Chainsaw Man: Why in the hell did they get away with this?

[DaReaperMan]

Oh this is going to be hellish for me, huh...

so! This calc. Nothing wrong with it, really... just who it's scaled to.

This is a CRT, and it uses this scan, and This scan proves the point I'm going to make...

You don't scale to something that ***** you up like this. If someone broke your arm, you don't ******' scale to the feat that broke said arm and fingers and literally forced you to regenerate in order to even begin to keep fighting!

this is endurance, nuff said...

as for what to replace this with? there's an 8-C scaling I saw that I didn't see anything egregious with, so just use that.

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Yeah... Not sure how this was accepted. I agree.

 

[Damage3245]

The OP makes sense to me.

 

[Da3ggman]

Seems good to be, axe it.

Or would it be chainsaw it?

 

[Agnaa]

I actually kinda disagree, you just need to be very very careful with the scaling, and with applying that Durability value in a fight.

If an attack breaks your bones, leaves you crawling around, and you can still move a little bit, you did withstand the attack. But characters won't scale to that durability value unless they can also break your bones to a similar or greater extent. And if you're in a match, characters with that level of AP will put you in a similar state with one blow.

You may want to include two durability values, one which they can handle with ease, and one "at most" value which leaves their bones broken. But on principle, I don't think it should be removed entirely.

I think as long as the attack doesn't, like, remove/obliterate the part of the body it contacted, it can work as a durability feat.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I actually kinda disagree, you just need to be very very careful with the scaling, and with applying that Durability value in a fight.

If an attack breaks your bones, leaves you crawling around, and you can still move a little bit, you did withstand the attack. But characters won't scale to that durability value unless they can also break your bones to a similar or greater extent. And if you're in a match, characters with that level of AP will put you in a similar state with one blow.

You may want to include two durability values, one which they can handle with ease, and one "at most" value which leaves their bones broken. But on principle, I don't think it should be removed entirely.

I think as long as the attack doesn't, like, remove/obliterate the part of the body it contacted, it can work as a durability feat.

So kind of like how the M1 Freebrams is treated in it's durability section?

 

[That_moron2]

Following

 

[Hypertornado099]

I agree with Agnaa, but I feel like this may be a problem with many verses in general

But characters won't scale to that durability value unless they can also break your bones to a similar or greater extent

especially this ^

 

[Agnaa]

So kind of like how the M1 Freebrams is treated in it's durability section?

Not really, since that's about a calc for full material destruction, the source is kinda different, and so is how it's indexed. The example I know of (due to making it) is Koyomi Araragi's second key.

I agree with Agnaa, but I feel like this may be a problem with many verses in general

especially this ^

Yeah, but there's also some verses that do it correctly. So one step at a time ig.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Not really, since that's about a calc for full material destruction, the source is kinda different, and so is how it's indexed. The example I know of (due to making it) is Koyomi Araragi's second key.

I'd prefer to list the durability the character is usually at as well, admittedly, so we'd have 8-C, at most High 8-C(or a vary tier from 8-C to At most High 8-C)