• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Immortality Negation and Regeneration Negation pages

I'm noticing that some wording could be upgraded, you keep listing a standard, then a example on how to index that, then back to a standard, and I think it could be formatted better, so...

In terms of how this is specified on the pages, the character who is capable of negating the immortality must be specified on which exact types of Immortality they've nullified, the level of Regeneration, if applicable, and the extra existencial aspects otherwise recovered from if an High-Godly level is involved, for example: "Immortality Negation (Type 3 - High-Godly: Concept, 4 - Mid-Godly, and 8 - Mid)".

Additionally, there's some standards to keep in mind:

- Killing a being with Type 1 Immortality would not grant the user Type 1 Immortality Negation, as it's even stated in the Immortality page that they can still die by unnatural causes, and that they're only immune to conventional sickness and dying of old age.

- For negating Type 3 Immortality, killing someone beyond their shown regeneration capabilities would not qualify as it's not nullifying their abilities, but instead them being destroyed beyond their shown capabilities of regeneration.

- Regarding Death Manipulation, it must be shown that the ability is capable of killing someone with a sufficiently high level of regeneration beyond just its base ability of inducing death, as without the evidence to prove it, it would imply it can bypass one's soul, mind, concept, etc. leading to a No Limits Fallacy.

- Being able to negate one specific type of High-Godly Regeneration does not mean one can negate other kinds of High-Godly Regeneration unless the evidence is provided that the user can negate the other types as well.

- Regeneration has little to no connection towards the reality the character exists in as the regeneration in question is revolving around the target individual, not all of existence, so being able to destroy the cosmological structure the character is in won't put them down as High-Godly by default already lets them come back from literal nothingness.

- Lastly, the Immortality Negation should be limited up to the cosmological size the verse is tied to, so anyone that is capable of negating all forms of Immortality on a 3-D scale wouldn't be able to negate qualitatively superior immortalities, especially any Type 8 and 9 Immortalities (and to some extent Type 4 and 5 depending on the context) that stems from a higher dimensional existence as it would be a No Limits Fallacy to assume otherwise.

Overall I separated whole paragraphs into a list, removed some informal wording and added some links to reduce vagueness.
 
Last edited:
Why are you listing mid-godly for 4 and mid for 8? Those literally have no connections to regeneration.
 
Regeneration has little to no connection towards the reality the character exists in as the regeneration in question is revolving around the target individual, not all of existence, so being able to destroy the cosmological structure the character is in won't put them down as High-Godly by default already lets them come back from literal nothingness.
This part can be misleading.
While true it doesn't negate high godly this way. Having no cosmological structure or plane to anchor into would still render the High godly regen character unable to return as they lack a reality to anchor whatever physical thing they will regenerate to.
The way this is phrased can mislead people that a high godly regen character can come back from complete cosmological structure destruction when even in NEP type 2 we cannot assume such thing without a feat.

As such it should follow the same standard.

Besides a destruction of cosmological structure or dimensional plane would include all of fundamental existence within it.
 
@TheGreatJedi13 Since when is the reality tied to the character a necessity for the high-godly to work? That would've only applied when we're talking about the old High-Godly since that was literally revolved around the entirety of reality being erased alongside yourself, but it doesn't and you're still coming back from nothingness. Having reality be nuked as well doesn't change the fact it's still literal nothingness coming back. Plus assuming the cosmological structure going away which erases in all 4 levels (which that in of itself needs proof for it to happen), someone who can regen in all 4 types wouldn't really be fazed by it in the end of the day.
 
Why are you listing mid-godly for 4 and mid for 8? Those literally have no connections to regeneration.
Ahem...
Regarding types 2, 3, 4, and 8, it should be noted that the degree of the abilities should be specified with the same system used for Regeneration. For example, it should preferably be specified if a character has displayed the ability to withstand injuries up to a Mid level for the purposes of type 2, or has been shown to recover up to such a degree regarding the other types.
 
@Bobsican thats still just regeneration if you’re saying they recovered from that level of damage and recovered.

@ImmortalDread he already responded, he hasn’t really commented since.
 
Last edited:
@Bobsican thats still just regeneration if you’re saying they recovered from that level of damage and recovered.
And that's why I'm proposing that change there to for starters, I'm just going to quote a bit from what I'm proposing here to begin with:

In terms of how this is specified on the pages, the character who is capable of negating the immortality must be specified on which exact types of Immortality they've nullified, the level of Regeneration, if applicable, and the extra existencial aspects otherwise recovered from if an High-Godly level is involved, for example: "Immortality Negation (Type 3 - High-Godly: Concept, 4 - Mid-Godly, and 8 - Mid)".
 
Last edited:
@Adem_Warlock69 We can use a bot for that.

