Fictional combat skill and VSB; Giving Skill a concrete form

[First_Witch]

After nearly 2 years of drafting, discussing and slacking, I think its finally time to tackle VSB's neglectful treatment of combat skill. This thread aims to, as the title implies, give combat skill a concrete form with which users can work with to index skill in a meaningful manner.

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:First_Witch/Fictional_Combat_Skill;_A_comprehensive_blog

What this thread tries to accomplish:

• Get the blog accepted as a official resource.
• Adopt the blog as a standard for the recently-ish more or less accepted combat skill section on profiles.

What this thread doesn't try to accomplish:

• Adopt the intelligence ratings for skill
• Have people write the section like a check list rather than a proper text, ala:

Combat Skill:

Analytical Prediction: blablabla
Information Analysis: blablabla

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @GrathOfLux @Dereck03 @Planck69 @LephyrTheRevanchist

What do you think about this, and how does it relate to our other (long) ongoing staff forum discussion thread about combat skills?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I think First_Witch needs to spellcheck their stuff more

My overall thoughts are the same as the last time I was asked about Combat Skill. I think it's a frivolous section with hazy interpretations that is difficult to quantify even by the metrics we have currently and I don't like its presence on profiles. Given that it has been accepted nevertheless, I think a blog explaining it is, conceptually, good, but this may be overlong and grandiose in its presentation. It's a lot of words to explain the concept of Combat Skill which I think most users understand implicitly. If we make a system to try and categorize skill, we ought to aim for simplicity, such that any given user may try to grasp it.

As for the specific contents... aside from the fat on it, I think the ideas are basically good. It relates abilities to skill and notes how each one might be interpreted as evidence of Combat Skill. I don't have any ideas in mind on how to approach the idea better, at least, just that it should be shorter- each ability probably doesn't need a full paragraph to explain, and it probably doesn't need so much discussion about pillars and firmaments and heavens and so on. If it can't be condensed per others' judgement then it'll do but it really is super long to discuss what seems to me to be a simple idea.

 

[First_Witch]

I think First_Witch needs to spellcheck their stuff more

My overall thoughts are the same as the last time I was asked about Combat Skill. I think it's a frivolous section with hazy interpretations that is difficult to quantify even by the metrics we have currently and I don't like its presence on profiles. Given that it has been accepted nevertheless, I think a blog explaining it is, conceptually, good, but this may be overlong and grandiose in its presentation. It's a lot of words to explain the concept of Combat Skill which I think most users understand implicitly. If we make a system to try and categorize skill, we ought to aim for simplicity, such that any given user may try to grasp it.

As for the specific contents... aside from the fat on it, I think the ideas are basically good. It relates abilities to skill and notes how each one might be interpreted as evidence of Combat Skill. I don't have any ideas in mind on how to approach the idea better, at least, just that it should be shorter- each ability probably doesn't need a full paragraph to explain, and it probably doesn't need so much discussion about pillars and firmaments and heavens and so on. If it can't be condensed per others' judgement then it'll do but it really is super long to discuss what seems to me to be a simple idea.

Uuuuuuh.... uuuuuuh... Hater?

I don't mind toning the presentation down (The Musashi quotes stay though).

The reason why this is so big is considering how contentious the topic is, I really want this to be thorough and well explained. The last thing I want is people claiming its too nebulous or something like that.

I also felt the categories could be explained even more thorough, but if its too much right now then fine

 

[First_Witch]

It's a lot of words to explain the concept of Combat Skill which I think most users understand implicitly.

They don't. You would weep if you read the day to day skill argumentation in your average VSthread

 

[Antvasima]

I think First_Witch needs to spellcheck their stuff more

My overall thoughts are the same as the last time I was asked about Combat Skill. I think it's a frivolous section with hazy interpretations that is difficult to quantify even by the metrics we have currently and I don't like its presence on profiles. Given that it has been accepted nevertheless, I think a blog explaining it is, conceptually, good, but this may be overlong and grandiose in its presentation. It's a lot of words to explain the concept of Combat Skill which I think most users understand implicitly. If we make a system to try and categorize skill, we ought to aim for simplicity, such that any given user may try to grasp it.

