Acausality (Type 1) Clarification

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Type 1 Acausality is the power to resist having your past tampered with through standard temporal paradoxes; e.g., killing a character with this ability in the past won't affect them in the present. However, I would like to add a note to this ability that it only applies to characters explicitly depicted as having the power to resist temporal paradoxes in their past. It's a common trope in stories involving time travel for a time-traveling person to retain their memories of the previous timeline even after changing the past. Almost all verses operating on such logic don't depict this as a bona fide power of time-travelers, especially given how such characters logically wouldn't be immune to those changes if they weren't the ones doing the time-traveling.

The proposed note:

Note that only characters ''explicitly depicted'' as immune to time paradoxes in their past by feats and/or direct statements qualify for this power. Fiction commonly features time travel systems where time-travelers, for no explainable reason, retain their memories of previous timelines even after changing the past, and merely existing in a work with such mechanics doesn't mean the ''character'' inherently has such an immunity, especially given how they would still be affected if someone else was time-traveling instead.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

@Antvasima @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Andytrenom @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @DarkGrath @Dereck03 @Planck69

 

[LordGriffin1000]

So characters would need statements or like a feat that shows them unaffected while others are? Overall I'm Neutral, if others agree with this then sure but I'll wait to see the responses.

 

[Qawsedf234]

In principle I'm not against it the removal. Though retaining memories of a past event isn't the same as being immune to changes in the past.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

In principle I'm not against it the removal. Though retaining memories of a past event isn't the same as being immune to changes in the past.

If you retain those memories, you are at least partly immune to such changes.

 

[ByAsura]

Seems fine.