Acausality and Resistances to Paradoxes and Causality Manipulation

[Antvasima]

Thanks.

 

[Jakob_C._Brown]

Here's what I've written for Time Paradox Immunity:
"A lesser form of Acausality, this ability is attributed to characters who can interact with others as per the laws of cause and effect but will not be killed or erased from existence if their past self is somehow killed. It is thus possible to defeat these character through conventional means, but it's virtually impossible to do so by killing them in the past with Time Travel or a similar ability."

I have a question about this. Does the case with Android 17 and 18 count as well? After the Cell Saga, when Trunks returned to his own point in time, he noticed that the world's state of being and its inhabitants were not altered despite changes being made in the past.

Now you can argue that Dragon Ball Z plays around with the multiverse theory in terms of time travelling being essentially travelling to parallel universes. Similarily, Link slaying Ganondorf in Ocarina of Time did not result in Ganondorf's erasure in the past, but rather resulted in a branching timeline. However, it is still done via time travel. So if a verse outright states that it adheres to the framework of if you go back in time you just access another parallel universe within the multiverse, wouldn't that make all the inhabitants of that verse immune to time paradox by default since they cannot be erases from existence by killing them in the past whatsoever?

 

[Antvasima]

It does not count if travelling to the past simply creates an alternative timeline, no.

 

[Kaltias]

I don't see why a time traveller who can affect their past should be unable to kill them. They aren't surviving because they resist the paradox, it's more because nobody is actually killing their past selvels due to the fact that DB time travel isn't actual time travel throughout the timeline, it's more like teleportation between universes.

 

[Joseph619]

I have a question about this. Does the case with Android 17 and 18 count as well?

Travelling to the past has to be in the same timeline, not alternate timeline. 17 and 18 are unaffected because of dragon ball's time mechanics, not because they have immunity to actual time travel hax. So they do not count.

 

[Jakob_C._Brown]

So as long as the verse only demonstrates time travel in the sense of branching timelines or parallel universes, you are essentially unable to ascertain whether they are immune towards a time paradox or not, and therefore it's better to go with the idea that they are susceptible to it than that they aren't?

 

[Kaltias]

I mean, why should we assume that everyone is immune to time paradoxes without any proff?

 

[Jakob_C._Brown]

I mean, why should we assume that everyone is immune to time paradoxes without any proff?

Fair enough, but it seems to me tricky altogether to subject all fictional characters to the same sense of how we determine whether they are immune to having their past-selves be killed or not considering not all verses share the same time mechanics.

For the sake of implementing verse equalization, to which verse's time mechanics would a hypothetical match-up favour to? One where time travel is actually affecting the very timeline and thus affecting it causes all sorts of paradoxes or the one where time travel avoids paradoxes altogether by appealing to the branching timeline model?

 

[Kaltias]

Imo it should be the former because otherwise it's the equivalent of removing a hax, and we usually don't do that.

 

[Joseph619]

@Jakob- If there's someone in dragon ball who can go back in time in the same timeline and kill a character, and that character is shown alive in future only then they have the immunity. This is a specific hax resistance, otherwise all random fodder in dragon ball would be protected because of verse mechanics. They don't have any hax resistance

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Kaltias and Joseph619

 

[LazyHunter]

Just gave a quick read to the thread since two Kamachi characters were listed as Acausal. If I understood correctly, Aburatori should be changed to Time Paradox Immunity and White Quee should be changed to Paradox Immunity and resistance to causality manipulation, right? Want me to make the changes? I was going to edit White Queen's page anyway to add a minor power.

 

[LordXcano]

Sure

 

[LordXcano]

As for the verses who I'm unsure about, I think we should check in on the justification for acausality with most Saint Seiya characters and the high tier Supernatural characters.

Saint Seiya seems to have most everyone listed as acausal with no justification I can find. The high Supernatural characters are listed as acausal also for no reason, but given that the lower tier characters (Angels) are listed as acausal for something that only counts for paradox immunity I'm assuming they're scaled from that. In which case they'll need to be changed.

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

Since i guess we're gonna be specific about the level of acausality (is that right?), i presume that these guys apply for it but on a 3-D spectrum like what was done for Madoka Kaname, yeah?

 

[LordXcano]

I'm pretty sure that while specifying which level they're immune to is helpful you can also determine that just by looking at their tier.

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

Mmm...aye, alright. Just wanted to bring it up here, that's all.

Hmm. Just a thought here but since the changes on how we determine the level of acausality, when will the page itself of the ability have it;s definition be changed up? Or if it is, i mean...

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Saint Seiya characters are acausal because Athena's divine Ichor overwrites the space-time continuum itself and allows Shura to continue existing despite time itself actively trying to erase him and him being a black hole information paradox.

Also as explained in Lost Canvas immortal characters in Saint Seiya are outside the flow of time.

