can we please add an NLF note regarding the durability negation page

[Robo432343]

it says on the dura neg page
"The ability that allows users to damage the target, regardless of their durability"

there are some people on here who think a 9-B character with dura neg can negate a 5-D characters dura or a High 1-A character's dura and this is assuming the character is NOT a smurf

 

[Voidnether]

it says on the dura neg page
"The ability that allows users to damage the target, regardless of their durability"

there are some people on here who think a 9-B character can negate a character who has 5-D dura or High 1-A dura

I don't know if I have the permission to reply here, but I'll just add some additions to this:
Yeah, it's always been a problem. People really can't differentiate that Durability Negation has a lot of types and for the fact that it's literally explained in Resistance page themselves but nobody seems to care enough. Hell, if you explain it to them. Most of the time they'll just deny what you said simply because it doesn't support their opinion.

Oh well, I can't say much honestly. But yeah, it should've been explained in the Durability Negation pages and add those things that are relevant to literally prevent this instead of it being in the Resistance page. Or basically just make this very clear enough, Existence Erasure literally have their own scale like 3-D, 4-D, etc and to assume otherwise is obviously No Limits Fallacy.

That being said. OP could've worded it way better, but with all the explanations said above: The distinctions should've been made solely on the Durability Negation page themselves instead of the Resistance page because most of them just thinks Resistance is only relevant to Powers & Abilities.

 

[DontTalkDT]

We could add a link to the corresponding detailed explanation.
Which reminds me that that and the smurf abilities section probably needs updates due to the Tiering Revision. @Ultima_Reality

 

[Flashlight237]

Personally, I am in agreement with an NLF note for durability negation. Let's take poison for example. Poison is commonly used as a "Durability Negation" thing, but generally, how harmful or deadly a poison is depends on how much is used and how much the opponent weighs. It's why whereas a blowfish's tetradotoxin content can kill a person, dolphins know how much of the toxin to use and basically just get high on it.

Although if you want a fictional character, let's look at Yor Forger. Sure, the poison from one of her needles can drop an elephant, but what the hell is it going to do against creatures like Perucetus Colossus (before and after the mass downgrade) or the Blue Whale?

 

[Robo432343]

bump

 

[ashen]

it says on the dura neg page
"The ability that allows users to damage the target, regardless of their durability"

there are some people on here who think a 9-B character can negate a character who has 5-D dura or High 1-A dura

I would say it is needed for some form of « weak » durability negation such as poison, mater manipulation or Attacking internal structures, but there are some durability negation abilities you have no way of resisting with simple « higher dimensional durability ».

We should keep in mind that it is durability and not HDE (wich give you a « size » so great that a range becomes needed to affect you so even if you have great hax they would be too large to be affected as they are beyond the reach you have shown to affect).

Exemple : HDE (5D) being would be unaffected by any form of hax that a character with 4D range would throw at him regardless of their layer and nature.

But in the other hand there is no reason to think that character that has been able to tank a 5D conventional physical attack (while his body still 3D) would be able to resist a conceptual destruction type 1, or powerful plot and fate manipulation.

But otherwise agree with the fact that conventional physical attack or maybe almost all physical attack should not have affect on them until proven otherwise.

(Ex : a 15D durability character getting damage by regular anti-matter)

Regarding 1-A or more durability I don’t know if it exists, a weaker tier character would use a 1-A power to protect him but that would be some kind of hax.

And just having 1-A durability without the existence or an entity/source of power with this kind of existence would not be 1-A, as I think it could be considered an anti feat to be able to resist such character with no proper explanation. (I could be wrong too for the 1-A part but never see this kind of character since it doesn’t match the 1-A definition)

FAQ page :

On the matter of power sources: That would depend on the nature of the power source itself. For example, a common trope in fiction is power sources that, so to speak, are "for the taking," meaning they are naturally self-diffusive and don't offer any resistance whatsoever to being tapped into, as being utilized in such a way is in their nature. Drawing power from such sources is obviously not actually an anti-feat for them being 1-A, especially so if they are depicted as naturally connected to, and united with, the beings that tap into them.

However, if the "power source" in question consists in a lower character literally overwhelming a would-be 1-A object with their own abilities and forcibly absorbing it into themselves, then that constitutes an anti-feat, unless the occasion falls under the stipulations above.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

it says on the dura neg page
"The ability that allows users to damage the target, regardless of their durability"

there are some people on here who think a 9-B character can negate a character who has 5-D dura or High 1-A dura

They can, though. Durability plays no role against durability negating abilities. Saying durability negation cannot destroy higher Tier Durability makes the entire concept of durability negation useless.

