• 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.

Acausality revisions #1

Status
Not open for further replies.

kuramamyfav68

He/Him
432
126
Hello everyone. New member here, but I’ve been lurking on this site for years now. Thing is, I’ve seen some dumb stuff being said about Acausality (types 2 and 4 – how the former is “better” than the latter and so on (I’ve seen many threads on types 2/4/5 too)). So, I am proposing a change to the system.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/adding-note-for-acausality-type-5.123412/

https://vsbattles.com/threads/acasuallity-type-4.127645/

https://vsbattles.com/threads/acasuality-type-4-question.127128/

https://vsbattles.com/threads/fate-manipulation-vs-causality-manipulation.125365/

(Apologies if I’m personally attacking anyone by linking these. I’m not. It’s just that type 4 Acausality is seriously misunderstood.)

Technically, “Acausality” is just types 4 and 5 (by its actual implication(s): ( https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/acausal, https://www.yourdictionary.com/acausality) ), but I guess types 1-3 can remain.

Let’s start with type 2. Its definition (on this wiki) is: “Type 2: Temporal Singularity: Characters with this type of Acausality do not exist in either the past or the future, only the present. This means they cannot be affected by changes to the past, while also making them resistant to Precognition that works by viewing the future, as they do not exist within it, and Fate Manipulation, for the same reason. In essence, they are able to choose their own fates, but they remain just as vulnerable at the point in time in which they do exist.”

Now, I think you could add one extra condition here one that currently justifies type 4 (existing outside of fate), because (1) nothing implies existing beyond regular causality here (you still have a past, though this could possibly/vaguely be referring to just that (existing outside of causality in a way)), (2) fate stuff is usually just type 2 anyway, (3) seems a bit underwhelming for type 4. I’m suggesting this line could be added as an additional justification for type 2 (instead of 4).

The elephant in the room: type 4. Current definition: “Type 4: Irregular Causality: Characters with this type of Acausality operate on a different and irregular system of cause and effect than regular causality. This grants them resistance to abilities such as Causality Manipulation, Fate Manipulation, and Precognition, among others.”

https://debatesjungle.fandom.com/wiki/Acausality

https://all-fiction-battles.fandom.com/wiki/Acausality

IMHO, these 2 sites have a better description for it, as it makes sense that having/coming from/operating with a different system of causality (or flow of time for that matter) actually makes you be unaffected/unbound by or resistant (or perhaps even immune) to the effects of regular causality (which could range from stuff like the duality/system of life and death, to abstract things like laws and concepts and to even the plot/narrative itself). For example, suppose someone doesn’t work under regular causality (so a type 4 being). Would it not be safe/reasonable to assume regular logic/causality/laws wouldn’t work on them, as they’re outside of/beyond them, and that to interact with them, you’d need dem good, old feats? How are they any different from type 5 (in that regard)? Yes, I know the difference between those 2 types, but imo, type 4 is a “mini” type 5 – both are illogical, though the former is that to a trivial degree compared to the latter. I would suggest adding this line here: “...Any attempts of a person or ability that functions in a conventional casual system cannot traditionally harm the user as the attack will be bound within a system the user does not exist within. Beings stated to exist "outside" causality (with no further context) also fits this category.” (This line is present in the type 4 explanations in both the last 2 sites)

As far as what satisfies/would satisfy type 4 Acausality, it could be listed as:

  • Existing outside of/beyond or transcending regular causality
  • Existing outside of the laws/logic/reason of creation/the universe/multiverse.
  • Existing outside of (space-)time, with the reasoning mentioning what that implies regarding their existence. For example, via them existing outside of the timeline/flow of time, so automatically not having a fate (possibly type 2 in this case as well), as well as them being acausal, since time is needed for causality to occur.
  • Basically, type 2 gains the following justification – existing outside of fate, and anyone with type 4 gains the following: resistance to all “regular”-causality hax, including life/death/probability/logic/law/maybe even plot hax.
I suggest we use these interpretations:

Type 1: Time Paradox Immunity: Characters with this type of Acausality are rendered immune to changes in the past and standard temporal paradoxes, but remain just as vulnerable in the present and can be affected by normal Causality Manipulation and similar abilities.

Type 2: Temporal Singularity: Characters with this type of Acausality do not exist in either the past or the future, only the present. This means they cannot be affected by changes to the past, while also making them resistant to Precognition that works by viewing the future, as they do not exist within it, and Fate Manipulation, for the same reason. In essence, they are able to choose their own fates, but they remain just as vulnerable at the point in time in which they do exist. Lacking fate/destiny and/or existing outside of it also qualifies for this type.

