-
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.
Invulnerability Revision
- Thread starter Dark649
- Start date
-
- Tags
- invulnerability
- Status
- 16,606
- 1,791
If it was already decided then what's to discuss?
- 3,706
- 315
- 31,370
- 34,117
I agree with this, having Invulnerability on all these profiles could lead to NLF. It should only be given to characters with a hax ability that makes the immune to all 3-D attacks unless said opponent possesses a hax ability that bypasses it.
- 8,675
- 5,559
We should only have conditional invulnerability
- 8,675
- 5,559
Stuff like Achilles being invulnerable to attacks that aren't from Divine opponents. We can't apply NLF but it's certainly relevant on Achilles' own scale of power
- 2,861
- 224
To be honest, I'm not so sure about that myself. Too often in fiction is "Invulnerability" defined as an explicit power that characters possess, even when they can be consistently be harmed or threatened within their stories. It would be a bit odd of us, I think, to simply not list such an explicit ability of a great many characters in fiction, NLF-bait or no.
Perhaps the answer is to redefine and contextualize "Invulverability"? A lot of the times, its a bit more specific than just "I can't be hurt by anything!" or "I'm invincible!" These, I'd argue, are simply untrustworthy NLF statements. However, to use Superman and Ganondorf as examples like they were earlier, Superman has consistently demonstrated that physical blows are considerably less effective against him than they should be, with his "weakness" to magic being that this additional toughness does not apply against attacks that are not physical in nature. Ganondorf's consistently much more difficult to wound with weaponry that is not holy or blessed, throughout the games, hence the Master Sword is often used to defeat him for good.
If not Invulnerability, what would you suggest we list this under? Resistance tends to be used more for particular types of hax abilities, or categories thereof, rather than such broad categories as "all physical wounds" or "all non-holy damage." It's certainly not Immunity, for obvious reasons.
Perhaps the answer is to redefine and contextualize "Invulverability"? A lot of the times, its a bit more specific than just "I can't be hurt by anything!" or "I'm invincible!" These, I'd argue, are simply untrustworthy NLF statements. However, to use Superman and Ganondorf as examples like they were earlier, Superman has consistently demonstrated that physical blows are considerably less effective against him than they should be, with his "weakness" to magic being that this additional toughness does not apply against attacks that are not physical in nature. Ganondorf's consistently much more difficult to wound with weaponry that is not holy or blessed, throughout the games, hence the Master Sword is often used to defeat him for good.
If not Invulnerability, what would you suggest we list this under? Resistance tends to be used more for particular types of hax abilities, or categories thereof, rather than such broad categories as "all physical wounds" or "all non-holy damage." It's certainly not Immunity, for obvious reasons.
- 7,868
- 2,803
I'll just go ahead and ask, what would be done for things like The Black Knight and his Blessed Armor? (Well, I suppose for his case, it can be quantified by saying it works up to where the Invulnerability came from, but that's not true for all cases)
- 31,370
- 34,117
Superman should clearly not have full invulnerability; characters such as Doomsday and Lobo were able to severely injure or even possibly kill him through blunt force trauma alone; no kryptonite or magic needed. Ganon is another common NLF; though, he's portrayed as being immortal but not invincible generally speaking.
- 3,323
- 1,856
Personally, I think Invulnerability is simply a vastly increased durability in the character's own tier, either against specific types of attacks or against all of them. To be more simple: The inverse of a Glass Cannon.
- 40,459
- 12,940
Just saying, I gave it to Miracle Matter just now because the whole gimmick in his boss fight is that he can only be hurt with the power he gives while in that form. He can't be hurt at all in the die form, and can only be hurt with bombs in the bomb form. If you use Spark on the bomb form, it's futile.
- 9,738
- 1,523
- Thread starter
- #16
I removed the Invulnerability ability for the Super Sonic profiles it was more of dura thing, they were stated to be invulnerable to any attacks sans the ones comparable or higher. I also said in the past that 2-A char. can stomp completely invulnerable characters. There are threads about Hat Kid and Cuphead were about this ability.
Twisted_Little_Raven
She/Her- 3,566
- 1,919
Invulnerability can be highly exaggerated
- 16,959
- 4,855
Im gonna disagree.
We seem to be mixing Invulnerability with AP/Hax attacks when only the former gets no-selled, not the latter. Like being able to no-sell punches, kicks, tackles, and/or attacks that are purely powered based. That doesn't mean you suddenly no-sell hax.