Personally, I am in agreement with an NLF note for durability negation. Let's take poison for example. Poison is commonly used as a "Durability Negation" thing, but generally, how harmful or deadly a poison is depends on how much is used and how much the opponent weighs. It's why whereas a blowfish's tetradotoxin content can kill a person, dolphins know how much of the toxin to use and basically just get high on it.

It still ignores durability, though? It depends on some factors, sure, but durability is not a factor here. 2-A person will be poisoned the same way as 10-C person, even if the poison does not kill, the durability is indeed ignored.

The OP and Revision are made on sticks and something stinky.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

We could explain case by case; because "Durability Negation" can be used in certain ways. Like just because something negates durability, doesn't necessarily mean it kills them. Like Flash said, poison is mainly fatal in large quantities and also via mixing with the bloodstreams over time. So in addition to needing larger quantities to be fatal, it also wouldn't work on various non-biological targets. And larger sized characters would require even more quantities of poison. Likewise, spatial manipulation easily negates human sized characters with high durability; but lacks the range to do anything lethal to various giant characters.

Durability negation does mean that durability stat becomes irrelevant, but there are plenty of other reasons to take into account such as quantities of the substance, range of the attack, size of the target, and physiology of the target.

 

[Flashlight237]

We could explain case by case; because "Durability Negation" can be used in certain ways. Like just because something negates durability, doesn't necessarily mean it kills them. Like Flash said, poison is mainly fatal in large quantities and also via mixing with the bloodstreams over time. So in addition to needing larger quantities to be fatal, it also wouldn't work on various non-biological targets. And larger sized characters would require even more quantities of poison. Likewise, spatial manipulation easily negates human sized characters with high durability; but lacks the range to do anything lethal to various giant characters.

Durability negation does mean that durability stat becomes irrelevant, but there are plenty of other reasons to take into account such as quantities of the substance, range of the attack, size of the target, and physiology of the target.

Pretty much this, plus if you want to get more specific, there's a reason why we have LD50 ratings for poisons on both their applications (oral, intravenous, subcutaneous, etc) and the animals tested (usually mice and rats, but sometimes rabbits).

Another example I wanna bring up is electricity. A lot of it has to do with where the hell it's going. Power lines go from 155000 to 765000 volts, yet birds don't get electrocuted standing on them because just standing on one wire doesn't complete the circuit. So, unless you're doing whatever the hell this is:

You should generally be fine.

Also, there is a reason why a lightning bolt generally has a lower killing record than the electric chair despite having more volts than the device. With lightning, generally if it doesn't hit your heart or your central nervous system, you should be fine. With the electric chair, while part of the equation for why it kills is the amperes, the electricity in that case is sent directly to the brain.

 

[Antvasima]

We could add a link to the corresponding detailed explanation.

This seems like a good idea. What do the rest of you think?

@Mr. Bambu @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69

Which reminds me that that and the smurf abilities section probably needs updates due to the Tiering Revision. @Ultima_Reality

@Ultima_Reality

 

[Agnaa]

I agree with DT that linking that explanation seems ideal.

However, I think the smurf abilities section wasn't mentioned during the tiering revision since it didn't need much of a change. It might need a little one if it implies that characters below 1-A can get R>F, but I don't think it actually did that. And in the absence of that, it already separates out different forms of transcendence.

EDIT: Actually, rereading, it does use terminology like "qualitatively superior" where we'd now use different stuff, so it definitely would need some touching up.

 

[Qawsedf234]

What do the rest of you think?

Barring an expansion of explaining what would or wouldn't qualify for a NLF, yeah adding the links would be the best option.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

I agree with DT that linking that explanation seems ideal.

However, I think the smurf abilities section wasn't mentioned during the tiering revision since it didn't need much of a change. It might need a little one if it implies that characters below 1-A can get R>F, but I don't think it actually did that. And in the absence of that, it already separates out different forms of transcendence.

EDIT: Actually, rereading, it does use terminology like "qualitatively superior" where we'd now use different stuff, so it definitely would need some touching up.

Do you have any specific suggestions?

 

[Agnaa]

Thank you for helping out.

Do you have any specific suggestions?

