Dark Deception: Bierce's Immortality and Regeneration

[DaReaperMan]

Remember when I said the scaling overhaul was probably going to be the last thread before Chapter 5? I forgot I had an issue with Bierce's profile

Bierce (Dark Deception)

Helen Bierce, also known as just Bierce, is the deuteragonist of Dark Deception. She is the person who appoints Doug Houser to collect the pieces of the Riddle of Heaven, and had a history with Malak. Tier: Unknown physically, At least 8-C with powers Name: Helen Bierce, Beatrice, Biercy (By...

vsbattles.fandom.com

and also stated that no matter what torment Malak inflicts on her, she will simply heal and cannot be destroyed

1:14:42

This is given for type 8, and while in the right context it can be Type 8, I think it could be something else instead.

Regeneration and Types 2, 3, and 5 Immortality.

Let's do the easy part first; Regeneration, no matter what Malak does Bierce will heal, Malak has fire, so ashing is on the table, but so is Vaporization with enough fire and magma, both of which Malak has access to. You could even argue Mid-Godly so here is my suggestion...

Regeneration (Mid-High, possibly Low-Godly Overtime; Bierce stated that No matter what Malak does, she will heal and cannot be destroyed.(scanned as above) Malak has access to ashing and vaporizing materials such as Fire and Magma(obviously scanned), but can also shatter souls as shown here(nother scan)

Now let's do the hard part; Type 5 Immortality

Bierce stated that she "cannot be destroyed" by Malak and that she is not flesh and blood(same scan as above)

Normally, "Cannot be destroyed" would imply she's reliant on something yes, but... what would she be reliant on? Her ring piece? A possibility, but I don't think we should be prospecting about what it could be without implications.

So here's how I'd word it

Immortality (Types 1, 2, 3, likely 5, possibly 8 "Type 1 justification". Bierce stated that she "cannot be destroyed" by Malak and that she is not flesh and blood)

Oh, and it'd be Type 1 Inorganic Physiology too I guess.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Just to make sure, I went backwards and afterwards to see if there is anything I missed.
Frankly speaking, I did not watch one hour of the video, so if I say anything, contradictory to the plot, please respectfully point it out.

The whole statement is:

BIERCE You are alive! Wait… how are you alive? I thought Malak had taken you for good. And the ring pieces! You got them back! Oh, I could kiss you! Not that I am not going to. Don't get your hopes up. Also, don't worry about me. I am fine. I am not flesh and blood. Remember? No matter what torment Malak inflicts on me, I will heal. He cannot destroy me. He can only enslave me for all eternity.

I will be absolutely honest: I have no idea what she meant by "I am not flesh and blood." I am contemplating some philosophical context, and within this framework, all I could speculate is that she is simply implying that she is different from humans – a supernatural being, a spirit, or whatever else.

Moving on, this is undoubtedly a regenerative feat. I will address your suggestions step by step and explain why I disagree with them.

This is given for type 8, and while in the right context it can be Type 8, I think it could be something else instead.

Bierce stated that she "cannot be destroyed" by Malak and that she is not flesh and blood(same scan as above)

Normally, "Cannot be destroyed" would imply she's reliant on something yes, but... what would she be reliant on? Her ring piece? A possibility, but I don't think we should be prospecting about what it could be without implications.

I don't think so. Perhaps the context ended there, and we are simply relying on an assumption that her existence relies on immortality. But I don't think anything indicates such a notion. There's nothing to remotely explain why she cannot be destroyed; the only information we have here is that she has a weakness, which is mentioned in the next sentence.

Now, regarding the idea of "immortality," I'm not someone who loves to nitpick, but I prioritize the significance of the context and always place it as my top priority before suggesting any abilities.

For me, the dialogue that is being provided doesn't explicitly confirm the character's immortality, but it strongly suggests their resilience and ability to heal from harm. While the character claims that they can heal no matter what torment Malak inflicts on them and that Malak cannot destroy them, this doesn't necessarily guarantee complete immortality. It indicates a high level of durability and regenerative ability, but it's possible that there are limits to what she can endure.

The character's statement about being enslaved for eternity could imply that while she can heal from physical harm, she might still be susceptible to other forms of control or manipulation.