As for the specific contents... aside from the fat on it, I think the ideas are basically good. It relates abilities to skill and notes how each one might be interpreted as evidence of Combat Skill. I don't have any ideas in mind on how to approach the idea better, at least, just that it should be shorter- each ability probably doesn't need a full paragraph to explain, and it probably doesn't need so much discussion about pillars and firmaments and heavens and so on. If it can't be condensed per others' judgement then it'll do but it really is super long to discuss what seems to me to be a simple idea.

Thank you for your input, but I thought that we had decided to use DontTalk's suggestion to disallow using specific intelligence ratings for combat skill and instead simply use/keep the explanation texts for them?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Blog seems good in theory, but I remember DaReaperman's blog explaining things.

 

[First_Witch]

Thank you for your input, but I thought that we had decided to use DontTalk's suggestion to disallow using specific intelligence ratings for combat skill and instead simply use/keep the explanation texts for them?

Categorization in the sense that skill can manifest itself in many different forms, I have listed them in the blog. As you can see from the OP, i do not desire creating some arbitrary levels of skill based on our current intelligence ratings.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Thank you for your input, but I thought that we had decided to use DontTalk's suggestion to disallow using specific intelligence ratings for combat skill and instead simply use/keep the explanation texts for them?

I don't see any intelligence relation in the blog. Admittedly I may have been kicked in the head or something at some point and lost all memory of reading it.

 

[First_Witch]

I don't see any intelligence relation in the blog. Admittedly I may have been kicked in the head or something at some point and lost all memory of reading it.

Peak isn't so easily forgotten

 

[DontTalkDT]

Going to have a closer look at a later date, but if the blog is supposed to become an official wiki page my first suggestion would be to drop the flowery language and stuff from it.

 

[Antvasima]

Categorization in the sense that skill can manifest itself in many different forms, I have listed them in the blog. As you can see from the OP, i do not desire creating some arbitrary levels of skill based on our current intelligence ratings.

Okay. Never mind then.

 

[Antvasima]

Going to have a closer look at a later date, but if the blog is supposed to become an official wiki page my first suggestion would be to drop the flowery language and stuff from it.

Thank you for helping out. That seems reasonable.

 

[First_Witch]

Huh, I was expecting more pushback considering how most skill threads go.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

To be clear, I think skill as a concept is a dogshit thing to integrate into our profiles. But like. We're already here. So.

 

[KLOL506]

Isn't there a similar-ish thread going on for this?

 

[DaReaperMan]

Blog seems good in theory, but I remember DaReaperman's blog explaining things.

What blog? I didn't make one. Main thing my thread changed was disallowing the usage of intelligence ratings on combat skill, which has all but unanimous Staff support.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

What blog? I didn't make one. Main thing my thread changed was disallowing the usage of intelligence ratings on combat skill, which has all but unanimous Staff support.

Oh, I remembered some kind of draft or proposal though.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Oh, I remembered some kind of draft or proposal though.

There was one from me. It was flatly rejected, so I made a sandbox including what such a skill section under what was accepted would look like.

 

[First_Witch]

Bump

 

[DMUA]

I think First_Witch needs to spellcheck their stuff more

Real

 

[Flashlight237]

I think it would make more sense to rename the Intelligence section of profiles to "Intelligence and Skill", that way we wouldn't have to go through so many hoops.

 

[First_Witch]

Real

 

[DMUA]

I think it would make more sense to rename the Intelligence section of profiles to "Intelligence and Skill", that way we wouldn't have to go through so many hoops.

If we're going to do something like that I don't know why you'd change the name to something so clunky, as opposed to properly codifying skill as proposed on the thread while keeping it a subset of intelligence (maybe it gets it's own section on our intelligence page, too?)

 

[Flashlight237]

If we're going to do something like that I don't know why you'd change the name to something so clunky, as opposed to properly codifying skill as proposed on the thread while keeping it a subset of intelligence (maybe it gets it's own section on our intelligence page, too?)

And "Powers and Abilities" is a clunky name?

 

[DMUA]

Flows a little better and more importantly you don't have to edit 30,000 pages for that to be common

 

[First_Witch]

For what its worth, I would support a proper section on profiles but would not push for it. I aknowledge the negative stigma of skill and believe the best way to change the abyssmal treatment of it here on this wiki is by tackling the topic one step at a time.

