Freezing and Temperature Feats Continued

[The_King_of_Prudence]

"6-A, with 5-B thermal power"

 

[Jaakubb]

So, I still technically hold the first opinion - under the caveat that we word AP to something that doesn't exclude freezing by definition.

How would we word it though? AP is worded in a way so that it logically scales to most or all of the character's attacks and durability.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Weiss Schnee uses her aura to freeze targets, so it is combat applicable in her case. That's an example of aura behaving on what appears to be Anti-Thermal energy. And I meant characters like The Invisible Woma have the ability to use her own force-fields as an attack. It's also an extremely common ability for characters to make an energy barrier that's just as tough as their KI attacks.

 

[Jaakubb]

Weiss Schnee uses her aura to freeze targets, so it is combat applicable in her case. That's an example of aura behaving on what appears to be Anti-Thermal energy.

Appears to be. We can't just assume that all freezing feats make use of "Anti-Thermal energy." I don't really know much about rwby though.

characters like The Invisible Woman have the ability to use her own force-fields as an attack. It's also an extremely common ability for characters to make an energy barrier that's just as tough as their KI attacks.

How does she use the force fields to attacks? I don't know that much about marvel powerscaling and I prefer not to because imo it's really inconsistent. lee's video on marvel powerscaling is pretty based. Also, I don't get how characters making energy barriers comparable to their attacks has anything to do with proving that cooling feats require an input of an amount of energy equal to the amount of energy displaced. I think "ranged energy displacement" MIGHT be a better term than "energy telekinesis". It's weird too though.

 

[Kepekley23]

Weiss Schnee uses her aura to freeze targets, so it is combat applicable in her case. That's an example of aura behaving on what appears to be Anti-Thermal energy. And I meant characters like The Invisible Woma have the ability to use her own force-fields as an attack. It's also an extremely common ability for characters to make an energy barrier that's just as tough as their KI attacks.

And Naruto uses his chakra to cast jutsu.

 

[Spinoirr]

But her semblance is glyphs she makes and adds dust to them from her weapon to freeze things...

 

[Jaakubb]

I don't get what significance dust in rwby or chakra in naruto has in this discussion. Just because a source of power/energy/whatever is required to do the freezing feat, doesn't mean the required energy is proportional to the amount of thermal energy moved. For example, with a refrigerator, energy is obviously required to operate. However, there is no strict proportional relationship between the energy required to operate a fridge (if we only know that it is a fridge, not what kind it is) and the amount of thermal energy it displaces. Some fridges are more efficient than others.

The second type of freezing is using a refrigerant (could be ice, liquid nitrogen, maybe some magical material) to absorb heat. This one is more grounded in reality. An example is putting ice in a drink to cool it down. This can't scale. Thermal energy always (automatically) moves from hot to cold. If you had a freeze beam made of liquid nitrogen or something, the only energy you'd need to provide is the energy that propels it.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

How would explain creating enough liquid nitrogen to cover an entire planet however? How one would argue that that's not an AP feat when such a thing is still a global flood? And all that thermal energy either being absorbed or dispersed in order create it all in the first place. There also is such a thing as Thermal Shock; when an excessive amount of heat and an excessive amount of cold collide, it can cause destructive force. Also, Kaltias already explained that it would still required a great deal of energy to stop atoms and molecules the same way freezing stuff would.

 

[Jaakubb]

I don't remember any feats that had someone cover the world with a refrigerant. Most of the second type of freezing feat are smaller in scale, like an ice beam. Also, the thermal energy displaced is already in the environment in the first place so the character doesn't need to create it. My house probably has a lot of thermal energy in it right now because it's obviously nowhere near absolute zero.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Bending and displacing thermal energy with your own willpower is still an AP feat, and actually; there are a lot of feats of characters causing a global scale Ice Age. And firing an ice bolt from your body that freezes stuff is still AP; as is an Ice Dragon's breath.

 

[Antvasima]

Are the staff members here closer to reaching a conclusion?

 

[Jaakubb]

Bending and displacing thermal energy with your own willpower is still an AP feat, and actually; there are a lot of feats of characters causing a global scale Ice Age. And firing an ice bolt from your body that freezes stuff is still AP; as is an Ice Dragon's breath.

You're begging the question. You're using the claim that freezing is AP to prove that freezing is AP.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Would, say, a 6-B with no feats related to tanking heat-based attacks still be able to tank a 6-C freezing/heat based attack?
Are you fine with calcs of freezing energy scaling to other attacks if there's a shared energy source or something similar?

