- 744
- 376
- Thread starter
- #41
Probably not but I'll tryI’m precoging this rn and this isn’t gonna get accepted
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Probably not but I'll tryI’m precoging this rn and this isn’t gonna get accepted
Because it factually goes against what’s presented.Why not
YESNO
Why not
in other words the hax can be beaten by power, and you don’t actually need a resistance to it for it to not workNo, because the power is the cause of the Negation. The abilities still have the same effect as the haxs. Just like how we give them abilites such as creating portal with power, we should give them resistances.
If you beat something with power. By definition. You're resisting it.in other words the hax can be beaten by power, and you don’t actually need a resistance to it for it to not work
Sorry but this thread kinda debunks itself
This Power>Hax thing got already accepted recently to be case by case, if there is explicit context or statement in which the Hax is resisted by power.in other words the hax can be beaten by power, and you don’t actually need a resistance to it for it to not work
Sorry but this thread kinda debunks itself
I'm not knowledgeable on smt but the resistance page propagate what I'm saying anyways.Because it factually goes against what’s presented.
It's the best way of doing things, if shown.YES
Because it's a shitty way of doing things. I'll make the CRT to remove it immediately.
so smt characters are losing their resistances?It’s outdated, simple. We don’t abide by that anymore.
Yup. We can even show the thread for it.This Power>Hax thing got already accepted recently to be case by case, if there is explicit context or statement in which the Hax is resisted by power.
Sorry to ruin it for you....BUT This Power>Hax thing got already accepted recently to be case by case, if there is explicit context or statement in which the Hax is resisted by power.YES
Because it's a shitty way of doing things. I'll make the CRT to remove it immediately.
If my fireball attack lights people on fire, but people with shoes on aren’t affected by it, does everybody with shoes get resistance to fire manipulation? No, it’s just a weakness of the attack. As I said, at best it’s completely ambiguous, but realistically there’s no reason this should go throughIf you beat something with power. By definition. You're resisting it.
Ok well there’s no way to counter bad wiki standards so I guess you win ggSorry to ruin it for you....BUT This Power>Hax thing got already accepted recently to be case by case, if there is explicit context or statement in which the Hax is resisted by power.
This Power>Hax thing got already accepted recently to be case by case, if there is explicit context or statement in which the Hax is resisted by power.To sum it up
At worst, your evidence saying “the attack can be beaten if the opponent is stronger than them!” Is heavily implying that anybody, regardless of their resistances, can simply overpower the hax if they have enough power
At best, it’s completely ambiguous and isn’t even enough for a “possible” resistance to be added to the profile.
If my fireball attack lights people on fire, but people with shoes on aren’t affected by it, does everybody with shoes get resistance to fire manipulation? No, it’s just a weakness of the attack. As I said, at best it’s completely ambiguous, but realistically there’s no reason this should go through
Just show them this:Yeah I figured this CRT would eventually become Power > Hax Vs Weakness of the Hax.
I know it's an old argument but let's go through it thoroughly so we can get the misconceptions out the way and actually make some progress with this debate.
I know this debate is never-ending but I did say to be optimistic.
Not necessary, if the affect of their attack hits someone from another verse who lacks a resistance they would be affected.Agreed, but you will also have to add on the other profiles that their hax doesn't work on characters stronger than them.
And it will be removed.I'm not knowledgeable on smt but the resistance page propagate what I'm saying anyways.
The insert on the page was put there from a staff thread. So another one would need to be made to remove it. Untill then the wiki begets my symposium.And it will be removed.
We should not delete threads in a wasteful manner if they contained useful arguments to reference later.
I just used it as an example cause they have the power>hax on their page.Why are we bringing in SMT? let's focus on Dragon Ball.
All the same arguments are on this thread. But people can look at those threads if they like.We should not delete threads in a wasteful manner if they contained useful arguments to reference later.
My thoughts exactly.Why are we bringing in SMT? let's focus on Dragon Ball.
For once the wiki rules are on my side.For the record, the thread is completely wrong, but I think it’s pointless for everybody to argue unless they wanna change the rules of the wiki
I meant arguments from others as well.All the same arguments are on this thread. But people can't look at those threads if they like.
i can see your point, but smt is p much like db when it comes to those thingsMy thoughts exactly.
It's bad enough when DB is usually the whipping boy for whataboutism on CRTs for other verses
I meant to put "can" my badI meant arguments from others as well.
Still, Gravity manip should still be listed thanks to te verse showings of characters resisting Gravity x10000 (even higher) than Earth's one.
That.As much as I wish I could agree with this thread, after thinking about it for a few seconds….
It’s just that, if the hax can be beaten via superior strength, then wouldn’t that just mean the hax is limited, not that they would have resistance to it?
Here it comes the difficult one, Staff.There’s more than enough agrees here, right?