 

[DMUA]

Sure enough I am fine with the standards on treatment, I just think implementation should be kept more to the intelligence section/page to not significantly increase the workload

And you should, in fact, spell check the blog

 

[First_Witch]

Me not speak english, me sorry. But seriously, I don't see them, so, if possible, send me a list and I will fix them

 

[DMUA]

Top to bottom, I'm not including capitalization errors but there are a lot of those

• And every single human has to make do with those characteristics under the oppressive laws of physic
• The earth: our fondation
• Feats that therefor ignore these laws are not necessarily invalid like they are under the laws of physics
• the laws of physics only exist to such an extend as the author considered it, bar some core assumption that are safe to make, like gravity existing
• Such feats happen, and they happen more often than not and worse of all, they happen to extends that differs from work to work
• So how does this look practise?
• With a swift motion, he cuts the bolder, a impossible feat made possible by his blade alignment
• Some may be borne differently, some may become differently over the course of their life, but we are all the same at our core
• Acrobatics, , Stealth,
• The idea behind the categories is as follow; Assume a duel in which both combatants are fully equal in every aspect imaginable, and they posses no abilities
• If one grants one of the characters a ability from the categories above, how much of an impact might that have.
• Save to say, fighting a worthy opponent is hard as is already
• Precision is unique in that its potency trump nearly other category the greater the distance between both combatants becomes
• Said depth only really exist for ranged combat though, in which Y is a factor.
• I call those 4 the fallacy's of Skill
• Experience of time spend on on something
• We don't know if he could growth through every loop in the first place, and we cant argue that he could utilize said potential growth because nothing in that series gives us reasons to believe that he would grow through each loop
• while B is a massive scaled war series with tons of combat and war scenes
• but having potential for Skill feats does not mean that those are being utilized
• It is ultimately the same argument, but it might be easier to understand why it's fallacious Skill argument
• Similary, martial artists in one series could break down their opponents entire existence (I was going after the lack of apostrophe in opponent's here, I didn't even realize Similarly was misspelled)
• Despite their widespread, skill scaling chains are simple to argue against.
• So you're just stacking variables upon variables in order to proof that your character is > your oppositions character

 

[DontTalkDT]

Ok, so blog improvement suggestions time (part 1).

I assume to adopt this blog as an official resource means to make it a wiki page, as user-blogs usually aren't official otherwise (outside of calculations and verse-specific stuff).

Various stuff​

• As said, flowery language should be removed. "Between heaven and earth", "the firmament", "the first pillar" etc. All of that stuff should be removed for a wiki page and replaced with more straight-forward descriptions of what the section is about.
• Remove the closing statement. If this is to become an article, then it's not an argumentation, and as such has no such thing as a closing statement.
• Remove any mention of "I". There is no singular writer of a wiki article. If a pronoun is needed it would be "we", as in "we, the wiki". Where possible it's ideal to avoid writer pronouns altogether.
• Obviously remove the disclaimer.
• Remove the whole introduction in its current state. It is subjective in its entirety and describe an as-is state that should hopefully change with the establishment of the page (if we are optimistic). Make the "What is Skill?" Section the "Introduction" instead.
• Remove the quote in the what is skill section. Quotes can have their place as examples, but this is just flavor text i.e. bloat.

The "What is Skill"-section​

Stylistically I wouldn't start a section with "But". That's perhaps besides the point, though. I suspect your definition is actually from Oxford Languages, not Google. However, my suggestion would be to structure this different to begin with.
We are in the position to define our own terms, so instead of drawing from an external source and then musing about it, I would just start with our definition of combat skill, in the sense that our wiki would use it, in this section. The definition as a dictionary gives it is just not really important to us, so we might as well get straight to the point.

You suggest the definition:

The ability to win in a battle without inherent advantages, other than the advantage of skill itself.

This definition has two problems. First, it's not clear what skill means here. It's not skill in terms of the Google definition, if you think about it.
Second, it's also not clear what an inherent advantage is.
I would instead propose the following definition, which could be the beginning of this section (that's how most pages of this type are started):

Combat skill is the attribute of a character that descibes how well they employ their powers and stats in combat. It serves as an umbrella term for many factors, including, but not limited to, how well a character can fight unarmed, how well they can employ weaponry and how well they can employ their supernatural abilities. As combat skill is a measure of how well a character uses their abilities and statistics in combat, the abilities and statistics themself are not taken into account as part of combat skill. It can, as such, be viewed as the gathering of all factors which influence how well two characters with the same statistics and abilities would do in combat.