Type 3: Temporal Permanence: Characters with this type of Acausality are incredibly difficult to kill, as other versions of themselves - from other points in time and/or from other universes - can survive the destruction of the "original" and act in their place. This also grants them immunity to changes in the past.

Type 4: Irregular Causality: Characters with this type of Acausality operate on a different and irregular system of cause and effect than regular causality. This grants them resistance to abilities such as Precognition, Causality, Fate, Life, Death, Probability, Law Manipulation, and in some cases, even Concept and Plot Manipulation (among others). Any attempts of a person or ability that functions in a conventional causal system cannot traditionally harm the user as the attack will be bound within a system the user does not exist within. Normal interaction with entities of this type of Acausality may prove to be virtually impossible. Beings stated to exist "outside" causality (with no further context) also fit this category.

Type 5: Causality Transcendence: Characters with this type of Acausality transcend the normal boundaries of cause and effect, existing outside of the causality of a system.

I know this is kind of short but thank you to anyone who's going to read this. I have some other suggestions, though I might post them later.
 
Last edited:
Thank you. To be honest, the type 4 acausality changes are the most important thing here - much more than what I'm suggesting for type 2 (also because I don't feel like I argued well enough for those ones).
 
Agree. It's definitely not treated the way it should have been. I mean, how is acausality exactly treated here? Is it 5>4>3>2>1? Or a different way?
 
I think an argument for type 2>4 may be the wording... tho (imo) type 4 should work this way: suppose Yhwach (for example) uses his hax on a type 4 acausal. He's able to use it successfully. What actually happens tho? The type 4 acausal simply destroys him despite the almighty supposedly having worked. That's how it should work (imo). Completely ignoring logic - like an "immunity" (in a way).
 
Last edited:
kuramamyfav68 said:
Agree. It's definitely not treated the way it should have been. I mean, how is acausality exactly treated here? Is it 5>4>3>2>1? Or a different way?
Click to expand...
They are treated as different powers, being able to affect one doesn't mean you can affect the others.
 
Yes, but 2 is clearly >1, and 5>4 (for example). Wouldn't it be better if they were this way (5>4>3>2>1)? Would make more sense (imo). 2 and 3 are debatable tho, but not the rest.
 
I'll add this here: this site (https://debatesjungle.fandom.com/wiki/Acausality) has type 4 listed as type 3 (Type 3: Irregular Causality: Users of this type exist on a different and irregular level of Cause and Effect, different to our own. This grants them resistances to abilities that rely on conventional cause and effect such as: Causality Manipulate, Fate Manipulation, Precognition, and similar abilities.)... so I guess we could use either the one from All Fiction Battles or this one as part of the wording for type 4 (tho the former seems a bit better imo).
 
Last edited:
Gotta disagree. Operating on another system doesn't mean operating on a system that makes you immune to stuff.
It's like playing chess, but you use different rules than your opponent. You playing by different rules doesn't mean your pieces can't be captured. They could still be possible to capture, just that they are captured in accordance to your set of rules.
In fact, a system being different just means it being different in one aspect, not necessarily in all aspects. You could operate on an irregular system of causality which 99% of the time behaves exactly like regular causality.

Honestly, if you ask me we should rather remove some of the resistances Type 4 grants by default...


What lacking fate implying type 2 is concerned: Doesn't work since the nature of fate is vague. Fiction doesn't have one universal definition of what fate is and in many fictions lacking fate wouldn't grant this. I can, in fact, not remember any fiction that defines fate in a fashion that would make the character lack a past.
 
DontTalkDT said:
Gotta disagree. Operating on another system doesn't mean operating on a system that makes you immune to stuff.
It's like playing chess, but you use different rules than your opponent. You playing by different rules doesn't mean your pieces can't be captured. They could still be possible to capture, just that they are captured in accordance to your set of rules.
In fact, a system being different just means it being different in one aspect, not necessarily in all aspects. You could operate on an irregular system of causality which 99% of the time behaves exactly like regular causality.

Honestly, if you ask me we should rather remove some of the resistances Type 4 grants by default...


