Addition to the reactions page

[DontTalkDT]

Since it came up recently it's probably worth discussing and adding, sooo...
On our reactions page we have the perception time (i.e. reaction time) table.

We have the following reminder listed on that page

Reaction speed has both a distance and a timeframe component, so all calculations that are completed for reaction speed cannot simply be a timeframe by itself. Do not randomly assume a 1 meter distance for each timeframe and use that speed for the reaction speed.

That reminder should be extended to also include the reverse. I.e. if you have travel, combat or reaction speed in a m/s format, you can't just calculate a perception timeframe to it by assuming the character can react in the timeframe necessary for something with that speed to cover 1 meter. That was basically already the issue in the space travel case, so noting it is worth it.

So illegitimate way of perception quantification would be: "Character is 100m/s fast, so I assume they can react in 1m/(100 m/s) = 0.01s."
Legitimate would be something like: "A 100 m/s attack was fired at the character from 2 meters away and they managed to create a forcefield in time. 2m/(100 m/s) = 0.02s perception time."
or "Character was stated to move at 100 m/s at that moment and turned a corner into a 1m wide corridor without crashing into the wall. To coordinate that they must have the reactions to turn in the timeframe in which they pass by the corridor, so 1m/(100 m/s) = 0.01s reactions."
Things like that.

So my proposal is to expand the upper note to

Reaction speed has both a distance and a timeframe component, so all calculations that are completed for reaction speed cannot simply be a timeframe by itself. Do not randomly assume a 1 meter distance for each timeframe and use that speed for the reaction speed. Other way around, perception time is just a timeframe and by that not proportional to a speed value alone. Do not assume that a character with a certain speed will have a perception time of 1 meter divided by that speed. Such calculations need a feat that demonstrates perception time and a suitable distance determined from that feat.

 

[KingTempest]

For calculations that are based on a canonical stated movement/combat/travel speed to find reactions, then scaling off of that, then how will calcs of this nature work?

Would you find a reasonable method of calculating the speed they can react at, then finding reactions?
How would this (above) work in the case of calc stacking?

Would you have to do things such as calc a hypothetical reaction? For example.

Character has shown to be able to turn at 45% angles while moving at a certain speed. Find their reactions by calculating the speed they react to while moving a certain distance.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Following just cause I wanna know how this all goes

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

That reminder should be extended to also include the reverse. I.e. if you have travel, combat or reaction speed in a m/s format, you can't just calculate a perception timeframe to it by assuming the character can react in the timeframe necessary for something with that speed to cover 1 meter. That was basically already the issue in the space travel case, so noting it is worth it.

So if a character displays the ability to move at a stated speed and react over short distances consistently, what's the issue with 1 m? It wouldn't be arbitrary or random.

 

[Arnoldstone18]

Would you find a reasonable method of calculating the speed they can react at, then finding reactions?

You know this scenario

Character A: Oh no! he/she disappeared (preception has not adjusted to his/her speed)

Character A: Oh she's right in front of me (preception finally picks up the character's speed in time)

or

A car approaches you faster than you can perceive initially:

You: ...

Car approaches fast but you cant see

all of a sudden the car appears right in front of you because you were able to perceive it in time.

Rip tho.


Is that what is being talked about?
The amount of time a person can perceive an object.

 

[KingTempest]

You know this scenario

Character A: Oh no! he/she disappeared (preception has not adjusted to his/her speed)

Character A: Oh she's right in front of me (preception finally picks up the character's speed in time)

or

A car approaches you faster than you can perceive initially:

You: ...

Car approaches fast but you cant see

all of a sudden the car appears right in front of you because you were able to perceive it in time.

Rip tho.


Is that what is being talked about?
The amount of time a person can perceive an object.

Nada

Someone can move at a certain stated speed, and someone blitzes them.
Moving at a certain speed means you have a certain reaction time.

 

[Arnoldstone18]

Nada

Someone can move at a certain stated speed, and someone blitzes them.
Moving at a certain speed means you have a certain reaction time.

Ohhh thanks for dumbing it down for me.

 

[DontTalkDT]

For calculations that are based on a canonical stated movement/combat/travel speed to find reactions, then scaling off of that, then how will calcs of this nature work?