To determine if this character is truly immortal, you would need more context from the larger story.

---

But we both (or at least I) agree that there is a regeneration feat. The question would be: how far can she regenerate, and what are its limitations?

As you mentioned, he (Malak) possesses the ability to unleash fire, thus ashing becomes a viable option. However, vaporization also enters the realm of possibility through the utilization of sufficient fire and magma – both of which Malak has at his disposal.

I can grasp the concept of the mid-godly argument being presented in this thread. However, it appears implausible to me that she could endure the total annihilation of her soul, body, and mind and still achieve regeneration from such an event.

With only this singular reference provided and lacking any supporting feats, the fact that he can shatter souls does not necessarily imply his capability to utterly destroy an entire soul. Unless he were to completely obliterate her beyond the existence of even a single soul shard, she (Bierce) could potentially recover from it.

Yet, should this truly be his initial course of action? If it isn't, then I am opposed to the notion of it being considered mid-godly.

In essence, to be unequivocally clear about my position, I believe this feat should be classified as possible mid-high level regeneration and solid level is dependent on how far his ability can truly without AMP or any assumption goes. (if it is only some burns; Mid-Low)

 

[DaReaperMan]

Just to make sure, I went backwards and afterwards to see if there is anything I missed.
Frankly speaking, I did not watch one hour of the video, so if I say anything, contradictory to the plot, please respectfully point it out.

We pretty much went through all relevant pieces of information over Discord, but Malak starts talking crap on the video just flat out there in the Bearly Buried scan at 7:12

The whole statement is:

BIERCE You are alive! Wait… how are you alive? I thought Malak had taken you for good. And the ring pieces! You got them back! Oh, I could kiss you! Not that I am not going to. Don't get your hopes up. Also, don't worry about me. I am fine. I am not flesh and blood. Remember? No matter what torment Malak inflicts on me, I will heal. He cannot destroy me. He can only enslave me for all eternity.

I will be absolutely honest: I have no idea what she meant by "I am not flesh and blood." I am contemplating some philosophical context, and within this framework, all I could speculate is that she is simply implying that she is different from humans – a supernatural being, a spirit, or whatever else.

Yeah, at the same time it could also mean that she's just that: not flesh and blood. Hence why I suggested Inorganic Physiology 1

Moving on, this is undoubtedly a regenerative feat. I will address your suggestions step by step and explain why I disagree with them.

I don't think so. Perhaps the context ended there, and we are simply relying on an assumption that her existence relies on immortality. But I don't think anything indicates such a notion. There's nothing to remotely explain why she cannot be destroyed; the only information we have here is that she has a weakness, which is mentioned in the next sentence.

Now, regarding the idea of "immortality," I'm not someone who loves to nitpick, but I prioritize the significance of the context and always place it as my top priority before suggesting any abilities.

For me, the dialogue that is being provided doesn't explicitly confirm the character's immortality, but it strongly suggests their resilience and ability to heal from harm. While the character claims that they can heal no matter what torment Malak inflicts on them and that Malak cannot destroy them, this doesn't necessarily guarantee complete immortality. It indicates a high level of durability and regenerative ability, but it's possible that there are limits to what they can endure.

The character's statement about being enslaved for eternity could imply that while they can heal from physical harm, they might still be susceptible to other forms of control or manipulation.

This makes sense, so only type 3 Immortality will be added and type 8 will be removed? Or do we add type 2 for surviving impalement by Agatha in the "fire" scan and being fine for the most part?

To determine if this character is truly immortal, you would need more context from the larger story.

---

But we both (or at least I) agree that there is a regeneration feat. The question would be: how far can she regenerate, and what are its limitations?

As you mentioned, he possesses the ability to unleash fire, thus ashing becomes a viable option. However, vaporization also enters the realm of possibility through the utilization of sufficient fire and magma – both of which Malak has at his disposal.

I can grasp the concept of the mid-godly argument being presented in this thread. However, it appears implausible to me that she could endure the total annihilation of her soul, body, and mind and still achieve regeneration from such an event.

With only this singular reference provided and lacking any supporting feats, the fact that he can shatter souls does not necessarily imply his capability to utterly destroy an entire soul. Unless he were to completely obliterate her beyond the existence of even a single soul shard, she (Bierce) could potentially recover from it.