What lacking fate implying type 2 is concerned: Doesn't work since the nature of fate is vague. Fiction doesn't have one universal definition of what fate is and in many fictions lacking fate wouldn't grant this. I can, in fact, not remember any fiction that defines fate in a fashion that would make the character lack a past.
Click to expand...
What would remain if some of the resistances got removed? It would end up in a nasty place. And yes, "operating on another system" means you're not playing by the rules of "this" system. Chess is a bad example (since there are no other rules in that game, and even then, as a type 4 acausal you'd introduce your own rules into it (like you said)). Also, sure. You don't have to be completely "immune", just resistant. That's a personal interpretation/preference. How about the other ones I've posted? Again, I'm not really interested in the type 2 stuff. The rules of "this" system aren't affecting you, no? The main issue here is how the "just that they are captured in accordance to your set of rules" is not expanded upon in both here and on the acausality page.
 
Last edited:
kuramamyfav68 said:
What would remain if some of the resistances got removed? It would end up in a nasty place. And yes, "operating on another system" means you're not playing by the rules of "this" system. Chess is a bad example (since there are no other rules in that game, and even then, as a type 4 acausal you'd introduce your own rules into it (like you said)). Also, sure. You don't have to be completely "immune", just resistant. That's a personal interpretation/preference. How about the other ones I've posted? Again, I'm not really interested in the type 2 stuff. The rules of "this" system aren't affecting you, no? The main issue here is how the "just that they are captured in accordance to your set of rules" is not expanded upon in both here and the acausality page.
Click to expand...
Type 4's in general can't freely choose which system of causality they operate under.
And there are actually tons of alternate chess rules. One player could for instance play standard chess, while the other plays "absorption chess". The absorption chess player can be beaten, despite using different rules. Their chess pieces aren't more "resistant" to being beaten than any normal piece.
 
DontTalkDT said:
Type 4's in general can't freely choose which system of causality they operate under.
And there are actually tons of alternate chess rules. One player could for instance play standard chess, while the other plays "absorption chess". The absorption chess player can be beaten, despite using different rules. Their chess pieces aren't more "resistant" to being beaten than any normal piece.
Click to expand...
Didn't know that, wow. However, it's up to you to prove only one of the two players will play "absorption chess". Besides, most of those rules aren't the main ones (of "normal" chess), are they? These rules are preceded by those. Again, bad example. A type 4 acausal follows other rules, and isn't bound to the "main" ones. Wdym they "can't feely choose"? They're not choosing, they're already operating under a different system. Please elaborate more on this: "just that they are captured in accordance to your set of rules". What does it mean in the context of acausality?
 
kuramamyfav68 said:
Type 4: Irregular Causality: Characters with this type of Acausality operate on a different and irregular system of cause and effect than regular causality. This grants them resistance to abilities such as Precognition, Causality, Fate, Life, Death, Probability, Law Manipulation, and in some cases, even Concept and Plot Manipulation (among others).
Click to expand...
I can understand about Law, Concept and Plot because some variation of Law and Concept hax involve fate and causality while plot is causality and fate on steroid, but why Life and Death??????, literally make no sense
kuramamyfav68 said:
Any attempts of a person or ability that functions in a conventional causal system cannot traditionally harm the user as the attack will be bound within a system the user does not exist within. Normal interaction with entities of this type of Acausality may prove to be virtually impossible
Click to expand...
What, how. Different causality system =/= have no causality. Even though Acausal 4 operating under different system, they still have causality, interact with them is possible. This is for type 5 which transcended the causality as a whole
 
Vietthai96 said:
I can understand about Law, Concept and Plot because some variation of Law and Concept hax involve fate and causality while plot is causality and fate on steroid, but why Life and Death??????, literally make no sense

What, how. Different causality system =/= have no causality. Even though Acausal 4 operating under different system, they still have causality, interact with them is possible. This is for type 5 which transcended the causality as a whole
Click to expand...
Life and death run on causality, just like most of that stuff. What's the deal with that?
No, a type 4 works under a different system of causality. You can't interact with them under your system. Don't generalise irregular causality.
 
Last edited:
kuramamyfav68 said:
Life and death run on causality, just like most of that stuff. What's the deal with that?
No, a type 4 works under a different system of causality. You can't interact with them if under your system.
Click to expand...
1. that wrong, by all mean, life is life and death is death, different system or not, if you die, you die
2. again, wrong, have causality mean still exist cause and effect, that by all mean still allow you to interact with other, they still have fate, have a cause. they resistance to normal fate and causality due to under different system unless you have feat. Only transcended causality allow you to have no cause and no effect thus interact with is impossible (if you have no feat of course)
 
1. Please don't generalize.
2. You don't get it. You become type 4 acausal - you're no longer restricted by the laws/concepts/logic of your reality (including life and death) - but only on that level. You need feats of affecting someone who's working under a different system of causality.
 
