• 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 Conceptual Manip/Destruction

REX9097

REX9097

339
142
The question is very simple. If a any character can destroy/affect entire existence, and existence is includes concepts, will it be a conceptual manipulation, an example of this:
Source Dragon says he can affect every existence, and existence includes Balance which is a concept, will this give him Conceptual Manipulation?
 
REX9097 said:
The question is very simple. If a any character can destroy/affect entire existence, and existence is includes concepts, will it be a conceptual manipulation, an example of this:
Source Dragon says he can affect every existence, and existence includes Balance which is a concept, will this give him Conceptual Manipulation?
Click to expand...
Sure. Now everything will depend on the function of the concept in question to have the type.
 
If it defines aspects of reality (from what is said it describes the very concept in existence) then for me it should be type 1.
 
I think the classification of an ability often depends on its intended purpose.

For instance, characters with Conceptual NPI (Non-Physical Interaction) might be capable of killing conceptual beings, but this doesn't necessarily qualify as Conceptual Manipulation. They aren't directly manipulating the concept; rather, they're interacting with it. Similarly, if a being can launch attacks powerful enough to atomize others, the attack isn't considered Matter Manipulation. The atomization is a side effect of the attack's raw power, not its primary function.

The key factor is whether the ability is focused on achieving a specific effect.
 
ActuallySpaceMan42 said:
I think the classification of an ability often depends on its intended purpose.

For instance, characters with Conceptual NPI (Non-Physical Interaction) might be capable of killing conceptual beings, but this doesn't necessarily qualify as Conceptual Manipulation. They aren't directly manipulating the concept; rather, they're interacting with it. Similarly, if a being can launch attacks powerful enough to atomize others, the attack isn't considered Matter Manipulation. The atomization is a side effect of the attack's raw power, not its primary function.

The key factor is whether the ability is focused on achieving a specific effect.
Click to expand...
I see. In the case you took it is a being that has AE.

And if the attack that affects/destroys existence affects/destroys reality in this case then it is CM? Because Lloydblitzed says that the concept is responsible for keeping the universe intact. Anything like the universe could be affected/destroyed could say that the concept is affected?
 
Digital_Franz said:
I see. In the case you took it is a being that has AE.

And if the attack that affects/destroys existence affects/destroys reality in this case then it is CM? Because Lloydblitzed says that the concept is responsible for keeping the universe intact. Anything like the universe could be affected/destroyed could say that the concept is affected?
Click to expand...
It depends on whether the concept is mentioned in the feat or the destruction is directed toward the concept. This is similar to the situation where gods in a verse create everything within it. While they would technically have created all the concepts in the verse, they wouldn't be considered to have conceptual manipulation unless it is explicitly stated.
 
ActuallySpaceMan42 said:
It depends on whether the concept is mentioned in the feat or the destruction is directed toward the concept. This is similar to the situation where gods in a verse create everything within it. While they would technically have created all the concepts in the verse, they wouldn't be considered to have conceptual manipulation unless it is explicitly stated.
Click to expand...
It has been stated that all existence and all reality will be destroyed/affected, existence/reality includes balance.
 
ActuallySpaceMan42 said:
It depends on whether the concept is mentioned in the feat or the destruction is directed toward the concept. This is similar to the situation where gods in a verse create everything within it. While they would technically have created all the concepts in the verse, they wouldn't be considered to have conceptual manipulation unless it is explicitly stated.
Click to expand...
OK I see. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Quasar002
Questions about Type 1 concept
Replies
0
Views
781
Quasar002
Quasar002
Quasar002
Questions about Jungian archetypes
Replies
1
Views
473
Accelerated_Evolution
Accelerated_Evolution
Frxwins
a Simple Analogy of Conceptual Manipulation
Replies
7
Views
2K
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
BrackishBrineBroth
Question about conceptual and death manipulation
Replies
2
Views
1K
ExSENNA
ExSENNA
King_Gorilla4002-8922
Question about conceptual manipulation type 2
Replies
7
Views
715
Vlova
Vlova
Back
Top