I'd say no to that, if they have absolutely no heat feats. Although I'd be hard-pressed to find a 6-B with no heat resistance feats due to how feats on that scale would go off, there's probably a decent amount of just get in the tier due to scaling.

It depends. If the verse treats something that should arguably take less energy as being more intensive with that resource then the power source isn't really internally consistent with how much energy it takes to perform feats and trying to scale it through energy source is a bit whacky. As for cases where the power source is consistent in this regard, it still really depends, I'd need a specific example to comment.

 

[Agnaa]

@Dargoo I believe I've had this discussion with you before, but I strongly believe that 6-Bs without explicit heat-based feats would have their "residual feats" far below their tier if they were calculated. And I think that response is currently generally disagreed with, so it's something the thread should talk about.

Well, currently we always allow it, so if you think it should be more case-by-case than that, then that's something the thread should discuss.

In case it's not clear, I don't have a strong stance on this, but I want to point out any points of contention so that we don't just talk past each other, assume we agree, and get nothing done - as the thread seemed to be going that way.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

that response is currently generally disagreed with, so it's something the thread should talk about.

I mean, if someone would actually like to explain how to translate blunt force resistance to thermal change resistance I'm all ears. There's no correlation IRL, but perhaps someone has something I didn't look into.

Well, currently we always allow it, so if you think it should be more case-by-case than that, then that's something the thread should discuss.

If the energy system of the verse is not consistent with how energy transfers and is calculated IRL, I'm not sure why we try to scale IRL energy values with an entirely different system of energy.

I'd love to see opinions on the above point, personally. All I've seen thusfar is mostly with how we list the feats on pages, but the issues with scaling and how the feats are treated and used in VSes weren't discussed as much.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

How would we word it though? AP is worded in a way so that it logically scales to most or all of the character's attacks and durability.

Look above you.

 

[Jaakubb]

How would we word it though? AP is worded in a way so that it logically scales to most or all of the character's attacks and durability.

Look above you.
Oh, I thought he meant "word AP" as in changing the definition of Attack Potency entirely.

Also, I agree with Agnaa. Characters with high durability almost always have lower resistance to heat. For example, small building level or building level characters being hurt by lava. I think it wouldn't be TOO unreasonable to assume that a tier 6 character could possibly get hurt by a nuclear fireball.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

There also exist a lot of vehicles and some characters whose heat resistance is greater than durability against blunt force trauma.

 

[Agnaa]

There also exist a lot of vehicles and some characters whose heat resistance is greater than durability against blunt force trauma.

True, although that's kinda irrelevant to the conversation at hand:

• Me: Would you say a 6-B could be damaged by a 6-C heat-based attack?
• Dargoo: Technically yes, but I think it'd be very difficult to find a 6-B without a 6-B heat durability feat.
• Me: I don't think it would be very difficult.
• Jaakkuub: I agree.
• You: Yeah but sometimes characters have higher heat resistance than their normal durability.

 

[Jaakubb]

I think we should save this discussion for later though. We should stick with one topic at a time.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

I definitly feel that heat should be able to harm higher tiers, though I have no crazy science to back me up.

An ability that biols the blood of an enemy should not stop working because the enemy is tier... 9? Pretty sure 100 degrees wouldn't be above 9-B, if even that.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Heat affecting higher tiers will probably only come into play for characters who get stats purely on scaling, I imagine. That or bricks whose only feats consist of shattering something what is big.

I also don't think it's something too strainful on our administrators to seperate out heat feats in AP/dura too (see MHA profiles, I linked above we already do this); it's something that'd be gradually implemented and would greatly help us in regards to cataloguing feats and organizing VSes.

 

[Jaakubb]

What about freezing feats though

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Basically the same, although we should probably change our wording of AP to support it first. Also scaling freezing to blunt force durability is far more difficult than heating, too.

 

[Jaakubb]

Same as what? I think freezing feats and heat feats are way different. Heat feats are at least somewhat applicable to AP, but not freezing.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Same as what? I think freezing feats and heat feats are way different. Heat feats are at least somewhat applicable to AP, but not freezing.

IRL freezing and heating are the same thing, it's more a matter of what's losing heat and what's gaining heat.

Obviously fiction doesn't follow this a lot of the time, as when someone insta-freezes a large block of air the water/air around it doesn't heat to boiling temperatures, which produces a lot of the issues here.