kuramamyfav68 said:
1. Please don't generalize.
2. You don't get it. You become type 4 acausal - you're no longer restricted by the laws/concepts/logic of your reality (including life and death) - but only on that level. You need feats of affecting someone who's working under a different system of causality.
Click to expand...
1. How it is even generalize, working under different system of causality doen't mean you can't die or not living, you still live and die, cause and effect still run and move from the day you born the the day you die
2. That wrong, you still being restricted by causality as a whole, different system mean nothing, because you still working under a system
 
Ok. Could someone please explain how acausality works? Feels like I'm not as knowledgeable as I thought I was. I guess the thread can be closed after that.
 
kuramamyfav68 said:
Ok. Could someone please explain how acausality works? Feels like I'm not as knowledgeable as I thought I was. I guess the thread can be closed after that.
Click to expand...
causality mean cause and effect, one event trigger another in the future, the past result in the present and then the future, you do something which is the cause, resulting in something which is the effect, cause and effect, that is causality
 
Vietthai96 said:
causality mean cause and effect, one event trigger another in the future, the past result in the present and then the future, you do something which is the cause, resulting in something which is the effect, cause and effect, that is causality
Click to expand...
Thanks, but I'm asking for an explanation of the acausality system.
Oblivion_Of_The_Endless said:
This is true. People just arbitrarily assume they can be normally touched, which ironically goes against the current definition of Type 4.
Click to expand...
That right there!
 
I also think that DontTalk makes sense above.

Should we close this thread then, or are there any useful changes that can be made based on it?
 
Imo I brought it up before on past threads. But type 4 and 5 should have a slight definition change just slight.

But type 2 should be deleted. It's just type 4.

Edit:

or give type 2 a better definition

If they have no future and no past then someone who is in the ordinary causal system cannot perceive them due to them existing in a whole other system of causality. They can't be perceived in any moment by the ordinary beings. That's type 4.

If they have no future but they have a past That's still type 4. That's still operating under a different causality system. They cannot be perceived at any future moment even if its the smallest unit of measurement of time in the future or 5 minutes into the future and so on. They don't have a future or any moment of time in the future. Ordinary beings cannot perceive them due to this different causality system they operate under.


If they have a future but no past. That sounds like type typical type 1.

Type 2 is really type 4.

Unless I'm horribly misunderstanding it and if so then the definitions of type 2 and 4 need changed to ne better understood imo.

Edit 2:

then again after thinking about it.

if you have no past; every action you do will get corrected and rewritten. No one will remember you but your still perceivable to them via the present and future. but they will soon forget you. This is a operating on a whole other system of causality.

Due to this it should also be Type 4 instead of type 1.

Yeah Type 2 makes no freaking sense at all to me. It needs yeeted.
 
Last edited:
TheUnshakableOne said:
Imo I brought it up before on past threads. But type 4 and 5 should have a slight definition change just slight.

But type 2 should be deleted. It's just type 4.

Edit:

or give type 2 a better definition

If they have no future and no past then someone who is in the ordinary causal system cannot perceive them due to them existing in a whole other system of causality. They can't be perceived in any moment by the ordinary beings. That's type 4.

If they have no future but they have a past That's still type 4. That's still operating under a different causality system. They cannot be perceived at any future moment even if its the smallest unit of measurement of time in the future or 5 minutes into the future and so on. They don't have a future or any moment of time in the future. Ordinary beings cannot perceive them due to this different causality system they operate under.


If they have a future but no past. That sounds like type typical type 1.

Type 2 is really type 4.

Unless I'm horribly misunderstanding it and if so then the definitions of type 2 and 4 need changed to ne better understood imo.

Edit 2:

then again after thinking about it.

if you have no past; every action you do will get corrected and rewritten. No one will remember you but your still perceivable to them via the present and future. but they will soon forget you. This is a operating on a whole other system of causality.

Due to this it should also be Type 4 instead of type 1.

Yeah Type 2 makes no freaking sense at all to me. It needs yeeted.
Click to expand...
Type 2: Temporal Singularity: Characters with this type of Acausality do not exist in either the past or the future, only the present. This means they cannot be affected by changes to the past, while also making them resistant to Precognition that works by viewing the future, as they do not exist within it, and Fate Manipulation, for the same reason. In essence, they are able to choose their own fates, but they remain just as vulnerable at the point in time in which they do exist.