---

Aaaaaand, what that I'm already out of time for today. Rest of the blog later.

 

[First_Witch]

Ok, so blog improvement suggestions time (part 1).

I assume to adopt this blog as an official resource means to make it a wiki page, as user-blogs usually aren't official otherwise (outside of calculations and verse-specific stuff).

Various stuff​

• As said, flowery language should be removed. "Between heaven and earth", "the firmament", "the first pillar" etc. All of that stuff should be removed for a wiki page and replaced with more straight-forward descriptions of what the section is about.
• Remove the closing statement. If this is to become an article, then it's not an argumentation, and as such has no such thing as a closing statement.
• Remove any mention of "I". There is no singular writer of a wiki article. If a pronoun is needed it would be "we", as in "we, the wiki". Where possible it's ideal to avoid writer pronouns altogether.
• Obviously remove the disclaimer.
• Remove the whole introduction in its current state. It is subjective in its entirety and describe an as-is state that should hopefully change with the establishment of the page (if we are optimistic). Make the "What is Skill?" Section the "Introduction" instead.
• Remove the quote in the what is skill section. Quotes can have their place as examples, but this is just flavor text i.e. bloat.

The "What is Skill"-section​

Stylistically I wouldn't start a section with "But". That's perhaps besides the point, though. I suspect your definition is actually from Oxford Languages, not Google. However, my suggestion would be to structure this different to begin with.
We are in the position to define our own terms, so instead of drawing from an external source and then musing about it, I would just start with our definition of combat skill, in the sense that our wiki would use it, in this section. The definition as a dictionary gives it is just not really important to us, so we might as well get straight to the point.

You suggest the definition:

This definition has two problems. First, it's not clear what skill means here. It's not skill in terms of the Google definition, if you think about it.
Second, it's also not clear what an inherent advantage is.
I would instead propose the following definition, which could be the beginning of this section (that's how most pages of this type are started):

---

Aaaaaand, what that I'm already out of time for today. Rest of the blog later.

As valuable as this is, and I won't see myself arguing with changes in wording and structure, maybe it would be better if we stick to the content first. Don't get me wrong, i gladly take the criticism, but it would be wasted if you disagree with the contents of the blog and as such with the blog in its entirety.

 

[First_Witch]

Bump

 

[DontTalkDT]

Well, alright, let's skip over structure, relevance, wording and more minor stuff for now then and just look at the spirit of the matter.


The whole "Between heaven and earth"-section would need some additions to take into consideration skill in supernatural subjects or in combination with them. Few characters on the wiki operate entirely on physics and biomechanics to begin with, after all. But the spirit of the section is fine.

That then further extends into the Foundation section. The three pillars thing stops working the moment you talk about magic skill or something like a magic swordsman.
One could try to bake the supernatural into a further generalized version of the body control pillar, but I think just going straight to splitting it up by disciplines might be the better approach.

Incidentally, not sure why to sort the disciplines by major and minor categories. That seems like a subjective and situational judgement. Like, I don't think we even have the same idea of what the most baseline analytic prediction is or how big of an advantage better reactions bring in a vacuum. I suggest to not compare the aspects by effectiveness.

I would furthermore suggest to err on the side of caution regarding the Disciplines and make clear that they are not an exhaustive list.

Analytic Prediction does not need to be based on observation. Some are just very good at guessing their opponent's mental state. One could argue that is indirectly also observation, as knowledge that leads to those guesses needs to come from somewhere, but it probably still bears mention.

Don't think I would classify Instinctive Reaction as connected to Enhanced Senses. It could work perfectly fine using a person's regular senses, as far as I am concerned. That category should also mention offensive applications.




But yeah, the only major thing is that this needs to incorporate skill in the supernatural, as most characters don't fight purely physically.

 

[Antvasima]

So has First Witch's blog been properly cleaned up and restructured according to DontTalk's and DMUA's instructions here?

After that has been done, we can evaluate if it seems like a good idea to apply it in practice.

 

[First_Witch]

Well, alright, let's skip over structure, relevance, wording and more minor stuff for now then and just look at the spirit of the matter.

Appreciated.

The whole "Between heaven and earth"-section would need some additions to take into consideration skill in supernatural subjects or in combination with them. Few characters on the wiki operate entirely on physics and biomechanics to begin with, after all. But the spirit of the section is fine.