Would you find a reasonable method of calculating the speed they can react at, then finding reactions?
How would this (above) work in the case of calc stacking?

Would you have to do things such as calc a hypothetical reaction? For example.

Not sure I understand the questions. The two examples for legitimate calculations in the OP use stated speeds, so would those answer your questions?

 

[KingTempest]

Not sure I understand the questions. The two examples for legitimate calculations in the OP use stated speeds, so would those answer your first questions?

not really. it's related to those though.

Character A blitzes Character B. Character B has a stated speed of let's say 200,000 m/s.
In order to find out reactions for Character B instead of using the average 0.013, the calcer would say "1 m/200,000 m/s" (which is apparently now Taboo) to find the reaction time of Character B.
Character A covers 13 meters in the timeframe that Character B can react to.

13 meters / (1 meter / 200,000 meters per second) would be the math.
A calc that uses this (sorry to throw you under the bus) is this. Character B is a certain speed (speed of lightning), Character A blitzes them.

With the issue in the OP, we no longer can assume that a distance in their reactions component is 1 meter, effectively ******** on all of these calcs.

 

[DontTalkDT]

not really. it's related to those though.

Character A blitzes Character B. Character B has a stated speed of let's say 200,000 m/s.
In order to find out reactions for Character B instead of using the average 0.013, the calcer would say "1 m/200,000 m/s" (which is apparently now Taboo) to find the reaction time of Character B.
Character A covers 13 meters in the timeframe that Character B can react to.

13 meters / (1 meter / 200,000 meters per second) would be the math.
A calc that uses this (sorry to throw you under the bus) is this. Character B is a certain speed (speed of lightning), Character A blitzes them.

With the issue in the OP, we no longer can assume that a distance in their reactions component is 1 meter, effectively ******** on all of these calcs.

Those calcs probably were never really consistent with our standards, yeah. IMO their relatively obvious calc stacking. It's literally the "character dodges bullet from close range. We say character is approximately bullet speed (or has approx. bullet speed reactions in this case). Then we, on another occasion, use that characters speed (or reactions) to calculate a new value"-case, just that instead of the bullet speed you use a stated speed and instead of dodging something, they prevent themselves from running into the closest wall.

I mean, the space case really illustrates well the problem with just using 1m as blanket value:

Basically, flying through space is just like flying an aircraft in a way. You hardly encounter any obstacles so you don't have to manoeuvre. And in case you encounter something, there is plenty of time for you to decelerate (slow down) or make a slight adjustment in advance. In long distance space travels, you will almost never have to worry about taking sharp turns and maneuvering at your top speed.

For a clearer perspective, let's assume a highly unlikely scenario (credit for this goes to @DMUA):

A character is somehow blind enough to not notice a star system or planets from afar, and he ends up coming close to crashing into a planet, but by the time he's within the orbit of it's moon, he notices because it's an entire planet and turns to the side before he hits.

That's around 382,500,000 meters of leeway. Let's say he's flying 1,000,000 times the speed of light.

382,500,000 divided by 2.9979e+14 is a reaction time of 0.00000127589 seconds, Massively Hypersonic+ reaction time.

While on Earth the cases will be less extreme and we do tend to say that characters which can do tight manoeuvring and dodging and stuff at their speed have reactions comparable to their speed, for a definite value calculated by such means needs a justified distance to use and is a calculation.

 

[KingTempest]

Unfortunate then

OP looks fine to me regardless

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I see the point of, needing a stated distance for reactions as to avoid calc stacking. However, what am I trying to wrap my head around is the following: if a character is stated to be unable to react and move at all in response to another characters “blitz”, what’s wrong with lowballing it to assuming they couldn’t move 1 meter in the time it took to get blitzed?

 

[KLOL506]

I have one question for this.

Suppose a character can dodge a bullet by quickstepping from it/ducking or blocking it.

Is this only a reaction feat? Or does it apply to combat speed as well, given that the character can move their legs or arms in order to move away from or counter the projectile?

 

[Damage3245]

I have one question for this.

Suppose a character can dodge a bullet by quickstepping from it/ducking or blocking it.

Is this only a reaction feat? Or does it apply to combat speed as well, given that the character can move their legs or arms in order to move away from or counter the projectile?