Type 4: Irregular Causality: Characters with this type of Acausality operate on a different and irregular system of cause and effect than regular causality. This grants them resistance to abilities such as Causality Manipulation, Fate Manipulation, and Precognition, among others.

vsbattles.fandom.com

Acausality

Acausality is the ability to act unrestrained by conventional cause and effect, on a scale that varies depending on the character. For some characters, this means not being affected by changes to the past; for others, this means defying all logic and acting with disregard for traditional...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...

I standby what i said..

anyone want to help clear a possible misunderstanding im having?
 
I agree with Don't talk.

I honestly think type 4 acausality is extremely overrated, and should only grant immunities that it has feats of granting.
 
Vietthai96 said:
So, what should acausal 4 grant then, almost all of acausal 4 characters on the wiki have not even a supposed feat regarding type 4
Click to expand...
So, are types 2/3 better than 4? My crt was aiming to make it 5>4>3>2>1, but idk how things are now... regardless, this thread can be closed, I guess.
 
Vietthai96 said:
So, what should acausal 4 grant then, almost all of acausal 4 characters on the wiki have not even a supposed feat regarding type 4
Click to expand...
Not sure honestly. It's kind of like reality warping. As an ability it's extremely vague and useless, but if the character has other feats using it(like using their reality warping to revive someone) then that can be indexed seperately.
 
kuramamyfav68 said:
So, are types 2/3 better than 4? My crt was aiming to make it 5>4>3>2>1, but idk how things are now... regardless, this thread can be closed, I guess.
Click to expand...
Depend, but obviously 5 is the highest due to transcended causality as a whole. 1 is very typical and common, 3 is 1 on steroid, 2 and 4 is actually different, but 4 is > 2 due to require feat of fate hax or causal hax that type while 2 doesn't need
Darksmash said:
Not sure honestly. It's kind of like reality warping. As an ability it's extremely vague and useless, but if the character has other feats using it(like using their reality warping to revive someone) then that can be indexed seperately.
Click to expand...
Hardly reality warp. It is still a type of acausality, no way and no reason to deny it existence, it current properties is grant resistance to fate and causal hax which can only hax conventional, normal cause and fate, also precog; which is pretty balance. If we hard with this type then either remove it and pretend that there is no such a thing as acausality 4, or upgrade it similar to what OP proposed, require feat of interacting with this type of acausal, like type 5, which make this type is even more broken
 
Vietthai96 said:
Hardly reality warp. It is still a type of acausality, no way and no reason to deny it existence, it current properties is grant resistance to fate and causal hax which can only hax conventional, normal cause and fate, also precog; which is pretty balance. If we hard with this type then either remove it and pretend that there is no such a thing as acausality 4, or upgrade it similar to what OP proposed, require feat of interacting with this type of acausal, like type 5, which make this type is even more broken
Click to expand...
By "like reality warping" I meant it's similar in the sense of being a vague ability. Reality warping doesn't grant any specific hax on its own and is a very useless ability pretty much. Same with working on a different system of causality. Unless we are explicitly told what kind of immunities it grants in the verse it's just a useless label.
 
Darksmash said:
By "like reality warping" I meant it's similar in the sense of being a vague ability. Reality warping doesn't grant any specific hax on its own and is a very useless ability pretty much. Same with working on a different system of causality. Unless we are explicitly told what kind of immunities it grants in the verse it's just a useless label.
Click to expand...
this is not true at all. you cant just affect a being that works on different laws of cause and effect with abilities that depend on the current system of causality in our universe(A causes B) in order to function correctly. say if you had fate manip and you try to make something cause something that wouldnt work if the entity youre trying to affect doesnt even abide by those rules
 
Sevil Natas said:
this is not true at all. you cant just affect a being that works on different laws of cause and effect with abilities that depend on the current system of causality in our universe(A causes B) in order to function correctly. say if you had fate manip and you try to make something cause something that wouldnt work if the entity youre trying to affect doesnt even abide by those rules
Click to expand...
that's my point!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CodeCCLL
  • Locked
Bill Cipher Acausality Revision
Replies
9
Views
2K
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
ShionAH
Bill Cipher Precognition Buff
2
Replies
69
Views
3K
Elizhaa
Elizhaa
PrinceStories
  • Locked
Problem Acausality type 4 Lucifer's
Replies
31
Views
2K
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
  • Locked
DC Comics: Acausality revisions
2 3
Replies
84
Views
4K
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Quasar002
Acausality question
Replies
3
Views
735
GreatIskandar14045
GreatIskandar14045
Back
Top