Mostly just changing things like "qualitatively superior to" to "uncountably infinitely higher than", and being careful to remove any mentions of R>F being lower than 1-A, and any mentions of BDE being lower than Low 1-A. I think the Resistance page will need some similar tuning.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I think that seems to make sense.

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus

Would that be acceptable for you as well?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Sure

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[Robo432343]

has this been accepted??

 

[Robo432343]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with DT that linking that explanation seems ideal.

However, I think the smurf abilities section wasn't mentioned during the tiering revision since it didn't need much of a change. It might need a little one if it implies that characters below 1-A can get R>F, but I don't think it actually did that. And in the absence of that, it already separates out different forms of transcendence.

EDIT: Actually, rereading, it does use terminology like "qualitatively superior" where we'd now use different stuff, so it definitely would need some touching up.

Do you have any specific suggestions?

Mostly just changing things like "qualitatively superior to" to "uncountably infinitely higher than", and being careful to remove any mentions of R>F being lower than 1-A, and any mentions of BDE being lower than Low 1-A. I think the Resistance page will need some similar tuning.

Okay. I think that seems to make sense.

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus

Would that be acceptable for you as well?

@Qawsedf234 @DontTalkDT

 

[DontTalkDT]

and any mentions of BDE being lower than Low 1-A.

That would only be needed for BDE Type 2 stuff.

Aside from that, that are pretty much the changes that need to be made. On the Resistance page side it might make sense to restructure the R>F section into qualitative superiority in general.

 

[Antvasima]

That would only be needed for BDE Type 2 stuff.

Aside from that, that are pretty much the changes that need to be made. On the Resistance page side it might make sense to restructure the R>F section into qualitative superiority in general.

Thank you for your reply.

@DontTalkDT @Agnaa @Qawsedf234

Are any of you willing to handle it please?

 

[Agnaa]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

That would only be needed for BDE Type 2 stuff.

Aside from that, that are pretty much the changes that need to be made. On the Resistance page side it might make sense to restructure the R>F section into qualitative superiority in general.

Thank you for your reply.

@DontTalkDT @Agnaa @Qawsedf234

Are any of you willing to handle it please?

@DontTalkDT @Agnaa @Qawsedf234

 

[Agnaa]

Does @Ultima_Reality have any interest in tweaking that stuff, maybe?

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Does @Ultima_Reality have any interest in tweaking that stuff, maybe?

Huuuh. Maybe, yeah. I'll look into it.

 

[Agnaa]

Since no-one else has been willing to fix it.

I will let literally anyone update the wording on the Hax and Resistance pages as I outlined here.

Anyone who is interested, staff or otherwise, let me know (this is permission for anyone to comment if they're affirming a willingness to do that) and I will unlock those pages for you to make those edits.

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

Since no-one else has been willing to fix it.

I will let literally anyone update the wording on the Hax and Resistance pages as I outlined here.

Anyone who is interested, staff or otherwise, let me know (this is permission for anyone to comment if they're affirming a willingness to do that) and I will unlock those pages for you to make those edits.

A fan term that originated in MMORPG communities where a player restarts their game and is matched against newbies after having years of experience and resources. However, in the vs-community, it has come to instead refer to characters who possess abilities capable of harming characters who are in durability of an uncountably infinitely higher than magnitude, or are qualitatively superior to them by means which should be impossible for regular abilities. I.e. they possess abilities which in themself can, at least in some aspect, be considered uncountably infinitely higher than, or qualitatively superior to their regular counterpart. Due to that, they can often circumvent certain defences against the abilities, although this depends on in which aspect the ability can be considered uncountably infinitely higher than, or qualitatively superior.

Abilities that are higher-dimensional (tiering-applicable) which their power can be concentrated onto a small area, or are qualitatively superior to the physical stats of the character, e.g. a physically Tier 7 character capable of casting a 1-A reality warping attack, or hax which has potency qualitatively superior to the baseline potency, e.g. soul hax which can affect a character that sees them as mere fiction (anti-feats apply).

Another way an ability can be shown to have smurf potency / power is if it significantly affects a structure of uncountably infinitely higher than size size. E.g. existence erasure which can affect a (tiering-applicable) higher-dimensional structure or character would qualify. Note that if the ability can't have its potency focused on a small object, it's not necessarily considered to have smurf power / potency.

The importance of smurf range and area of effect is that without it many entities with certain kinds of transcendence over the user can not be significantly harmed. A target uncountably infinitely larger than may, for example, exist beyond the dimension in which the user resides. And even if a character had enough brute strength to kill a higher-dimensional character, they may not be able to do so in practice if they can't project their strength to a more then 3-dimensional area of effect, as they then can't affect a significant portion of the target's body. See here for further details.

