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.
It is not self-evident. A calculation replacement would require some discussion whether which calculation is more preferable and consistent with the narrative.
Then it is unknown. "Did nothing", but get an ability? If there is an implication that they restored their memory by manipulating something, then it is restoration or memory manipulation.
I'm starting to sense that you are deliberately attempting to misinterpret him. You've presented your defense; now, let other staff team members determine the course of action for you.
I fully support the proposed topic ban, and if it is approved, @Maverick_Zero_X should voluntarily close her own thread. In my view, whether it's a discussion rule or a topic ban, the essence is the same. However, a decisive action should be taken, as continually debating the same point or...
There is nothing new under the sun; all arguments, with recycled evidence, attempt to circumvent past rejections by masquerading as novel, despite the unchanged premise
I don't see the difference at all. I support the discussion rule.
It is not haxless. They have one hax. You can argue that references/scans are not added for this ability, but checking the page's age, it is self-evident.
I don't see why it should be deleted. It is not a rule violation.
Not necessarily; while it's a possibility, it's not a requirement. If I recall correctly, @Bobsican has initiated a discussion suggesting an alternative viewpoint. According to the information on the page, it appears that fate manipulation is among the benefits. I believe that resistance to...
Ya, @Deagonx do you see a significance for having a discussion rule? Since the OP is trying to get 5D every time with suggested “new arguments” for this verse but with old premise.
@ShionAH Thank you for the translations; I'll remember to seek your advice whenever we encounter similar situations.
@Antvasima I think the matter can be closed. Unless you got any objections, we can move on.
It is not really a metaphor, since it has been proven that those determined events are repeating and that's why kenjaku chose sealing over killing, since he is aware he can't do it. But I agree with fate manipulation resistance.
I have no clue; translating the entire speech is proving to be ambitious, and it appears that no Turkish speakers have offered precise and comprehensive translations for us to assess.
The definition is for both types. You are not bounded by a regular traditional causality (is this an error in my language, I suppose?) means that you are:
Either operating in a different one | Type 4
Or being completely outside of the system itself | Type 5
I'm specifically referring to the...
Because he is still bounded by regular traditional causality system like anyone else. Are we talking about the same causality system that is highlighted in the page?
I am specifically talking about this, and the page does the same. And operating in a different one will give you resistance to...
I will attempt to concisely summarize my position. I'm not in agreement, as I believe, outside of the JJK context, this nature/ability is pointless.
I assume that we hold distinct interpretations of the term "causality systems." It appears that you associate fate with causality, asserting that...
I am not asking you to trust me, also what is this type of counterargument? I am asking where in fact is this stated in the official page itself.
Since as far as the page concerns, it specifically stated that the character requires to operate on a different causality system than regular one. We...
Being outside of fate gives you at maximum resistance to fate manipulation. I don't see why causality should be assumed by default to be included.
We specifically are talking about cause and effect relationship, Toji never displayed any feat to be outside of it (or operate on a complete...
And why is fate is interpreted as causality for you? Because we don't equate this by default in this community.
As far as I see, he is still bounded by causality like anyone else.