-
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.
About ''A Call Beyond"
- Thread starter M11UTD
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bloodborne
- Status
- 1,127
- 369
Delusion, Bias, Wank.
Either one of these or all of them combined. I don't even know how can a sane person play the whole Bloodborn, die to some fodder monster, not witness actual strength feats and then come here and claim "These characters can totally bust Stars". Its not only Bloodborn by the way, check out Solar System Dark Souls.
Either one of these or all of them combined. I don't even know how can a sane person play the whole Bloodborn, die to some fodder monster, not witness actual strength feats and then come here and claim "These characters can totally bust Stars". Its not only Bloodborn by the way, check out Solar System Dark Souls.
- 8,136
- 2,155
This is a good question. What is the supporting evidence this object simulates the explosion of our sun? Is it this statement?
- 7,897
- 3,856
Do we rate miniture black holes or other celestial bodies similarly?
- 8,136
- 2,155
No
- 7,897
- 3,856
So why would a "small exploding star" be any different? retorical question
- 907
- 248
- Thread starter
- #9
This's the "small star explosion" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPPaP8KCk3E
- 61,134
- 14,543
This again...
Its 4-C because A Call Beyond is creating portal to an actual exploding star and using the energy of said explosion as an attack.
This will now be the 6th thread on this topic.
Its 4-C because A Call Beyond is creating portal to an actual exploding star and using the energy of said explosion as an attack.
This will now be the 6th thread on this topic.
- 7,897
- 3,856
So stars in Bloodborne produce homing projectiles when they explode?
- 61,134
- 14,543
Correct
- 8,136
- 2,155
Do you have the source of that?
- 7,897
- 3,856
@WeeklyBattles
But wouldn't that mean it isn't a real star? Just like we don't assume Black Holes, Laser and Weather Manipulation feats as legit if they don't follow a set of guidelines?
But wouldn't that mean it isn't a real star? Just like we don't assume Black Holes, Laser and Weather Manipulation feats as legit if they don't follow a set of guidelines?
- 61,134
- 14,543
@Dienomite Nope, its stated to reach through space and pull the energy of an actual exploding star, warping it through the power of the Great Ones, and using it as an attack. No reason to assume its a fake star when the Great Ones can create real stars through sheer will.
- 3,355
- 1,026
judging from the video linked a bit above , it's definitly not an exploding star worthy of 4-C rating.
- 61,134
- 14,543
AoE Fallacy. The attack is not blowing up a star, the attacking is using the energy of an exploding star.Naeblis495 said:
- 5,501
- 714
Chews popcorn
- 7,897
- 3,856
Its 4-C because A Call Beyond is creating portal to an actual exploding star and using the energy of said explosion as an attack.
AoE Fallacy. The attack is not blowing up a star, the attacking is using the energy of an exploding star.
The description, both direct translation from Japanese and English localization says what is produced is the explosion of the star. Not the energy of a star explosion being transformed into an attack.
"One of the secret rites of the Choir. Long ago, the Healing Church used phantasms to reach a lofty plane of darkness,
but failed to make contact with the outer reaches of the cosmos. The rite failed to achieve its intended purpose, but instead created a small exploding star,
now a powerful part of the Choir's arsenal. At times, failure is the mother of invention."
"Formerly, the Healing Church used spirits as intermediaries to contact a higher dimension of darkness,They attempted to send communications to a distant star-world. However, it all ended in futility.In other words, this was a failed work, but the rite was accompanied by a small explosion of a star.This became a special power of the Choir. In truth, failure is the mother of success."
Where is it stated the attack itself is just using energy of the exploding star and not the star's explosion itself as an attack?
AoE Fallacy. The attack is not blowing up a star, the attacking is using the energy of an exploding star.
The description, both direct translation from Japanese and English localization says what is produced is the explosion of the star. Not the energy of a star explosion being transformed into an attack.
"One of the secret rites of the Choir. Long ago, the Healing Church used phantasms to reach a lofty plane of darkness,
but failed to make contact with the outer reaches of the cosmos. The rite failed to achieve its intended purpose, but instead created a small exploding star,
now a powerful part of the Choir's arsenal. At times, failure is the mother of invention."