Here's suggestion for hax part.

 

[Agnaa]

It's a bit wordy, but this should not be dragged out for another 6 months over something like that. I can fix up some of the blatant stuff (using "e.g." twice in the same sentence, saying "uncountably infinitely higher than size size") later.

Hax page is unlocked. Let me know when you're done

 

[FriendOfTheTeaParty]

It's a bit wordy, but this should not be dragged out for another 6 months over something like that. I can fix up some of the blatant stuff (using "e.g." twice in the same sentence, saying "uncountably infinitely higher than size size") later.

Hax page is unlocked. Let me know when you're done

Done

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I've made significant adjustments to BestMGQScaler's edits so feel free to comment on whether or not anything else needs to be changed.

 

[Voidnether]

Considering I've participated on this thread before, there's just one very minor issue here:

and also metaphysical stuff such as concept stuff or reality-itself affecting hax cant be smurf hax unless it's 1-A.

Is smurf hax truly exclusive to 1-A and above even when it comes to hax related to reality warping? Because, I thought we've already gotten over this by these two paragraph:

Another way an ability can be shown to have smurf potency / power is in its ability to significantly affect a structure of uncountably infinite size. E.g. existence erasure which can affect a (tiering-applicable) higher-dimensional structure or character. Note that if the ability does not have its potency focused on a relatively small object, it may not be considered to have smurf power / potency.

The main advantage of an ability being considered "smurf" in power / potency is that it is assumed to be capable of overpowering all resistances that have not shown to be even close to the same level of power. This in practice means that a three dimensional character with a Low Complex Multiveral ability should be capable of overpowering the baseline resistance of a three dimensional character with only Universal+ levels of resistance.

 

[Antvasima]

I've made significant adjustments to BestMGQScaler's edits so feel free to comment on whether or not anything else needs to be changed.

For easier reference, here are all of the revisions that have been made so far based on this thread.

Do all of you find them acceptable, or should something be adjusted?

Hax

Hax is a catch-all term for abilities that can be used to ignore/bypass one or more of a target's statistics, rendering them irrelevant. The most common hax are the ones that ignore durability, and their scale/potency are unrelated to their users' AP & Tier, however, they can be measured with...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Also, what what changes are required for our Resistance page?

 

[Agnaa]

For easier reference, here are all of the revisions that have been made so far based on this thread.

Do all of you find them acceptable, or should something be adjusted?

Hax

Hax is a catch-all term for abilities that can be used to ignore/bypass one or more of a target's statistics, rendering them irrelevant. The most common hax are the ones that ignore durability, and their scale/potency are unrelated to their users' AP & Tier, however, they can be measured with...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Also, what what changes are required for our Resistance page?

I just read the current version of the page, and I'm pretty happy with it. There are some lingering awkward parts, but whatever.

The Resistance page needs a similar treatment, but on a much smaller scale since it's already segmented out in an appropriate way. I believe it would mainly be the more general sections, and mentions of "qualitative superiority" outside of the R>F section that need to be changed.

Considering I've participated on this thread before, there's just one very minor issue here:

Is smurf hax truly exclusive to 1-A and above even when it comes to hax related to reality warping? Because, I thought we've already gotten over this by these two paragraph:

To give a tl;dr of our Resistance page, and then answer that question, it depends on the type of hax:

• If the "hax" interacts with durability (attacking organs, utilising pressure points), smurf is anything that works on greater-than-infinitely-higher-durability targets.
• If the hax interacts with the target's physical body (poison, existence erasure), smurf is anything that works on higher-size or more real targets and can be focused on a smaller region.
• If the hax interacts with a metaphysical aspect of the target (soul, personal concepts, mind; do note that if any of these have physical sizes instead of being purely metaphysical, they will instead be treated as the previous type), smurf is anything that works on more real targets, as otherwise the hax-user simply needs to be able to target that aspect successfully. Do note, however, that many characters will "resist" weaker aspect manipulation, despite not any functioning aspect manipulation gaining smurf properties, as that aspect of theirs is simply considered out of range. Mind manip isn't stronger for being able to hit a mind a timeline away, but if your mind is a timeline away, many characters will fail to reach it.
• If the hax interacts with reality itself (law manipulation, supernatural luck, reality warping, reality-wide concepts), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone that goes within reach of the ability will be affected, and anyone who can sidestep it (i.e. by destroying the reality without entering it) won't be.
• If the hax makes the target interact with themselves (subliminal messages, type 3 madness), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone who meets a criteria to affect themselves, and has no good reason to be inoculated against that, will be affected.
• Keep in mind that some verses can still establish that their abilities have smurf-type properties even when we say they won't; in these cases, that will just be taken as making the ability layered.