And I agree and disagree - freezing doesn't apply to AP as we currently define it, and it doesn't apply to AP in the conventional sense as it's kind of a different metric for attacking an enemy. Which is why I'm asking to seperate heat-based AP and non-heat based AP for characters where that would apply. They'd be functionally sperate, but listed under AP.

I'd personally have them listed under a new stat entirely - but I'm unsure how we'd apply that without overhauling our system entirely, which I'd like to avoid if possible.

 

[Antoniofer]

Would say that scaling freezing to blunt force is impossible, stuff do not decrease it temperature by punching, is physically impossible.

 

[Jaakubb]

How would AP be reworded so that freezing feats are fine? I'd rather just discard freezing feats and count freezing as a sort of "energy displacement" power, would be hax since durability can't counter energy being sucked from you. I don't know.

 

[Antoniofer]

The proper way to define AP based in altering energy values would be "the capability to produce change or alter the elements of a system", wouldn't be damage cuz energy do not necessary means that.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

The AP definition should be changed to mention displacing energy or the ability to concentrate or harness energy rather than simply saying produce energy. Ice Manipulation is still harnessing or concentrating energy and would thus be AP. It's the same as heating objects but in reverse; kind of like rising vs falling or moving forward vs moving backwards. Also, forgot to mention that some characters have the ability to undo their own freezes back to just normal temperatures; that's technically heating. So we should still treat cooling and heating feats equally based on what Kaltias, Xulrev, and Bambu said.

But to Agnaa's it was still part of the discussion. The OP was listing two things; the cooling Vs heating was one, and applying it to durability is the other. Me mentioning that some characters have more heat resistance than they do durability on top of you guys talking about characters having less heat resistance than blunt force durability was actually part of the exact same topic. Though, as Ugarik said, if the change temperature attakcs and physical strikes all operate on the same mechanics such as "Everything comes Chakra, or Ki, or the force, or psynergy, ect" type of scenarios, then we could equalize it all.

Basically my two cents based on the general agreements on those who seem reasonable.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Though, as Ugarik said, if the change temperature attakcs and physical strikes all operate on the same mechanics such as "Everything comes Chakra, or Ki, or the force, or psynergy, ect" type of scenarios, then we could equalize it all.

So, I commented on this and never had a response, so I'll try starting a debate with this, then.

If the energy system of the verse is not consistent with how energy transfers and is calculated IRL, I'm not sure why we try to scale IRL energy values with an entirely different system of energy.

I'd love to see opinions on the above point, personally. All I've seen thusfar is mostly with how we list the feats on pages, but the issues with scaling and how the feats are treated and used in VSes weren't discussed as much.

IMO equalizing everything when it has the same source has issues when the source itself isn't consistent with how we value energy IRL.

 

[Kepekley23]

I agree with Dargoo here, in all honesty.

 

[Jaakubb]

The AP definition should be changed to mention displacing energy or the ability to concentrate or harness energy rather than simply saying produce energy. Ice Manipulation is still harnessing or concentrating energy and would thus be AP. It's the same as heating objects but in reverse; kind of like rising vs falling or moving forward vs moving backwards. Also, forgot to mention that some characters have the ability to undo their own freezes back to just normal temperatures; that's technically heating. So we should still treat cooling and heating feats equally based on what Kaltias, Xulrev, and Bambu said.

An important thing is that AP automatically scales to the character's other attacks and durability. It can't do either because freezing attacks:

Use energy that already exists in the environment that does not need to be produced by the character

Newton's Third Law does not apply since nothing comes in contact with the character. That's the entire point of telekinesis in general. There is no energy produced inside the body to be tanked either.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

Environmental Destruction is a thing.

 

[Andytrenom]

"An important thing is that AP automatically scales to the character's other attacks and durability. It can't do either because freezing attacks"

It absolutely doesn't. AP only automatically scales to durability when it's a physical attack and can vary between different attacks of the same character.

"Use energy that already exists in the environment that does not need to be produced by the character"

In most circumstances, freezing feats will still be a mark of the character's own power, and have a limit depending on the specific individual. That's why it's important to mention the energy value involved in performing them which should be listed in the AP and tier section,because those are meant to illustrate how strong a character is. Even stuff like environmental destruction and reality warping are listed in AP and tier despite not scaling and often not scaling to other stats respectively, and that's because they are still relevant to the character's strength and worth noting

"Newton's Third Law does not apply since nothing comes in contact with the character. That's the entire point of telekinesis in general. There is no energy produced inside the body to be tanked either."