"Formerly, the Healing Church used spirits as intermediaries to contact a higher dimension of darkness,They attempted to send communications to a distant star-world. However, it all ended in futility.In other words, this was a failed work, but the rite was accompanied by a small explosion of a star.This became a special power of the Choir. In truth, failure is the mother of success."
Where is it stated the attack itself is just using energy of the exploding star and not the star's explosion itself as an attack?
- 61,134
- 14,543
In the description of the item, you even described it yourself, its producing the explosion of a star.
- 7,897
- 3,856
So the star is small and doesn't follow the standards of naturally exploding stars. Why should this specific feat be considered legitimate?
- 3,355
- 1,026
"small star"
as seen in the video , it's just very smalls stars . No way it unleash 4-C level of energy .
as seen in the video , it's just very smalls stars . No way it unleash 4-C level of energy .
- 61,134
- 14,543
No, the star is normal sized and does follow the standards of naturally exploding stars. the energy is then pulled through a portal, manipulated and compressed by the Great Ones' power, ad used as a projectile.
The misconception im seeing here is that you think that we see the star at any point in the video, which we dont.
The misconception im seeing here is that you think that we see the star at any point in the video, which we dont.
- 3,355
- 1,026
what proof can you give to us that would put credit to that claim ?
so far , neither the description of the ability or the video is conclusive
so far , neither the description of the ability or the video is conclusive
- 7,897
- 3,856
So where is any of that stated?
- 61,134
- 14,543
In the descriptions of the items
Im gonna get someone to close this, this discussion has been had five times before and nothing new has been brought to the table other than AoE fallacy and 'it doesnt look 4-C'
Im gonna get someone to close this, this discussion has been had five times before and nothing new has been brought to the table other than AoE fallacy and 'it doesnt look 4-C'
- 7,897
- 3,856
Neither discription implies or states what you are attributing to the feat. That is a huge assumption.
- 3,355
- 1,026
agree with dienomite22
- 8,136
- 2,155
I don't see a description that says it gathers energy from the stars. They all say the stars themselves are summoned or created right there.
- 7,897
- 3,856
How was this even accepted?
- 9,749
- 4,371
I'm pretty sure A Call Beyond was recalced some time ago after some of these same concerns were considered valid, and ended up yielding results much lower than 4-C afterwards. Might be worth tracking down whatever thread that was on, and the ensuing calc blog, just to remind ourselves what the context of that was and why none of it was ever actually applied.
I mostly don't care what results from this discussion, though, so that's all I've got to say on the matter.
I mostly don't care what results from this discussion, though, so that's all I've got to say on the matter.
- 61,134
- 14,543
@King I mean even if that were true Call Beyond isnt the only 4-C feat in the verse so it wouldnt make any difference
- 8,136
- 2,155
I assume it's this.
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:ThePerpetual/Bloodborne:_A_Call_Beyond
I can't find any discussion via google search.
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:ThePerpetual/Bloodborne:_A_Call_Beyond
I can't find any discussion via google search.
- 19,675
- 16,042
If it's just the item description that's evidence of 4-C, it doesn't look particularly valid. The thing makes a small star that explodes, not takes the energy of an already exploding star that is then funneled into a attack (going by the given item descriptions).
- 5,501
- 714
Still if Call Beyond is exaggerated it should probably be remedied
- 7,897
- 3,856
Just for the record, I don't mind the verse being as strong as it is and in fact I want it to be stronger than what it currently is but if this upgrade was made today, I would be very surprised if it wasn't looked at as a joke.
- 9,749
- 4,371
Yeah, that's the one. Though if there's no thread preceding that, then the discussion leading to it might have been on Discord or something. I'm pretty sure I only ever saw the blog itself. I have no idea what was said beforehand.Sigurd Snake in The Eye said:
- 19,675
- 16,042
So then all we need to do is just change the reasoning then, rather than the tier.WeeklyBattles said:
- Status
