Immortality Negation and Regeneration Negation pages

[Theglassman12]

Hmm, I’ll redraft the sandbox to combine both sides tomorrow and see how that goes.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

You would need to trim/add a lot more users them. I recommend Understanding users from MegaTen, and there’s absolutely no ulterior motive here.

 

[Theglassman12]

Yeah but that’s not negation, that’s just understanding

 

[Vietthai96]

.......

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Though, this is definitely an addition that’s long overdue.

Next, please eradicate the distinction between time manip and time stop.

 

[Bobsican]

Healing, Immortality, Regen and Ressurection are all practically the same power for negating purposes, so I'd suggest more a name like "Restoration Negation" or so.

 

[Vietthai96]

Healing, Immortality, Regen and Ressurection are all practically the same power for negating purposes, so I'd suggest more a name like "Restoration Negation" or so.

Eh no, the name Restoration isn't cover Immortality as Immortality type 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 9 don't fall under that term. Just keep the page as Immortality Negation, since Healing fall under Regeneration

 

[Bobsican]

Those types just prevent deterioration over certain conditions/criteria, so broadly speaking the name would fit, if anything the name should be something broader than "Immortality Negation" as neither Regen or Healing inherently grant Immortality.

 

[DaMonkeMan]

It's just power null that we treat as something on its own
No need for new pages, just expend the current power null page

Agreed

 

[Bobsican]

Anyways, more staff may be needed considering it's currently a tie, unless we presumably count Glassman agreeing with himself, or we give more priority to DontTalk's vote by being a bureaucrat on the site.

 

[Noneless21]

Dunno if this point is already argued or not but isn't it better to combine all kinds of negation into 1 pages with "negation" as the name?

 

[SheevShezarrine]

I agree with the addition. They're common enough and varied enough in function and methods that they would be better off having their own pages that more fully flesh them out

also I'm hurt that you didn't add Guts as a notable user for Regen Negation and Sekiro as a notable user for Immortality Negation :'(

 

[Vietthai96]

Those types just prevent deterioration over certain conditions/criteria, so broadly speaking the name would fit, if anything the name should be something broader than "Immortality Negation" as neither Regen or Healing inherently grant Immortality.

They aren't related to Restoration, and no Immortality actually have broader meaning than Restoration

 

[Bobsican]

I mean, immortality is defined as being unable to die, which healing nor regeneration inherently reach on practical levels (unless now you want to claim that merely having slightly faster than usual regeneration (Low level of regen) qualifies to be called immortal, which is a no.

Meanwhile "restoration" is broader as it covers any sort of fixing for these purposes.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This needs more staff attention, also did DT agree with it tho?

 

[Theglassman12]

Yes he did, he just said to merge it with power null and hasn’t commented since.

 

[Bobsican]

DT is against this, actually, as far the OP says.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Yes he did, he just said to merge it with power null and hasn’t commented since.

DT is against your premise, Mr glass.

 

[Theglassman12]

He said to merge it with power null, and he hasn’t commented since, plus other staff members are fine with it being a new page.

 

[Tllmbrg]

By that metric wouldn't the fact that I still disagree mean we should hold out

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

True
Anyways to give an actual retort, at least to me a power should exist if indexes something that another power doesn't
Does having Fear Manipulation make our indexing more accurate if there's no explanation to it?
Not really, what we should prioritize is people just explaining the mechanics of powers rather then create relatively small pages just so we can slap it on pages and explain less

I agree with this sentiment overall

 

[Theglassman12]

@Tllmbrg You can disagree, the problem is your logic doesn't remotely hold up here when it affects like 90% of the powers and abilities pages and the argument doesn't go beyond "its a subset", and everyone already explained why that's a stupid argument to make.

 

[Theglassman12]

I finished the redraft to make it only Immortality Negation, any input would be appreciated.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

Just a question.

X character is 1A
Y character is 2A
Z character is 3A but has resistance to getting his regen negg
All of them have high godly regen

Y character negates X's regen, does that mean he can negate Z's regen/immortality?

 

[Bobsican]

Of course, that's basic smurfery, otherwise you could legit argue Warhammer characters solo SCP by having more resistance layers (leaving dimensionality at a side) and whatever.

 

[Delta333]

And how does regen potency even connect with attack potency

 

[Tllmbrg]

@Tllmbrg You can disagree, the problem is your logic doesn't remotely hold up here when it affects like 90% of the powers and abilities pages and the argument doesn't go beyond "its a subset", and everyone already explained why that's a stupid argument to make.

We should remove a lot of power pages yes
Also your arguement was basically just "It is different", even though with a lot of those cases it really is not

 

[Theglassman12]

@Tllmbrg Good luck with that. Except that it is because at no point in countless forms of fiction do they remotely treat being able to permanently kill an immortal being or make their healing factor not work count as just power nullification. The latter, especially on this site, is universally agreed to be more focused on nullifying one's abilities that they used in combat. The former two do not remotely act and behave the exact same as power nullification, and I'm still waiting to see a bunch of examples where in the fiction itself it's just treated as just power nullification. If you can provide me with a good chunk of examples of that being the case then sure I'll just merge it with power null.

@Tony_di_bugalu Regen isn't really something that's affected by dimensionality though. If we're talking about the old High-Godly where it's reliant on the reality being erased as well as you sure, but the new High-Godly is just focused on the individual person themselves being erased at a deep level, and reality has nothing to do with it.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

Of course, that's basic smurfery, otherwise you could legit argue Warhammer characters solo SCP by having more resistance layers (leaving dimensionality at a side) and whatever.

The man of glass above me seems to disagree with this

@Tony_di_bugalu Regen isn't really something that's affected by dimensionality though. If we're talking about the old High-Godly where it's reliant on the reality being erased as well as you sure, but the new High-Godly is just focused on the individual person themselves being erased at a deep level, and reality has nothing to do with it.

So just to make it clearer for me and using the example bob brought up, warhammer characters could kill SCP characters since they have more layers of regen negg?

 

[Theglassman12]

They’d at the very least incapacitate the SCP folks if some of their immortalities, especially type 9 are beyond the Warhammer verse but yeah it should work. Like I said regen stopped being factored into dimensionality when the old high godly got nuked.

 

[Bobsican]

That kind of stuff should probably be specified on the page then TBH, as otherwise people will generally jump on that being a NLF and whatever even if it may not work like that.

 

[Theglassman12]

Bump, finally finished with exams for now. Gonna try to make some final touches on the page and I’ll apply the changes by the end of the week.

 

[Theglassman12]

I've updated the blog, any inputs would be appreciated.

 

[Planck69]

Looks good to me.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

Sad you took the DMC examples out but looks good to me

 

[LordTracer]

This seems fine to me.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Sad you took the DMC examples out but looks good to me

I told him

 

[Theglassman12]

Liar

 

[ImmortalDread]

Liar

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

I told him

I hate you