@Antvasima We've made a new page for Immortality Negation, can you use a bot to change any and all immortality negation links to fit the new page links?
We are short on capable mass-editing Bot handlers. There is likely really only @Promestein at the moment, but I am hoping that @Elizhaa will get more interested, and that @Dereck03 , @Just_a_Random_Butler , and @Damage3245 will set up Bot accounts and get instructions from Promestein.
 
Agree: 22 (Tony, Reaper, Fujiwara, Planck, Shake, Deceived, Strangeverse, Tarang, Marvel Champion, Excel, Milly, Dust, Duedate, Vietthai, Artor, Narurias, Gin, Delta, Sheev, Promestein, LordTracer, Rabbit)

Disagree: 6 (Tllmbrg, Dread, Flashlight, DontTalk, Lephyr, Monke [fuse with power null instead of new page])

Neutral: 2 (KLOL, Damage)
Also, why was this page applied with such an inconclusive staff tally? And these types of threads should always be posted in our staff forum.
 
That said, I personally do not mind Promestein's solution here.
 
Last edited:
If you don't mind, ping @DontTalkDT to approve this page.
Okay.

@DontTalkDT

What do you think about the following newly created page? @Promestein seems to have suggested the current format.

 
@Antvasima we have a large portion of folks who accepted the page, plus not much staff members really gave input despite me asking a good chunk for input so if you want to get more staff input and they can respond, by all means bring them.
 
@TheGreatJedi13 Since when is the reality tied to the character a necessity for the high-godly to work? That would've only applied when we're talking about the old High-Godly since that was literally revolved around the entirety of reality being erased alongside yourself, but it doesn't and you're still coming back from nothingness. Having reality be nuked as well doesn't change the fact it's still literal nothingness coming back. Plus assuming the cosmological structure going away which erases in all 4 levels (which that in of itself needs proof for it to happen), someone who can regen in all 4 types wouldn't really be fazed by it in the end of the day.
I did not contest that it will nullify or stop their regeneration but more so that it will become moot or they will be incapacitated.
Take for example a fictional drawing that has HGR in a paper. with the paper gone no matter how many times the drawing tries to regenerate, they cannot as they do not have the capacity to recreate even the paper from which they have its existence anchored.
one would need far more abilities to actually still be able to do something with their cosmological structure destroyed

Another case is that the Erasure of someone across history or in their spacetime is enough to stop someone from regenerating from concept or information as they do not have the feat of being able to come back from history erasure.

You using an example of someone possessing all forms of HGR is yet another special case which isn't what something you could classify as Standard or Regular

so the idea of their cosmological structure necessary for them to act and exist being gone somehow not being necessary for them to come back is a case of NLF without any feat or special circumstances which allows them
 
The paper being gone just sounds no different than an entire timeline being erased. If the character can come back from that, there’s no reason to suggest they can’t come back from that.

yeah so being erased across history won’t help anyone who has other forms of regen, that’s what I’ve stated in the page, if they can indeed come back from all types of High-Godly then there’s little to no reason why having their entire reality erased alongside it would affect them when they already came back from that type of erasure.

The burden of proof is on you to show that they cannot act without that reality intact though. If they have similar natures to Type 1 concepts to where they’re not reliant on the reality to exist for them to exist then this means absolutely nothing to the High-Godly characters.
 
@Antvasima we have a large portion of folks who accepted the page, plus not much staff members really gave input despite me asking a good chunk for input so if you want to get more staff input and they can respond, by all means bring them.
@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr._Bambu @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale

What do you think about the following newly created page? Promestein seems to have suggested the current format.


Here is the current tally:
Agree: 22 (Tony, Reaper, Fujiwara, Planck, Shake, Deceived, Strangeverse, Tarang, Marvel Champion, Excel, Milly, Dust, Duedate, Vietthai, Artor, Narurias, Gin, Delta, Sheev, Promestein, LordTracer, Rabbit)

Disagree: 6 (Tllmbrg, Dread, Flashlight, DontTalk, Lephyr, Monke [fuse with power null instead of new page])

Neutral: 2 (KLOL, Damage)
 
I'm noticing that some wording could be upgraded, you keep listing a standard, then a example on how to index that, then back to a standard, and I think it could be formatted better, so...

In terms of how this is specified on the pages, the character who is capable of negating the immortality must be specified on which exact types of Immortality they've nullified, the level of Regeneration, if applicable, and the extra existencial aspects otherwise recovered from if an High-Godly level is involved, for example: "Immortality Negation (Type 3 - High-Godly: Type 1 Concept, 4 - Mid-Godly, and 8 - Mid)".

Additionally, there's some standards to keep in mind:

- Killing a being with Type 1 Immortality would not grant the user Type 1 Immortality Negation, as it's even stated in the Immortality page that they can still die by unnatural causes, and that they're only immune to conventional sickness and dying of old age.