Yet, should this truly be his initial course of action? If it isn't, then I am opposed to the notion of it being considered mid-godly.

Considering how much Malak despises Bierce, if he well and truly got his hands on her, he'd probably go straight for Soul shattering, though it's unknown if he can do so beyond a soul shard, so mid-godly goes then

In essence, to be unequivocally clear about my position, I believe this feat should be classified as possible mid-high-level regeneration and solid level is dependent on how far his ability can truly without AMP or any assumption goes. (if it is only some burns; Mid-Low)

Low-mid is the minimum, seeing as she regenned from a gruesome impalement through the chest and this is shown, but Mid-High on a likely or possibly is fine, as long as it's there and it's being taken into account

 

[ImmortalDread]

Yeah, at the same time it could also mean that she's just that: not flesh and blood. Hence why I suggested Inorganic Physiology 1

I'm not sure if I can agree. As I've mentioned, we're essentially making assumptions without any context regarding her intended meaning. The absence of context leaves us in a void, as it could imply that she is either just a different human or possibly even supernatural. (the safer and still fit the current available context)

As for regeneration level discussion;

Low-mid is the minimum, seeing as she regenned from a gruesome impalement through the chest and this is shown, but Mid-High on a likely or possibly is fine, as long as it's there and it's being taken into account

Yeah, this seems okay to me. This is my entire stance in the thread.

As for the topic of immortality, I still maintain that the provided context does not explicitly refer to any form of immortality.

Or do we add type 2 for surviving impalement by Agatha in the "fire" scan and being fine for the most part?

Which scene? Because for me, it seems to stem from her regeneration source rather than her being truly immortal, which is never referenced in the entire story (or maybe it is, but I would assume you'd mention it if there was a reference for that).

 

[DaReaperMan]

I'm not sure if I can agree. As I've mentioned, we're essentially making assumptions without any context regarding her intended meaning. The absence of context leaves us in a void, as it could imply that she is either just a different human or possibly even supernatural. (the safer and still fit the current available context)

As for regeneration level discussion;

Yeah, this seems okay to me. This is my entire stance in the thread.

As for the topic of immortality, I still maintain that the provided context does not explicitly refer to any form of immortality.

Which scene? Because for me, it seems to stem from her regeneration source rather than her being truly immortal, which is never referenced in the entire story (or maybe it is, but I would assume you'd mention it if there was a reference for that).

Eh, I usually go for the most bull-headed answer, but that may just be me

Cool

Type 3 Immortality is gained from having a certain regen level, for the most part. Depending on severity it can even come from mid-low regen, let alone the Low-Mid Bierce has got



3:39 straight up impaled, next time we see her(which is like, 40 minutes to over an hour later), she's mostly recovered due to regen, but being impaled in the chest like that isn't exactly something you just shrug off without some kind of extreme resilience or instant regen, the ladder of which Bierce explicitly lacks

 

[ImmortalDread]

Type 3 Immortality is gained from having a certain regen level, for the most part. Depending on severity it can even come from mid-low regen, let alone the Low-Mid Bierce has got

To my understanding, immortality of the type 3 is only attributed if the reason for the observed regeneration is their immortality. We do not classify something as immortality type 3 solely based on their regenerative abilities. This is the criterion by which I differentiate between the two.

3:39 straight up impaled, next time we see her(which is like, 40 minutes to over an hour later), she's mostly recovered due to regen, but being impaled in the chest like that isn't exactly something you just shrug off without some kind of extreme resilience or instant regen, the ladder of which Bierce explicitly lacks

I believe this serves as supporting evidence for her regeneration. However, I must clarify that it doesn't occur instantly; rather, it happens over time. If it were instantaneous, it would have been depicted in the scene.

Likewise, I believe you already agree with this point.

 

[DaReaperMan]

To my understanding, immortality of the type 3 is only attributed if the reason for the observed regeneration is their immortality. We do not classify something as immortality type 3 solely based on their regenerative abilities. This is the criterion by which I differentiate between the two.