So concept stuff can't be smurf unless it's 1-A or above and the concepts are personal, and reality warping stuff can't be smurf in general.

 

[Theglassman12]

I got some questions in regards to the criteria of smurf hax or lack thereof for anything that isn't 1-A.

• Mind manip isn't stronger for being able to hit a mind a timeline away, but if your mind is a timeline away, many characters will fail to reach it.

I don't exactly recall this ever being treated as a smurf hax in general unless there's a bunch of verses I'm unfamiliar with that treats affecting someone's mind in the future as a smurf hax. But what about having the ability to mindhax an entire timeline's worth of minds and being able to channel that power into a smaller source as a means to increase potency? Would that scenario count as being Smurf hax?

• If the hax interacts with reality itself (law manipulation, supernatural luck, reality warping, reality-wide concepts), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone that goes within reach of the ability will be affected, and anyone who can sidestep it (i.e. by destroying the reality without entering it) won't be.

What about fictional works that has higher layers of existence like the 5th dimension to 12th dimension and so on? Does affecting reality itself without much elaboration by default just have the range of these dimensions without any evidence? Because that feels like we'd be breaching into NLF territory in that sense.

• If the hax makes the target interact with themselves (subliminal messages, type 3 madness), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone who meets a criteria to affect themselves, and has no good reason to be inoculated against that, will be affected.

What exactly do you mean by this? Is this referring to some higher dimensional construct affecting itself with its own hax or someone with smurf resistance affecting themselves?

• It's important to separate the case of Power or Potency from the case of Range or Area of Effect. A higher-dimensional character might be immune to regular mind manipulation due to being outside its range, but not due to their mind being fundamentally harder to affect. Of course, exceptions may apply if there are statements or feats that prove the opposite.

I know this part was technically there for a while but I want to better understand this. Shouldn't the fact that their existence operates in dimensions far beyond what our 3-D world is comprised of by default makes any part of their being like their mind harder to affect? I feel like this should be a given because they have some dimensional depth to them that we fundamentally lack or comprehend, so wouldn't their mind also by default be harder to affect?

 

[Agnaa]

I got some questions in regards to the criteria of smurf hax or lack thereof for anything that isn't 1-A.

• Mind manip isn't stronger for being able to hit a mind a timeline away, but if your mind is a timeline away, many characters will fail to reach it.

I don't exactly recall this ever being treated as a smurf hax in general unless there's a bunch of verses I'm unfamiliar with that treats affecting someone's mind in the future as a smurf hax. But what about having the ability to mindhax an entire timeline's worth of minds and being able to channel that power into a smaller source as a means to increase potency? Would that scenario count as being Smurf hax?

Being able to mindhax more individuals, and concentrate that potency on fewer individuals, has always and will continue to be treated as a stronger feat. But it's not like a character who is a living 8-dimensional multiverse would be immune to mindhax that functioned on an entire timeline's worth of minds (aside from the range issue, and some other stuff I get into at the end of this).

So yeah, stuff like that specifically is a stronger feat, but it doesn't work on the old general smurf principles. We don't have exact lines on how many numbers of minds correspond to what number of layers, or on which kinds of resistance feats would protect against which numbers of minds affected, that's a very case-by-case thing that should be argued in individual matches.

• If the hax interacts with reality itself (law manipulation, supernatural luck, reality warping, reality-wide concepts), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone that goes within reach of the ability will be affected, and anyone who can sidestep it (i.e. by destroying the reality without entering it) won't be.

What about fictional works that has higher layers of existence like the 5th dimension to 12th dimension and so on? Does affecting reality itself without much elaboration by default just have the range of these dimensions without any evidence? Because that feels like we'd be breaching into NLF territory in that sense.

It has the range it showed in the original work; if a character from a verse with 5 spatial dimensions changes a law of reality, a character from another verse who can displace their body across 20 dimensions would be able to leave the area which that law manipulation effects.

If you're simply asking about how we determine the range it effects, that hasn't changed from how it operated previously. We have traditionally given these abilities Range ratings regardless. We'd be as NLF-y as we always have.

