seriously discussed we practically made up our own physics to describe and calculate them for no reason other than it having the feats line up with our tiering system.

I don't see the issue discussing how we treat pocket realities as a whole in a thread about creating pocket realities. Much more scrutiny should be used for our 4-A pocket reality feats too, however small-scale pocket realities are both infrequently used in fiction and also frequently don't describe the level of physical and magical power we otherwise see the characters at.
 
I don't understand this point- you're saying that because our previous (removed) standards were arbitrary it's okay to implement your arbitrary standards now?

That's clearly off-topic though. The thread's specifically about starry skies so it's only indirectly relating to a portion of 4-A PR feats, and not much else.
 
Last edited:
First, we didn't really "remove" the arbitrary standards as much as we replaced just-plain-stupid standards with arbitrary standards. Second, nah, we have a precedence to apply standards based on trends in fiction so applying a standard based on this has a precedence to be applied. I don't really care if you think it's arbitrary.

I fail to see how the premise being a specific flavor of pocket reality feats means discussion about pocket realities as a whole, which would apply to this, is off-topic. Seems kind of silly to me to restrict discussion like that.
 
You mean just being the 'just based on size' standards we have now? Admittedly, that is kinda stupid, since it makes AP guesswork. Though if you're going to provide a solution, it should at least be better and not arbitrary. When we base it on trends, we usually make it a guideline or case-by-case rather than a standard. That said, there has been precedence to ignore it as well, like dimensional scaling for example.

It would be like bringing up why we should upgrade Jiren in the Roshi thread, for comparison. Sure they're both Dragon Ball, but it's off-topic.
 
You're telling me the guideline is "case-by-case" when our default assumption is "Feats that involve the creation and manipulation of pocket realities are recurrently used to define a character's capacity to harm an opponent. In such cases, they are treated similarly to celestial body/creation feats.". We're not asking our users to prove why a pocket reality feat should scale to destructive capacity but rather asking our users to "call it a destructive feat first, ask questions later". This is especially exemplified by the line going "Outliers, inconsistencies, plot-induced stupidity, and similar should be considered as well" as if the only reason we can't take such a feat at face-value is the narrative itself breaking or the character not performing the feat at all, and not just our own shoddy logic.

Not a really great analogy - I'd liken it to me talking about Dragon Ball as a whole, not a specific character, and if mechanics or commonly accepted assumptions about Dragon Ball were relevant to discuss for Roshi (like Ki Control), it'd be silly to ban that discussion.
 
@Dargoo_Faust first of all, saying we "Make up our own physics" is rather rude, obnoxious, narrow-minded, and condescending. But I'll discuss it.

We aren't the ones who made that; StarDestroyer.net or OBD have been doing those methods long before we did, and there's even a Wikipedia article for Gravitational binding energy. The body of space actually is the kinetic energy of quantum particles, it's similar to how thermal energy is just a fancy word for kinetic energy of atoms and molecules producing heat, or kinetic energy of protons being positively charged energy meant to raise thermal energy or kinetic energy of electrons being the negatively charged energy that often lowers energy. Agnaa already brought up in detail that Space-time is energy too, just an unknown amount of it.

Anyway, DontTalkDT already brought up in detail magic and creation are indeed feats of power, that much can't be ignored. Also, DC Vs AP is one of the basic fundamentals of Vs Debating Battle boarding, otherwise pretty much every verse in fiction that isn't Dragon Ball would peak at Tier 9. Also, Ki Control technically follows the laws of thermal dynamics if you look into the article that all energy in the universe is still energy; it's just not all energy flows the same way. But various fundamental powers such as Ki Control or Magic, or what not are literally just in general the ability to turn thermal energy into Tons of TNT equivalent. Even IRL, some modern inventions are finding ways to do things similar. The only time creation doesn't scale to any other power is if it's done via a one track item or power and said character has no other powers period. But characters with multiple powers that are all subpowers of a much more universal power, it's common sense that they use that same amount of more general powers to do their feats. Especially if their pocket reality creation feats are casual. If a character is X Tier via swinging a giant sword, the same character can logically still punch really hard without said sword unless said sword is implied to be something that amps its user. High AP with low destruction is called precision.