If you're arguing against freezing being AP then this point doesn't work in your favour. Telekinesis is something we treat as AP, and so we wouldn't discredit freezing for working in a similar way.

 

[Jaakubb]

"An important thing is that AP automatically scales to the character's other attacks and durability. It can't do either because freezing attacks"
It absolutely doesn't. AP only automatically scales to durability when it's a physical attack and can vary between different attacks of the same character.

Really? That's good then as long as we don't scale one attack to the energy transferred.

In most circumstances, freezing feats will still be a mark of the character's own power, and have a limit depending on the specific individual. That's why it's important to mention the energy value involved in performing them which should be listed in the AP and tier section,because those are meant to illustrate how strong a character is. Even stuff like environmental destruction and reality warping are listed in AP and tier despite not scaling and often not scaling to other stats respectively, and that's because they are still relevant to the character's strength and worth noting.

Why does it matter if it's a "mark of the character's own power"? Don't we just mostly discard intent on the author's part? Could you give me an example of someone who has reality warping listed on AP? I thought we scaled reality warping etc. to dura and other attacks. If we don't that's a good thing.

"Newton's Third Law does not apply since nothing comes in contact with the character. That's the entire point of telekinesis in general. There is no energy produced inside the body to be tanked either." If you're arguing against freezing being AP then this point doesn't work in your favour. Telekinesis is something we treat as AP, and so we wouldn't discredit freezing for working in a similar way.

I know. I was just making sure that DDM wouldn't bring up newton's third law to try to scale freezing to dura. Also, I did mention earlier that "energy telekinesis" for the lack of a better term is different from "matter telekinesis."

"Energy telekinesis" (there is probably a better term for this) and object telekinesis are entirely different. One involves altering the path of where energy moves (which itself does not require energy because you can't use energy to directly alter the path of energy IRL, only indirectly, keep in mind that energy is ALWAYS moving on its own). The other involves moving objects. The definition of kinetic energy is literally "energy which a body possesses by virtue of being in motion."

 

[Andytrenom]

"Why does it matter if it's a "mark of the character's own power"? Don't we just mostly discard intent on the author's part?"

First of all, I think discarding author intent as a general rule is dumb, what the writer of a story was trying to get across is obviously going to be important to what's happening in the story, it's just that sometimes events in-universe contradict the author's word or he is unaware of all the implications of what he's written, in which case we would give priority to what's happening in the story rather than what the author says or we think he intends

Secondly, Freezing feats being the character's power is mostly made clear within the narrative itself, not via a detached word of god or by us guessing author intent without any in-universe evidence; there's literally no reason why the author intent argument would even apply here without it being misused


"Could you give me an example of someone who has reality warping listed on AP? I thought we scaled reality warping etc. to dura and other attacks. If we don't that's a good thing."

Gingka Hagane (Beyblade)

Reality warping does not scale to other attacks and certainly not to dura by default, in some cases it probably does but that's not the general standard

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

A very clear example is Evangeline from Mahou Sensei Negima. She's a very accomplished and extremely powerful Darkness and Ice Vampire mage from the series. How is Evangeline's power shown? By making constructs of massive ice easily and her spells being able to match the spells of other powerful characters or outright just hurt them. There are also different levels of spells, which goes also for ice, which denotes power. One of the biggest shows of her power to scare an army in the flashback of the sequel series is literally creating a massive iceberg of ice as big as a small island and visibly enormous from even 10 kms away. The implication is obvious, she's showing off how big of a deal she is so the army stops annoying her and agrees to a non aggression pact. Unless you were trying to be deliberately contrarian, I don't know how you couldn't tell the authorial intent here is obviously a demonstration of power, and obviously Negima ain't the only one that does this.

Whenever the power is not of an AP variant, such as Ensis Exsequens, which is deadly due to forcibly transitioning all matter it clashes with from solid to to gas, it is made pretty clear.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

That is an impressively aimless and nonsensical comparison.

You are comparing something done in an instant by a single person to something done over time by a combined effort. This doesn't work on the surface or deeper level, and I am doubting you are even engaging what I am saying.

A show of power is meant to be about how much damage the character can deal out, because... it is a show of combative or destructive power. Did you just really say something that lacking in any logical sense?

 

[Jaakubb]

Nvm that was a dumb argument. Making an iceberg is just a creation argument anyways, right?