All of those seem like quick, one-off movements. The reactions page specifies that falls under reaction speed and combat speed requires multiple such movements in a short timespan.

 

[Damage3245]

Also, I agree with the OP. The arguments there make sense to me and it is a necessary clarification of our standards.

I see the point of, needing a stated distance for reactions as to avoid calc stacking. However, what am I trying to wrap my head around is the following: if a character is stated to be unable to react and move at all in response to another characters “blitz”, what’s wrong with lowballing it to assuming they couldn’t move 1 meter in the time it took to get blitzed?

Sometimes characters fail to move not only because of the limitation in how fast they can move their body, but also because of factors like they were caught off guard and surprised, their perceptions didn't recognize what was blitzing them, they were more preoccupied with mentally processing and thinking than just reacting, etc. It doesn't seem right to just assume that the character being blitzed failed to move 1 meter.

 

[KLOL506]

All of those seem like quick, one-off movements. The reactions page specifies that falls under reaction speed and combat speed requires multiple such movements in a short timespan.

What if those maneuvers can be performed multiple times in quick succession? A quickstep and blocking fall under it.

Would slicing a bullet or blocking/grabbing an arrow by swinging a blade also fall under reactions? Or would they be combat speed if said slicing and blocking can be performed multiple times to block enemy attacks?

 

[Damage3245]

What if those maneuvers can be performed multiple times in quick succession? A quickstep and blocking fall under it.

Would slicing a bullet or blocking an arrow by swinging a blade also fall under reactions? Or would they be combat speed if said slicing and blocking can be performed multiple times to block enemy attacks?

Just going off of this:

Reaction speed is defined as a single movement in a defined timeframe, which a character has been shown capable of. A series of movements in similar timeframes makes this combat speed, so this term should only be applied for a single, quick movement. Examples include ducking backwards to dodge bullets and diving away to dodge extremely fast vehicles.

My interpretation is that your examples of "quickstepping", "blocking" or "ducking" a bullet would be reaction speed.

Performing multiple blocks/dodges in quick succession would be combat speed.

So deflecting/cutting a single bullet could be interpreted as reaction speed (unless it was something like you turned around to a new angle, unsheathed your sword and then easily sliced the bullet). Garou deflecting a stream of several of bullets would be combat speed.

 

[KLOL506]

When I meant quickstepping, I meant this (This doesn't involve dodging bullets but the movement used to dodge the bullet is the exact same). As for slicing bullets, this would be my example, and for blocking, this would be my example (Here Hercules blocks the light from blinding him and then uses the same blocking moves to stop Kratos's attacks).

My point is, suppose the characters are using these same exact maneuvers in a different scenario not involving dodging projectiles, but here they perform it in quick succession.

 

[KLOL506]

Just going off of this:



My interpretation is that your examples of "quickstepping", "blocking" or "ducking" a bullet would be reaction speed.

Performing multiple blocks/dodges in quick succession would be combat speed.

So deflecting/cutting a single bullet could be interpreted as reaction speed (unless it was something like you turned around to a new angle, unsheathed your sword and then easily sliced the bullet). Garou deflecting a stream of several of bullets would be combat speed.

When I meant quickstepping, I meant this (This doesn't involve dodging bullets but the movement used to dodge the bullet is the exact same, and here it's being performed in quick succession several times). As for slicing bullets, this would be my example, and for blocking, this would be my example (Here Hercules blocks the light of Helios from blinding him and then uses the same blocking moves to stop multiple of Kratos's attacks, which aren't projectile-based).

What I wanted to know was, suppose the characters are using these same exact maneuvers in a different scenario not involving dodging projectiles, but here they perform it in quick succession in combat against their foes, and the foes more than give said characters trouble in dodging said attacks. Wouldn't the character maintain their reaction speed in those moves performed several times in a row in quick succession and thus it'd be combat speed?

 

[AKM sama]

The OP seems reasonable. Though it is unfortunate that many older calcs will get complicated.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

What if someone moved so fast that the opponent couldn't move at all in the same timeframe?

Should we use the slow motion calculation?