Anyway, I can agree the rules need to be updated to say case by case and that there should generally be proof that it scales to other stats or abilities such as similar power sources and what not. Several staff members think you tend to be too blunt on most of these threads.
 
You misread my comment: I talked about the PRC standards in the previous sentence, the sentence where I mention case-by-case was for when we do trend-based rules.

That's still off-topic. Not to mention, unlike ki-control discussing why PRC lower than 5-B are invalid completely excludes 4-A feats- it literally has nothing to do with the starry skies.
 
@SomebodyData actually, the way we treat pocket realities smaller than planet level is we don't really calc them but just give a lowballed guestimate. For example, a City sized pocket reality is just baseline City level or a mountain sized pocket reality is mountain level in lack of better options. It's considered iffy to compare space-creation to nuke map calculations, but GBE is very much energy under the same principle that space-time is energy; it's the KE of quantum particles in motion being used to hold a planet together that defines GBE.
 
@DarkDragonMedeus

You're telling me this, but then proceed to give me a multi-paragraph explanation on how exactly we use made-up physics.

You also forgot to explain how using any of these equations to describe magicking a pocket reality into existence makes any sense. If I used enthalpy values to describe some dude breaking a rock I wouldn't be at the peak of scientific accuracy because I happened to use an equation that exists and describes things IRL.

Also you interestingly enough left out how Agnaa also brought up that we literally can't quantify the energy needed to create space, even if Space-Time energy is a thing, something we conveniently ignored when we decided to "assume equivalent power to an explosion that would destroy the most distant celestial bodies within the pocket reality".

> so, DC Vs AP is one of the basic fundamentals of Vs Debating Battle boarding, otherwise pretty much every verse in fiction that isn't Dragon Ball would peak at Tier 9.

Nah, they'd still be pretty strong, we'd just stop pretending a bunch of generic magic users what conjured storm/pocket reality/object can shoot fireballs with equivalence force to a nuclear bomb.

> The only time creation doesn't scale to any other power is if it's done via a one track item or power and said character has no other powers period. But characters with multiple powers that are all subpowers of a much more universal power, it's common sense that they use that same amount of more general powers to do their feats.

Glad to know the primary defense and justification for an entire branch of feats we use is "it's common sense". I could easily just make the opposite claim while not really elaborating what I'm saying, "it's common sense that punching and making pocket dimensions have nothing to do with one another even if it's done via magic".

And you're speaking as if this assumption has merit in the fiction itself when far more often than not I see these feats be literally the only indicator of the characters being at that level of power, with zero relevant strength, heat, etc. feats that come within orders of magnitude of creating a storm or pocket reality. Almost as if the authors writing are considering these two different things as different.

> there should generally be proof that it scales to other stats or abilities such as similar power sources and what not.

I think proof should be more extensive than "feat A performed by character A uses magic, feat B performed by character A uses magic, feat A = feat B", historically this is what most verses default to when we go by a case-by-case and don't require more scrutiny.

> Several staff members think you tend to be too blunt on most of these threads.

I'm not really trying to convince the staff members that will disagree with me by default on these matters anyways, and well, if I'm specifically asked by Ant to show up and give an opinion on these matters I'll do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GarrixianXD
  • Locked
Setting Standard Sizes for Pocket Dimensions
Replies
5
Views
931
Antvasima
Antvasima
SunDaGamer
  • Locked
Minor change on the Creation Feats page
Replies
12
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Dark_Soul20189
  • Locked
The problem with Plot Manipulation.
2 3
Replies
99
Views
10K
Duedate8898
Duedate8898
LordGriffin1000
  • Locked
Human Statistics Scaling Standards in Fiction (Staff Only)
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Bastolan27
  • Locked
Coral Peacock's Dream of the Endless Clover
Replies
15
Views
2K
Bastolan27
Bastolan27
Back
Top