I believe this serves as supporting evidence for her regeneration. However, I must clarify that it doesn't occur instantly; rather, it happens over time. If it were instantaneous, it would have been depicted in the scene.

Likewise, I believe you already agree with this point.

"3: Immortality via regeneration: Characters with this type of immortality can simply regenerate from wounds that would normally be lethal, though its effectiveness depends on the degree of the regeneration." ~ Immortality Page

Not really, it's basically "regen good. Regen can make person immortal"

That is the low-mid feat lol, we see her once that part of the cutscene ends, and she finishes healing during her dialog after Bearly Buried, the very same dialog I put into the OP

 

[ImmortalDread]

Using this logic, any regeneration can make a person immortal and grant them immortality. However, this concept seems less sensible and undermines the significance of distinctions.

In my view (the only logical basis that distinguishes between the two), regeneration should only lead to immortality if its origin is tied to immortality or if it's explicitly stated to result in immortality through the process of regeneration.

This is my stance.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Eh, practical application beats theory IMO, if you get impaled in the stomach, you're gonna die without aid, if that aid is regen, that's a form of immortality.

That's the basis type 3 Immortality is built on, it's not overcomplicating things, it's not looking for XYZ statement, it's straight up just "yeah that'd be lethal, it's a form of immortality via regeneration".

And I'm gonna be blunt, there'd be mass pushback if that basis was to be changed due to just overcomplicating a very simple concept to grasp

 

[ImmortalDread]

Eh, practical application beats theory IMO, if you get impaled in the stomach, you're gonna die without aid, if that aid is regen, that's a form of immortality.

This is a valid point. I will concur with immortality type 3 based on this basis.

I don't think I am overcomplicating things (as I mentioned to you in private). The issue is that the fiction is so absurd that it defies even common scenarios where people should theoretically and scientifically die before the regeneration feat, yet they still live a natural life and die like any other beings. This undermines the purpose of basic immortality.

This is why my understanding of the significance of distinctions, at the very least, can address this potential issue. But I can agree for now, and act as those are cases anti-feat rather exceptional.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Looking at it now, I don't think it's presumptuous to say that she lacks immortality. We already knew from the fact that she is different from a normal human being, somewhat supernatural. So yes, considering this perspective, it can still align with the narrative framework.

 

[DaReaperMan]

TBH from what's implied, all souls are immortal in some way, it's just... questionable as to what Bierce really is in her current state.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Bump

 

[ShionAH]

You could even argue Mid-Godly so here is my suggestion...

This would be Low-Godly since theres no implication that Malak can also destroy Mind

 

[Da3ggman]

Would Bierce get Immortality Type 7 since its implied that she is dead?

 

[DaReaperMan]

Would Bierce get Immortality Type 7 since its implied that she is dead?

TBH from what's implied, all souls are immortal in some way, it's just... questionable as to what Bierce really is in her current state.

See here.

The most you can get from what Bierce says is regen and Inorganic Physiology type 1

 

[Da3ggman]

See here.

The most you can get from what Bierce says is regen and Inorganic Physiology type 1

I was more so referring to the secret extras you can unlock, that tell the story of Bierce and her deal with Malak.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I was more so referring to the secret extras you can unlock, that tell the story of Bierce and her deal with Malak.

Bierce's diaries? Ehhhhh, I'd say there's too many variables at play here to label her as Undead

Also you've been decently knowledgeable on Dark Deception all this time and haven't even added yourself to the verse page?

 

[Da3ggman]

Bierce's diaries? Ehhhhh, I'd say there's too many variables at play here to label her as Undead

Also you've been decently knowledgeable on Dark Deception all this time and haven't even added yourself to the verse page?

That's fair; I suppose we'll have to wait for Chapter 5 for more info.

Honestly, I've been meaning to add myself to a lot of support pages, so it's not just a Dark Deception things. I'm stuck in a cycle of "Think about adding me, get distracted by schoolwork, forget to do it."

 

[DaReaperMan]

Bump

 

[AThe1412]

Bump? Malak did say something along the lines of "Heaven and Hell are simply quaint and amusing concepts that humans thought of. In truth, there's a dark dimension where all evil souls gather and wage war to become the ultimate evil", so she and Doug are kinda dead but not really.