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I think the reaction table values should have further clarification or be removed entirely because those time values are calculated via 1 m / speed, but if that’s a bad assumption, they shouldn’t show up in our official table values.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I think the reaction table values should have further clarification or be removed entirely because those time values are calculated via 1 m / speed, but if that’s a bad assumption, they shouldn’t show up in our official table values.

Either the reactions table needs to be changed or Arc can still do the calculation he did

Since both follow the same methods of being figured out

 

[CloverDragon03]

What if someone moved so fast that the opponent couldn't move at all in the same timeframe?

Should we use the slow motion calculation?

This was legit what I was about to ask, because there's no movement being done

 

[Damage3245]

I think the reaction table values should have further clarification or be removed entirely because those time values are calculated via 1 m / speed, but if that’s a bad assumption, they shouldn’t show up in our official table values.

I think the reactions table was intended for a different purpose than what it has been interpreted to be.

It is meant to provide the names of the different tiers depending on what result you get. If you get a calc result of 0.0014 seconds, you don't just put that number on the profile you put what tier that would fall under.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I think the reactions table was intended for a different purpose than what it has been interpreted to be.

It is meant to provide the names of the different tiers depending on what result you get. If you get a calc result of 0.0014 seconds, you don't just put that number on the profile you put what tier that would fall under.

Sure but the fact it assumes 1 m as the distance to divide by to achieve said time is the same assumption used in the blitz calcs. So, to avoid confusion, which it clearly created, they should be removed.

 

[Damage3245]

Sure but the fact it assumes 1 m as the distance to divide by to achieve said time is the same assumption used in the blitz calcs. So, to avoid confusion, which it clearly created, they should be removed.

I don't have a problem with it being removed, but if somebody got a perception time result for a calc, do we say what tier that value falls under, or just ignore the tiering of perception time altogether? I suppose it is fine to remove it altogether because the labels for speed tiers don't make sense to apply to timeframe.

 

[KingTempest]

but if somebody got a perception time result for a calc, do we say what tier that value falls under, or just ignore the tiering of perception time altogether?

we should leave it

the reactions table is to quantify reaction speed in tiers. I'm not going to put "Can react in 0.000000245 seconds" on a profile. The tiers are fine.

In the case of the feats Arc is worrying about, just calc reactions based on the movement speed being done at that moment, and if they don't move, do the slow motion thing

 

[CloverDragon03]

I don't have a problem with it being removed, but if somebody got a perception time result for a calc, do we say what tier that value falls under, or just ignore the tiering of perception time altogether? I suppose it is fine to remove it altogether because the labels for speed tiers don't make sense to apply to timeframe.

I'm with KT on this, the tiers should stay.

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

I don't understand. What do you mean "Divide by 1 meter"? Articles about perception use the same logic, No? Like the legendary "(1/220) reaction seconds".

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

What is slow motion thing?

 

[KLOL506]

What is slow motion thing?

Person's actual speed: (True projectile speed/projectile apparent speed) * Person's apparent speed

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Person's actual speed: (True projectile speed/projectile apparent speed) * Person's apparent speed

What are the justifications for 0.013 and 6.35?

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

6.35 is human speed
0.013 is the speed of a snail

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Thanks, just found it in common feat references!

 

[KLOL506]

What are the justifications for 0.013 and 6.35?

0.013 is true garden snail speed and 6.35 is human jogging speed.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

thanks, apologies for the slight derail, this was very insightful

 

[CloverDragon03]

I don't understand. What do you mean "Divide by 1 meter"? Articles about perception use the same logic, No? Like the legendary "(1/220) reaction seconds".

Reaction times are derived on the reactions page by taking "1 / (speed value)"

For example, Speed of Light reactions on the Reactions page are 3.336e-9 seconds. To verify this, take 1 / 299792458, and you'll get the same result

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Figured I’d ask this here since it’s related to reactions and blitz calcs.

Calculations

In order to determine a character's Destructive Capacity, we must first look through the character's feats, and determine how much energy was exerted to preform such a feat. Sometimes the destructive capacity of the feat can be determined easily with no need of a calculation, but most of the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

So this page uses 0.001 for slow motion but the common feat references page uses 0.013, which is correct? Are both fine depending on the context?

 

[Damage3245]

IIRC 0.013 is the more commonly used one. I don't know if the 0.001 figure is just outdated or what though.