regenerating from conceptual attacks, not conceptual erasure

[Robo432343]

would regenerating from conceptual attacks be high godly or does it have to be full erasure of the body

 

[Hecky2222]

would regenerating from conceptual attacks be high godly

Low-Godly: The ability to regenerate from the complete physical destruction of the user's body, instead restoring it from their disembodied consciousness, whether that be their soul, mind, some other non-physical aspect of themself, esoteric or metaphysical energy, or something else.

 

[Hecky2222]

but its conceptual tho

what do you think non-physical aspect is my dear student

 

[Hecky2222]

@Hecky2222

Huh

 

[Vietthai96]

Did the conceptual attack also affect other lesser aspects? Such as body damage and soul, mind, consciousness damage?

 

[Kavliaris]

Did the conceptual attack also affect other lesser aspects? Such as body damage and soul, mind, consciousness damage?

What if it only affects the body (explicitly stated), while stripping the original concept and authority of the target (already a conceptual being). Closer to concept transmutation?

 

[Tanin_iver]

Low-Godly: The ability to regenerate from the complete physical destruction of the user's body, instead restoring it from their disembodied consciousness, whether that be their soul, mind, some other non-physical aspect of themself, esoteric or metaphysical energy, or something else.

This isn't necessarily correct.

Statements or feats of regeneration in which characters can survive as long as a part of their existence, such as their souls or minds, remain intact, or that involve the regeneration of a non-physical aspect of the body when the body itself remains intact, do not warrant godly levels of regeneration due to involving resurrection rather than the destruction and reforming of both the physical and non-physical aspects of a body, which is a fundamental requirement to qualify.

@Robo432343 keep this in mind. It depends on context.

If a character's ability to regenerate is limited to certain conditions, their page must explain those circumstances in detail. If the character's regeneration only covers damage included under a higher type of regeneration and not from damage included in a lower type, list the lowest type with all qualifiers met, or none if not even the lowest type has sufficient justification. Explain the extent of the regeneration in an additional note.

For example, if a character can regenerate from having their head destroyed but not from comparable damage to their heart, they would be listed as having Low-Mid regeneration. The page would explain that the character can regenerate from head damage as long as their heart remains intact. If a character can only regenerate damage to their soul but not their body, their page would explain that they have soul-specific regeneration and list no type. Similarly, if a character can regenerate their concept but not their body, their page would list them as having regeneration with an explanation that it is concept-specific and has no type.

 

[Vietthai96]

What if it only affects the body (explicitly stated), while stripping the original concept and authority of the target (already a conceptual being). Closer to concept transmutation?

That seems like Low-Godly

 

[Vietthai96]

no, it just attacks the opponents concept

Then it is just regeneration with no type, and specific it that it is regeneration from conceptual damage

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Then it is just regeneration with no type, and specific it that it is regeneration from conceptual damage

Conceptual attacks on the body, soul, or anything else cannot be regenerated from in a normal way, as if they were ordinary attacks. Rather, this is regeneration on the conceptual level itself—that is, you are restoring your own concepts (such as the concept of your hand, the concept of your body, and so on). It is regeneration on a conceptual level because the attacks affect the body at a conceptual level.