• 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.

The Real World Discussion Thread

What does the rule of "Outside Influence" in SBA look like when we give profiles to dormant organisms like coral and plants? If a clownfish (check link for context on abilities) fights an enemy in a coral reef with standard battle assumptions otherwise, is it allowed to hide in a venomous anemone for a brief moment mid-fight? Would that count as interfering if animals like the anemone have their own profiles and count as "characters?"

If two characters are fighting in a park and one throws a flower at their opponent (for whatever reason, maybe they have a pollen allergy or smth), is that outside influence, too?

If so, do we just remove any plants or animals like anemones from the battlefield under SBA?
Also, sorry for being absent for so long
 
What does the rule of "Outside Influence" in SBA look like when we give profiles to dormant organisms like coral and plants? If a clownfish (check link for context on abilities) fights an enemy in a coral reef with standard battle assumptions otherwise, is it allowed to hide in a venomous anemone for a brief moment mid-fight? Would that count as interfering if animals like the anemone have their own profiles and count as "characters?"

If two characters are fighting in a park and one throws a flower at their opponent (for whatever reason, maybe they have a pollen allergy or smth), is that outside influence, too?

If so, do we just remove any plants or animals like anemones from the battlefield under SBA?
Also, sorry for being absent for so long
Something along the lines of using noncombantants/trees as meat shields? Good question.

Outside help generally refers to characters and conscious organisms (IRL equals of characters). Maybe plants and fungi if you include their appearant intelligence despite being mindless.

So SBA excludes characters or any equivalents. In short. This includes animals and similarly conscious beings (except mindless ones)
 
I have a hard time finding a proper Research paper about it, but find lots of clips, non-scientific reports, and such about it. Is that enough?
Depends, what are you using to research? The reason why is that with the current standards, we need something in case these videos are AI fake or without further context. Non scientific reports aren't as reliable within current standards either
 
By the way, why doesn't Venus Flytrap have poison manipulation since its nectar makes insects and other small critters drunk?


I have a hard time finding a proper Research paper about it, but find lots of clips, non-scientific reports, and such about it. Is that enough?
Depends, what are you using to research? The reason why is that with the current standards, we need something in case these videos are AI fake or without further context. Non scientific reports aren't as reliable within current standards either
Maybe these would help.
These plants do have a few similarities in how they attract/lure prey, but it's best to understand how each type of insectivorous plant works by both observing them independently and comparing similarities and differences comprehensively.

(Do make sure to check each link embed, it's usually cause with multiple links to the same page I'm linking to different parts of said page, whether content sections or highlighted text, this usually applies for any and all links I send.)

In general:




Specifically:







 
Questions for the Human Race (The Real World)'s profile, since we're generally trying to make civilization profiles with a general capability of the species and not composite species, how do we know the human race's profile involves the general tech/abilities of the species?
Some of it is common sense, but other abilities like cosmetics and freeze sprays are implying a vague line of introducing mundane/low-end abilities of the race as a whole.

And with nukes and possibly other abilities being held from the most powerful and influential nations, does that make them wanky high-ends, or noteworthy due to their global influence?

Along with the previous questions here, how do we define "general capabilities of the species" if we don't want low-end mundane abilities like small size (type 0) babies and high-end notable technology?
 
Questions for the Human Race (The Real World)'s profile, since we're generally trying to make civilization profiles with a general capability of the species and not composite species, how do we know the human race's profile involves the general tech/abilities of the species?
Some of it is common sense, but other abilities like cosmetics and freeze sprays are implying a vague line of introducing mundane/low-end abilities of the race as a whole.

And with nukes and possibly other abilities being held from the most powerful and influential nations, does that make them wanky high-ends, or noteworthy due to their global influence?

Along with the previous questions here, how do we define "general capabilities of the species" if we don't want low-end mundane abilities like small size (type 0) babies and high-end notable technology?
Bumping this several more times first before moving on
 
I'm not too knowledgeable on this subject, but my best guess is probably just to keep both. Most nations have access to decently high-level weaponry like bombs while also being able to use basic commodities like flashlights. Idk about stuff like nuclear weapons, though. You don't come across those in many countries.
 
Questions for the Human Race (The Real World)'s profile, since we're generally trying to make civilization profiles with a general capability of the species and not composite species, how do we know the human race's profile involves the general tech/abilities of the species?
Some of it is common sense, but other abilities like cosmetics and freeze sprays are implying a vague line of introducing mundane/low-end abilities of the race as a whole.