That has been a conscioues decision on my end. I do not believe a unified standard can be made for "supernaturaly working skill". The reason being that supernatural power system truly work differently for each verse and a common ground can be barely found between sub categories of such power system in the first place; Magic is not like magic. And god beware a series has 2 or more power systems. "Physical" skill works, because biomechanics and physics apply to nearly every series that doesn't happen to be some lovecraftian cosmic tale or similar. Not that you skill scale such verses in the first place. In cases of series not respecting those 2 laws, I can at least point at those deviations and make my judgement thusly, thanks to a unified reference. I can't do the same with Narutos chakra vs Fairy Tails magic power vs Chinamen Tao stuff.

A series not operating on them is a issue of the verse. Truly skillful characters are skillful because they are written as such. And a author can only write skillful characters because they understand what goes into skill.

That then further extends into the Foundation section. The three pillars thing stops working the moment you talk about magic skill or something like a magic swordsman.
One could try to bake the supernatural into a further generalized version of the body control pillar, but I think just going straight to splitting it up by disciplines might be the better approach.

As explained above, I don't believe it would work, as no possible reference could be created for magical skill. There is no way to comprehend what it entails to be skilled in magic for example.

If you believe that a working system could be made then I will gladly discuss this with you, if you desire so.

Incidentally, not sure why to sort the disciplines by major and minor categories. That seems like a subjective and situational judgement. Like, I don't think we even have the same idea of what the most baseline analytic prediction is or how big of an advantage better reactions bring in a vacuum. I suggest to not compare the aspects by effectiveness.

This is a issue for Witch in the future (And something that I expect will garner major pushback), so I don't mind doing away with that for the meantime

I would furthermore suggest to err on the side of caution regarding the Disciplines and make clear that they are not an exhaustive list.

I do consider them exhaustive from the standpoint of skill in supernatural fields being not included (Which could change if you bring up a working proposal for such). I don't believe any additional categories that woudn't be redundant with the already existing ones exist, but I am gladly proven wrong. This may be my arrogant side speaking after all.

Analytic Prediction does not need to be based on observation. Some are just very good at guessing their opponent's mental state. One could argue that is indirectly also observation, as knowledge that leads to those guesses needs to come from somewhere, but it probably still bears mention.

I disagree, kind of? You can't make predictions without having anything to base them off, it woudn't be A. a Prediction and B. Analytical if that were the case. If you can, without having seen your opponent once, ascertain their mental state then that simply not a skill feat, thats being a psychic. One explanation I could field that explains your argument would be if I were to argue that sight was necessary, but that is not what I mean with AnaPre being a skill feat of knowledge and senses; Senses included EVERY of the human 5 senses. So I guess "Observing" (That is, doing so by eyesight) isn't necessary, that is true. But perception of any kind is.

If that was not your argument then please elaborate.

Don't think I would classify Instinctive Reaction as connected to Enhanced Senses. It could work perfectly fine using a person's regular senses, as far as I am concerned. That category should also mention offensive applications.

Enhanced senses aren't a requirement for the lowest and most basic showcases of IR, that is correct. I don't think I have written that anywhere in the blog, but if I did then that was not my intention. Enhanced Senses are necessary for high end showings of IR.

But yeah, the only major thing is that this needs to incorporate skill in the supernatural, as most characters don't fight purely physically.

So outside of the aspect of skill in supernatural fields, can I consider you without gripes for the contents of the blog? (So in your eyes, only structure, spelling and the potential addition of a supernatural section)

 

[First_Witch]

So has First Witch's blog been properly cleaned up and restructured according to DontTalk's and DMUA's instructions here?

After that has been done, we can evaluate if it seems like a good idea to apply it in practice.

No, I think it is more prudent to see wether or not the contents of the blog are suffice. If even the contents of the blog are disagreed with, then any changes to its structure would be wasted.

 

[Antvasima]

So has First Witch's blog been properly cleaned up and restructured according to DontTalk's and DMUA's instructions here?

After that has been done, we can evaluate if it seems like a good idea to apply it in practice.

No, I think it is more prudent to see wether or not the contents of the blog are suffice. If even the contents of the blog are disagreed with, then any changes to its structure would be wasted.

Okay. What do the rest of you think about this?

@DontTalkDT @DMUA @Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @Flashlight237

 

[First_Witch]

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @DMUA @Mr. Bambu @DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @Flashlight237

We seem to still need some help here.