Acasualty, A ability for verses or Characters?

[Dark_Soul20189]

I currently have an understand the ability is far easier to get than what people think, and also think it's harder to gain than it should be, based on its description

Page
Relevant ability - Acasualty 1

Type 1: Time Paradox Immunity: Characters with this type of Acausality are rendered immune to changes in the past and standard temporal paradoxes, but remain just as vulnerable in the present and can be affected by normal Causality Manipulation and similar abilities.

Note that only characters explicitly depicted as immune to time paradoxes in their past by feats and/or direct statements qualify for this power. Fiction commonly features time travel systems where time-travelers, for no explainable reason, retain their memories of previous timelines even after changing the past, and merely existing in a work with such mechanics doesn't mean the character inherently has such an immunity, especially given how they would still be affected if someone else was time-traveling instead.

As we can see here, the main definition of the ability is for characters that are immune to changes in the past, with no defining factors, "how" or "why".

Now, why is this an issue? Simple

Many verses with multiple timelines, or simple time travel, have this defining factor.
Let me get some examples.
*Dragon Ball, other timelines are unaffected by changes to a timeline.
*Maou Gakuin, the "higher gods," prevent changes in the past.
*Tensura, all changes in the past create/move into a new timeline...

Now this should be pretty logical to understand, but this, in turn, with the current definition, would grant a general type 1 acasuality to everyone, since any time travel or changes in the past don't affect them, but a separate version of them...

So I guess my question would be, should all these types of characters/verses have the ability, or is the current definition lacking?
(I could also just be missing something)

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

Those sound like branching timelines, except Maou Gakuin, since I don't have an idea.

Well, they technically still get affected since they branch out a new part of themselves the manipulation or changes affects the entire structure and not just a single branch unless you can somehow classify a single branch as a character but by then it is not him being directly influenced but the bigger body so it doesn't really grant acausality type 1

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Well, they technically still get affected since they branch out a new part of themselves the manipulation or changes affects the entire structure and not just a single branch unless you can somehow classify a single branch as a character but by then it is not him being directly influenced but the bigger body so it doesn't really grant acausality type 1

Here is the thing, it is not directly "them" that is affected, but a "new" version of themself, with the old one remaining unaffected. So yes, I do think it would qualify.

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

that's rather very pedantic and irrelevant

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Type 1 acausality is only applicable when a time travel method typically allows changing the past, but certain characters are specifically exempt.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Type 1 acausality is only applicable when a time travel method typically allows changing the past, but certain characters are specifically exempt.

So it grants no real ability? (in this case)

 

[Hecky2222]

Timeline mechanics like MWI don't garant usually Acausality Type 1

Idk about others but DB got Ac for being unaffected by MWI(This is applicable)

 

[Vietthai96]

No, this is specific cosmology function; we don't give ability because of the environment, we only give ability that is inherently from the character themselves

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

So it grants no real ability? (in this case)

Yeah.

 

[Tatsumi504]

No, this is specific cosmology function; we don't give ability because of the environment, we only give ability that is inherently from the character themselves

But we count external powers that are affecting characters in some way be they advantageous or not.

 

[Vietthai96]

But we count external powers that are affecting characters in some way be they advantageous or not.

What external power are you talking about?

 

[Tatsumi504]

What external power are you talking about?

Stuff like blessings, bestowment, curses that affect stuff around you. If it's somehow advantageous or disadvantageous to you or people around you, we don't separate it from a characters P&A.

 

[Vietthai96]

Stuff like blessings, bestowment, curses that affect stuff around you. If it's somehow advantageous or disadvantageous to you or people around you, we don't separate it from a characters P&A.

those are still abilities that are inherently from the character themselves, even if the true source isn't from them, they still have the effects on themselves

 

[OMsHanT69]

I currently have an understand the ability is far easier to get than what people think, and also think it's harder to gain than it should be, based on its description

Page
Relevant ability - Acasualty 1

As we can see here, the main definition of the ability is for characters that are immune to changes in the past, with no defining factors, "how" or "why".

Now, why is this an issue? Simple

Many verses with multiple timelines, or simple time travel, have this defining factor.
Let me get some examples.
*Dragon Ball, other timelines are unaffected by changes to a timeline.
*Maou Gakuin, the "higher gods," prevent changes in the past.
*Tensura, all changes in the past create/move into a new timeline...

Now this should be pretty logical to understand, but this, in turn, with the current definition, would grant a general type 1 acasuality to everyone, since any time travel or changes in the past don't affect them, but a separate version of them...

So I guess my question would be, should all these types of characters/verses have the ability, or is the current definition lacking?
(I could also just be missing something)

Lowkeygenuinely they should atleast have "Unconventional Type 1 Acausality"