And with nukes and possibly other abilities being held from the most powerful and influential nations, does that make them wanky high-ends, or noteworthy due to their global influence?

Along with the previous questions here, how do we define "general capabilities of the species" if we don't want low-end mundane abilities like small size (type 0) babies and high-end notable technology?
I'm not too knowledgeable on this subject, but my best guess is probably just to keep both. Most nations have access to decently high-level weaponry like bombs while also being able to use basic commodities like flashlights. Idk about stuff like nuclear weapons, though. You don't come across those in many countries.
I'd also say keep them all (also cause people have managed to build radioactive stuff and obtain nuclear fusion by themselves but then again those might be exceptions/outliers... though it's very impressive in general)


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let's not turn this into a meme thread, there's enough of them as it is.



I'd also say keep them all (also cause people have managed to build radioactive stuff and obtain nuclear fusion by themselves but then again those might be exceptions/outliers... though it's very impressive in general)


Judging by the answers to these questions, I'm pretty sure 99-100% of the human race's page is "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." The only things I could really think of that could be most likely be removed would be fragrance manipulation since pretty much everyone's mother, sister, and any close females can do those things.

Besides what's been built on previously, are there any other things to potentially add that nations would be generally be capable of? Or not?
 
Judging by the answers to these questions, I'm pretty sure 99-100% of the human race's page is "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." The only things I could really think of that could be most likely be removed would be fragrance manipulation since pretty much everyone's mother, sister, and any close females can do those things.

Besides what's been built on previously, are there any other things to potentially add that nations would be generally be capable of? Or not?
Bumping this twice before I go on with my day
 
Judging by the answers to these questions, I'm pretty sure 99-100% of the human race's page is "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." The only things I could really think of that could be most likely be removed would be fragrance manipulation since pretty much everyone's mother, sister, and any close females can do those things.
This solution seems fine to me. 🙏
Besides what's been built on previously, are there any other things to potentially add that nations would be generally be capable of? Or not?
I do not know. Sorry.

Also, I removed the derailing posts here.
 
I do not know. Sorry.

Also, I removed the derailing posts here.
Digging to see if there is more wouldn't hurt, and I'm pretty sure one of the 1% of things that need fixing for the page is to see if anything is out dated. I am planning to update the page some time in the future (at which I don't know)

Judging by current arguments and precedents, the capabilities of the IRL human race are defined by what most nations, or most politically influential nations (ie nukes and stuff) could offer to put. Especially to tech/abilities of the entire race as a whole.
 
Okay. Thank you for helping out. 🙏
 
Digging to see if there is more wouldn't hurt, and I'm pretty sure one of the 1% of things that need fixing for the page is to see if anything is out dated. I am planning to update the page some time in the future (at which I don't know)

Judging by current arguments and precedents, the capabilities of the IRL human race are defined by what most nations, or most politically influential nations (ie nukes and stuff) could offer to put. Especially to tech/abilities of the entire race as a whole.
Update regarding to this.

Since the human race's capabilities are judged by what the race can do as a whole, the majority of nations' capabilities, and also, great powers' capabilities should be included.

"After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the superpower status of the United States was challenged primarily by the rise of Russia and China as great powers. Other sizable countries with emerging economies, like Brazil, India, and South Africa—sometimes collectively called, along with Russia and China, BRICS—also demonstrated rising influence in this period. The European Union, although not a nation-state in its own right, has also challenged the unipolarity of the United States’ influence by means of its considerable area, population, and wealth." - Great Power from Brittanica


I'll be getting to laying down the foundations of the modernized page of the Human Race soon. Any feedback regarding including great powers and majority of nations' capabilities in the definition of what the human race can do? It really helps close potentially vague lines here with feedback (especially when Great Power here is vague by definition, and I don't want to accidentally step on boundaries of terrible precedents like last time with Gacha Life).

A note like this is good? "The profile's civilizational capabilities includes a majority of nations' capabilities or ones definitely confirmed to be Great Powers with the most international influence, not ones that stray a vague confirmation of if a nation is a Great Power or capabilities that don't apply to the entire civilization."
 