• If the hax makes the target interact with themselves (subliminal messages, type 3 madness), there are no smurf abilities. Anyone who meets a criteria to affect themselves, and has no good reason to be inoculated against that, will be affected.

What exactly do you mean by this? Is this referring to some higher dimensional construct affecting itself with its own hax or someone with smurf resistance affecting themselves?

Neither. I'm talking about Type 3 Madness Manipulation.

3: Cognition: Those who possess this type drive others insane as a side-effect of the nature of their being, with the very act of looking at or attempting to perceive them being enough to send victims into a state of madness or terror. More extreme forms are capable of outright killing those who suffer from their effects.

The user of such is not sending out an ability. But whoever perceives them invariably causes some negative effect to themselves.

This has the usual caveats, where if a character can be reasoned to be unaffected by the character's specific appearance quirk, they won't be. But aside from that, there's nothing stopping it from working on, say, High 1-A characters.

• It's important to separate the case of Power or Potency from the case of Range or Area of Effect. A higher-dimensional character might be immune to regular mind manipulation due to being outside its range, but not due to their mind being fundamentally harder to affect. Of course, exceptions may apply if there are statements or feats that prove the opposite.

I know this part was technically there for a while but I want to better understand this. Shouldn't the fact that their existence operates in dimensions far beyond what our 3-D world is comprised of by default makes any part of their being like their mind harder to affect? I feel like this should be a given because they have some dimensional depth to them that we fundamentally lack or comprehend, so wouldn't their mind also by default be harder to affect?

That example is probably better to substitute with "information". Mind Manipulation can both operate on a physical level (through biological, chemical, and electrical means), or on a non-physical level by affecting an abstract mind. That range thing for minds only applies to the abstract kind.

Our Resistance page is clearer about this:

Abilities that just need range to work: These are fully durability circumventing abilities which target things that are not necessarily bound to physical size, such as the non-physical mind or the soul of a character. Note that depending on the fiction these could also be of the same dimension as the character in which case mind and soul manipulation would be of the 2nd Type instead.

In other words, this is only talking about metaphysical minds that lack any "dimensional depth".

 

[Agnaa]

• It's important to separate the case of Power or Potency from the case of Range or Area of Effect. A higher-dimensional character might be immune to regular mind manipulation due to being outside its range, but not due to their mind being fundamentally harder to affect. Of course, exceptions may apply if there are statements or feats that prove the opposite.

I know this part was technically there for a while but I want to better understand this. Shouldn't the fact that their existence operates in dimensions far beyond what our 3-D world is comprised of by default makes any part of their being like their mind harder to affect? I feel like this should be a given because they have some dimensional depth to them that we fundamentally lack or comprehend, so wouldn't their mind also by default be harder to affect?

That example is probably better to substitute with "information". Mind Manipulation can both operate on a physical level (through biological, chemical, and electrical means), or on a non-physical level by affecting an abstract mind. That range thing for minds only applies to the abstract kind.

Our Resistance page is clearer about this:

In other words, this is only talking about metaphysical minds that lack any "dimensional depth".

@DontTalkDT @Bobsican Would you be fine with me changing this part of the Hax page?

 

[Bobsican]

Can you be more specific what it'd be changed to? If you mean just replacing the mention of mind stuff there with "information", it may be ideal to be a bit more specific, given there's Information Manipulation on the site, which should fall on the same ballpark as concepts (aka, it can quite vary on this regard and thus that should be clarified on the kind that'd fall there to avoid over-generalizations).

 

[Agnaa]

Can you be more specific what it'd be changed to? If you mean just replacing the mention of mind stuff there with "information", it may be ideal to be a bit more specific, given there's Information Manipulation on the site, which should fall on the same ballpark as concepts (aka, it can quite vary on this regard and thus that should be clarified on the kind that'd fall there to avoid over-generalizations).

Hmm, while information varies, does it ever vary enough to land outside of that example?

I just want to find a quick substitution there which doesn't have the risk of misconceptions.

• Minds are often physical.
• Souls are sometimes physical.
• Concepts are sometimes tied to reality instead of individuals.

If all of them have their own issues, we might need to reword it a bit further....

 

[Bobsican]

Given fiction often varies on that kind of stuff, there isn't really one metaphysical aspect that is always treated like that to avoid that kind of issue, so the best alternative would be to either focus on certain qualities, or going over examples that specifically meet certain criteria (aka, incorporeality).