 

[LordXcano]

Alrighty then.

That just leaves Digimon and high tier Supernatural stuff. I've noticed only 2 justifications for acausal Digimon in the profiles and one was vague in that in only described them surviving an attack without describing the attack itself and the other was just paradox immunity.

 

[Executor_N0]

More directly Millenniummon and his family had this because he created Apocalymon who created Mugendramon and this formed Millenniummon. The others, however, are Acausals because they were unaffected by the re-writing of Yggdrasil, who rewrote all causal relations through the timeline.

 

[Executor_N0]

This video explains a little bit what happened. After the rewriting of the Eaters occurs the Space-Time itself is rewritten, with this cause and effect relationships are rewritten and with it the entire timeline is rewritten.

Characters such as Alphamon, and the other royal knights for example, have proved unaffected by the law of causality that rewrote space-time.


Digimon and Law of Causality

 

[LordXcano]

Alrighty then

 

[DontTalk]

I am confused.

I thought surviving causality being rewritten and causality paradoxes like in the digimon example and I think also for madoka and description wise I guess also saint seiya, would now be classified as resistance to causality manipulation (and time paradox immunity) and not acausality?

I thought acausality would only be for things like characters that demonstrated that them being killed in the presence does not effect themself in the future. (with the future self just reappering, basically)

Hence for example the White Queen not qualifying, even though rearranging causality in general would not do anything to her.

Could someone summarize for me which kind of feats are accepted for acausality now and which for resistance against causality manipulation (and time paradox immunity)?

 

[Kaltias]

Madoka is acausal on a 3D scale because she is stated to be a "singularity of cause and effect" I think. Dunno about the others though

 

[LordXcano]

Im done

 

[Jakob_C._Brown]

In the aforementioned cases, is it safe to really describe them as "Acausal" when they can still be affected by other means (i.e. getting their face kicked in through combat)? Like, wouldn't a "true" acausal entity be immune to all kinds of changes being brought upon them, whether it's something hax based or killing them in the past or trying to harm them in the now? A lot of these cases sound like characters who can not have their existence overrided or erased via timeline destruction but they could still be defeated by other (non-hax) means in combat.

Are the immune to reality warping-esque shenanigans that involve time or any sort of existential paradox? Sure, but they can still be harmed or influenced by the circumstances around them even though that shouldn't technically be possible since you are acausal and thus not grounded in the metaphysical framework of action-reaction-action.

 

[Antvasima]

I have similar concerns to DontTalk. I also thought that cases such as those described by Matthew for Saint Seiya characters would now be counted as Time Paradox Immunity.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you very much to LordXcano for helping out in any case.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

"I thought acausality would only be for things like characters that demonstrated that them being killed in the presence does not effect themself in the future."

That's exactly what happens in Saint Seiya. Shura is dead in the past and thus he should be dead in the future, but thanks to Athena's Ichor the effect of space-time itself is overwritten and Shura stays alive even though he's a walking existential paradox.

 

[LordXcano]

I actually think DT was wrong on the "I thought acausality would only be for things like characters that demonstrated that them being killed in the presence does not effect themself in the future." part. That would just be paradox immunity.

Acausality under the definition in OP would basically be like Gold Experience Requiem's "nuh uh that didn't happen" powers. Someone can kill you a thousand times and it means nothing because you are free from cause and effect.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Still fits.

 

[LordXcano]

Alrighty then

 

[Antvasima]

How is that example not simply time paradox immunity, rather than being completely immune to the laws of cause and effect?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

How could it be Time Paradox Immunity if what Aspros is being immune to is Time Manipulation (Rewinding) by virtue of being outside the flow of time?

Just like Capricorn Shura can exist as a black hole information paradox when he is bathed in Athena's ichor, and him being dead in the past doesn't affect him being alive in the future.

Immortality in Saint Seiya seems to make you exist outside the flow of time.

 

[LordXcano]

I'd assume it's because he says he's beyond the flow of time, which might imply he exists in some higher dimensional form of time. But he could also just be referring to the fact he's immortal.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, lots of 2-C characters and above exist outside of conventional time, but I do not think that this is the same thing as existing beyond the laws of cause and effect.

 

[LordXcano]

If you're above cause and effect in a lower form of time you still apply for acausality, its just that anybody who is also in that higher form of time would treat you normally and anyone above that form of time would be acausal to you.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Aspros literally ignored the effects of being time rewinded by the god of time, and explained it as his immortality means he's outside the flow of time.

Gods in Saint Seiya are generally outside the flow of time as it applies to mortals, and their blood allows one to exist as living paradoxes, remaining alive in the future despite being dead in the past.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, but being alive in the future while being dead in the past is the exact definition of time paradox immunity. Perhaps we should ask Sera and VenomElite for input/information about this?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

That's still an application of acausality. It's complementary rather than contradictory