• 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.

At What Point is a Feat too Survivable by Regular Humans to Actually Count?

IDK3465

He/Him
251
78
Hello everyone,

Recently, I made this calc for a character tanking a relatively high fall and, initially, it was accepted by Flashlight237 and nobody seemed to have any issue with it. But, soon afterwards, Agnaa brought up how regular people have consistently survived falls of a similar height in real life, with Bambu agreeing.

While we still haven’t decided on wether or not that calc is acceptable yet, Agnaa’s comments have made me question where exactly we should draw the line between what regular humans can and can’t do. Like, if regular people have been shown to get lucky and survive 9-C or rarely even 9-B falls, who’s to say that any fall truely represents a character’s durability? Or what about the many times regular people have shown to survive explosives, or lightning strikes, or car crashes, or nukes, or anything for that matter?

I should probably note that I personally don’t feel like we should discredit any of these kinds of feats just because regular people sometimes survive them. Applying the same amount of scrutiny that real life gets to something entirely fictional is ridiculous. I mainly created this thread to see how others feel about this issue and how we should handle this kinda situation in the future.

Think of this less as a question thread and more so a discussion of what our standards should be for regular humans in relation to (what should be) peak or superhuman feats.

(PS, I’m currently almost on a flight as of writing, so I won’t be able to reply for like 5 hrs, sorry :()
 
Last edited:
The lower you go in feats, the more you need to take into account actual irl mechanics. Like ok they fell, what did they fall into? Did it disperse their energy? On what part of themselves did they fall onto? Such as legs? Back? etc. Like falling leg first can serve to take some of the energy, and slow the rest of your body's fall even if negligibly, might shatter your legs but at least your head isnt ******.
Or even just that, a 10-B surviving a 9-C fall, but are they fine? Torn muscles? Broken bones?

And even things like area on impact.

Lower 9-B and below be like that, tbh you could be hyper anal and calc at this extra facets, but you could prob just skip it and use common sense.
For example, Zelda in new game falls like 25m 5 seconds into the game, and doenst even flinch and just keeps running, not even one frame of pause. That's a fall someone irl could survive, under the right conditions, but she didn't even flinch and fell leg first so, yeah in that case I'd say scale her to the energy directly. Or like, Batman falling off a skyscraper, it kinda ****** him up but he got up, would we scale him to that? Probably not, it hurt, he took damage, it's something an irl dude can live, and he even exploited those mechanics to make sure he'd be able to walk off focusing on where he landed, how he landed, etc.
 
Back
Top