- For negating Type 3 Immortality, killing someone beyond their shown regeneration capabilities would not qualify as it's not nullifying their abilities, but instead them being destroyed beyond their shown capabilities of regeneration.

- Regarding Death Manipulation, it must be shown that the ability is capable of killing someone with a sufficiently high level of regeneration beyond just its base ability of inducing death, as without the evidence to prove it, it would imply it can bypass one's soul, mind, concept, etc. leading to a No Limits Fallacy.

- Being able to negate one specific type of High-Godly Regeneration does not mean one can negate other kinds of High-Godly Regeneration unless the evidence is provided that the user can negate the other types as well.

- Regeneration has little to no connection towards the reality the character exists in as the regeneration in question is revolving around the target individual, not all of existence, so being able to destroy the cosmological structure the character is in won't put them down as High-Godly by default already lets them come back from literal nothingness.

- Lastly, the Immortality Negation should be limited up to the cosmological size the verse is tied to, so anyone that is capable of negating all forms of Immortality on a 3-D scale wouldn't be able to negate qualitatively superior immortalities, especially any Type 8 and 9 Immortalities (and to some extent Type 4 and 5 depending on the context) that stems from a higher dimensional existence as it would be a No Limits Fallacy to assume otherwise.
I'll remind that I'm proposing this reformatting of the page.

In addition, after seeing some concerns off-site, I wonder if a note should also be made to note that this ability also extends to negating Regeneration, Resurrection and Healing contrary to the name.

If the above is accepted I'd also suggest to rename the page to "Restoration Negation", as it fits a broader scope name-wise to better fit the above.
 
What do you think about the following newly created page? Promestein seems to have suggested the current format.

Looks fine to me.
 
I still think the page shouldn't be added as we have a bad case of redundant power pages as is
I actually agree with this.

Though if it gets accepted, I don't really care to much

What do you think about the following newly created page? Promestein seems to have suggested the current format.

It looks fine I guess.
 
So what do you all think about Bobsican's suggestion above for revising the page in question?
I'm noticing that some wording could be upgraded, you keep listing a standard, then a example on how to index that, then back to a standard, and I think it could be formatted better, so...

In terms of how this is specified on the pages, the character who is capable of negating the immortality must be specified on which exact types of Immortality they've nullified, the level of Regeneration, if applicable, and the extra existencial aspects otherwise recovered from if an High-Godly level is involved, for example: "Immortality Negation (Type 3 - High-Godly: Type 1 Concept, 4 - Mid-Godly, and 8 - Mid)".

Additionally, there's some standards to keep in mind:

- Killing a being with Type 1 Immortality would not grant the user Type 1 Immortality Negation, as it's even stated in the Immortality page that they can still die by unnatural causes, and that they're only immune to conventional sickness and dying of old age.

- For negating Type 3 Immortality, killing someone beyond their shown regeneration capabilities would not qualify as it's not nullifying their abilities, but instead them being destroyed beyond their shown capabilities of regeneration.

- Regarding Death Manipulation, it must be shown that the ability is capable of killing someone with a sufficiently high level of regeneration beyond just its base ability of inducing death, as without the evidence to prove it, it would imply it can bypass one's soul, mind, concept, etc. leading to a No Limits Fallacy.

- Being able to negate one specific type of High-Godly Regeneration does not mean one can negate other kinds of High-Godly Regeneration unless the evidence is provided that the user can negate the other types as well.

- Regeneration has little to no connection towards the reality the character exists in as the regeneration in question is revolving around the target individual, not all of existence, so being able to destroy the cosmological structure the character is in won't put them down as High-Godly by default already lets them come back from literal nothingness.

- Lastly, the Immortality Negation should be limited up to the cosmological size the verse is tied to, so anyone that is capable of negating all forms of Immortality on a 3-D scale wouldn't be able to negate qualitatively superior immortalities, especially any Type 8 and 9 Immortalities (and to some extent Type 4 and 5 depending on the context) that stems from a higher dimensional existence as it would be a No Limits Fallacy to assume otherwise.
I'll remind that I'm proposing this reformatting of the page.

In addition, after seeing some concerns off-site, I wonder if a note should also be made to note that this ability also extends to negating Regeneration, Resurrection and Healing contrary to the name.

If the above is accepted I'd also suggest to rename the page to "Restoration Negation", as it fits a broader scope name-wise to better fit the above.
@Planck69 @Marvel_Champion_07 @Duedate8898 @Promestein @LordTracer @Tllmbrg @Flashlight237 @DontTalkDT @LephyrTheRevanchist @KLOL506
@Damage3245 @Celestial_Pegasus @Maverick_Zero_X @LordGriffin1000 @Mr._Bambu
 
Also, how much work would we need to do in practice to apply required links and possible other changes to our wiki due to this change?
 
Back
Top