Last edited:
A note like this is good? "The profile's civilizational capabilities includes a majority of nations' capabilities or ones definitely confirmed to be Great Powers with the most international influence, not ones that stray a vague confirmation of if a nation is a Great Power or capabilities that don't apply to the entire civilization."
Updated to include this.
 
Update regarding to this.

Since the human race's capabilities are judged by what the race can do as a whole, the majority of nations' capabilities, and also, great powers' capabilities should be included.

"After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the superpower status of the United States was challenged primarily by the rise of Russia and China as great powers. Other sizable countries with emerging economies, like Brazil, India, and South Africa—sometimes collectively called, along with Russia and China, BRICS—also demonstrated rising influence in this period. The European Union, although not a nation-state in its own right, has also challenged the unipolarity of the United States’ influence by means of its considerable area, population, and wealth." - Great Power from Brittanica


I'll be getting to laying down the foundations of the modernized page of the Human Race soon. Any feedback regarding including great powers and majority of nations' capabilities in the definition of what the human race can do? It really helps close potentially vague lines here with feedback (especially when Great Power here is vague by definition, and I don't want to accidentally step on boundaries of terrible precedents like last time with Gacha Life).

A note like this is good? "The profile's civilizational capabilities includes a majority of nations' capabilities or ones definitely confirmed to be Great Powers with the most international influence, not ones that stray a vague confirmation of if a nation is a Great Power or capabilities that don't apply to the entire civilization."
Final bump before moving on. Reception seems positive so far.
 
DarlingAurora is making a return in a couple of days, so I'll announce on the same day, I'll be posting a series of Reaction/Combat Speed feats to add.

Some of them are Athletic Human/Peak Human. Though I have no clue of any other superhuman combat speed feats in large megafauna
 
Today is the announcement Aurora is returning in another form. Here's the linked speed feats

Athletic Human

Peak Human
Superhuman
 
Posts with relevant Wikipedia links for possible entries to the VSBW Real World verse page:






 
Last edited:
Why does the real world even have enemies lol

 
Why does the real world even have enemies lol


Already said welp but yeah oof.
 
Why does the real world even have enemies lol

Even without battleboarding, people have reasons to hate reality, whether it be suffering, the flaws in humans, etc.
 
Is it controversial to index either of the big 3 deadliest infectious diseases in modern day?

 
Is it controversial to index either of the big 3 deadliest infectious diseases in modern day?

Maybe? I think the start of such an arguement would be if we're describing "infectious" through the lens of the pathogen's ability to spread, or the conditions that allowed a pathogen to spread so efficently.
 
Maybe? I think the start of such an arguement would be if we're describing "infectious" through the lens of the pathogen's ability to spread, or the conditions that allowed a pathogen to spread so efficently.
Each of the big 3 (TB, Malaria, and HIV -> AIDS) impact real people and can get deadly. TB is surprisingly underacknowledged and underrated in it's threat like it should be.

And even then, would they set a bad precedent if they were on-site? We do have disease-based profiles.
 
Is it controversial to index either of the big 3 deadliest infectious diseases in modern day?

Maybe? I think the start of such an arguement would be if we're describing "infectious" through the lens of the pathogen's ability to spread, or the conditions that allowed a pathogen to spread so efficently.
Each of the big 3 (TB, Malaria, and HIV -> AIDS) impact real people and can get deadly. TB is surprisingly underacknowledged and underrated in it's threat like it should be.

And even then, would they set a bad precedent if they were on-site? We do have disease-based profiles.
I did add placeholders for other infectious and deadly conditions into the Real World verse page as stated in the message linked below but we still need pages/entries for them. (Also, hi Cracker, thanks again for making this thread in the first place.)


Just gonna post/repost these Wikipedia pages since they should be relevant:






Posts with relevant Wikipedia links for possible entries to the VSBW Real World verse page:






^ H3, just a reminder as to where I posted the Wikipedia stuff to look into with regard to finding potential entries to add to the Real World verse page.
 
Each of the big 3 (TB, Malaria, and HIV -> AIDS) impact real people and can get deadly. TB is surprisingly underacknowledged and underrated in it's threat like it should be.

And even then, would they set a bad precedent if they were on-site? We do have disease-based profiles.
I don't think indexing a disease on a VS site is any more controversial than it being indexed in any manner of website, medical book, etc. Nobody should get their ******* in a twist over dry facts, even in an unserious hobby such as ours, and if they do then that's their issue, not ours.
 
Back
Top