Also, why is it not simplier to simply say Invulnerability wont work after an extent when dealing with characters vastly stronger than yourself? It's clearly obvious a 2-C with Invulnerability will get one shotted by a 2-A, unless they have some ability that nullifies damage. And even with that it only goes so far. You can be damaged by attacks as long as its vastly beyond your capability of no-selling attacks.
We seem to be mixing Invulnerability with AP/Hax attacks when only the former gets no-selled, not the latter. Like being able to no-sell punches, kicks, tackles, and/or attacks that are purely powered based. That doesn't mean you suddenly no-sell hax.
Also, why is it not simplier to simply say Invulnerability wont work after an extent when dealing with characters vastly stronger than yourself? It's clearly obvious a 2-C with Invulnerability will get one shotted by a 2-A, unless they have some ability that nullifies damage. And even with that it only goes so far. You can be damaged by attacks as long as its vastly beyond your capability of no-selling attacks.
- 10,873
- 12,277
It is basically this topic again, yes?
If so my opinion is what it was there:
"if the invulnerability is explained and well sourced it can be added to the page together with an explanation, but doesn't influence the durability statistic. Like that we can give credit to characters for which invulnerability is an important aspect of their abilities without going into the realms of NLFs. "
I mean the invulnerability page basically states that invulnerability has in practice no influence on battles, exactly to prevent NLF issues.
If so my opinion is what it was there:
"if the invulnerability is explained and well sourced it can be added to the page together with an explanation, but doesn't influence the durability statistic. Like that we can give credit to characters for which invulnerability is an important aspect of their abilities without going into the realms of NLFs. "
I mean the invulnerability page basically states that invulnerability has in practice no influence on battles, exactly to prevent NLF issues.
- 16,959
- 4,855
If its hax/haxy attacks, then either its not true Invulerability to power or Invulnerability period cannot no-sell hax.Dark649 said:
Which I honestly think may be true for the latter.
- 3,294
- 1,288
IMO, Invulerability should be Nigh-Invulerability. That way, there's no implication that the character cannot be hurt at all.
We should also note why a character has that power.
Achilles from the Fate Series cannot be harmed unless he fighting someone with Divinity and even then, damage is reduced if they don't have divinity surpassing his own.
Ganondorf cannot really be harmed/killed unless you use blessed or holy weapons.
Superman has a bio-electric field that shields him. This in particular is notable. If you shoot Supes in the eye with a bullet, the bullet does nothing to him. Doesn't blind, doesn't hurt, etc. Supes even shrugs off swords and bludgeons. Unless there's something special about them, they'll actually break on his body. Wonder Woman on the other hand, would be hurt by a lot of those. She can be cut by slicing and piercing weapons. Bullets do not pierce her skin but do cause minor bruises that she almost instantly heals.
We should also note why a character has that power.
Achilles from the Fate Series cannot be harmed unless he fighting someone with Divinity and even then, damage is reduced if they don't have divinity surpassing his own.
Ganondorf cannot really be harmed/killed unless you use blessed or holy weapons.
Superman has a bio-electric field that shields him. This in particular is notable. If you shoot Supes in the eye with a bullet, the bullet does nothing to him. Doesn't blind, doesn't hurt, etc. Supes even shrugs off swords and bludgeons. Unless there's something special about them, they'll actually break on his body. Wonder Woman on the other hand, would be hurt by a lot of those. She can be cut by slicing and piercing weapons. Bullets do not pierce her skin but do cause minor bruises that she almost instantly heals.
- 3,706
- 315
This is true. My gosh, Miracle Matter was such a boss.The real cal howard said:
- 3,294
- 1,288
Except that you can be more resistant to one type of damage than another. Heck, even a lot of wikis note the difference in the two's durability. For instance, the New Gods have durability more comparable to Wonder Woman than to Superman. They take blunt force trauma very well but are not immune to lasers, bullets or piercing/slicing weapons.Reppuzan said:
- 31,370
- 34,117
Bullets in general are among the ultimate examples of PIS. Unless it's a Radion bullet, Darkseid getting injured or killed by one is a massive PIS.
- 3,294
- 1,288
Isn't Darkseid above most New Gods, in general? If anything, I'd consider him an exception not the rule.DarkDragonMedeus said:
- 8,377
- 3,045
Ganondorf isn't a good example, as his invulnerability is more likely a side-effect of the immortality granted by the Triforce of Power (why is it type 2 and not type 4? It was granted and it's from divine origin)
- 1,881
- 230
Just say "Nigh-Invulnerability" instead. It's simple as that.
- 1,881
- 230
Usually characters like Superman should already been having Nigh-Invulerability by now, but anyways I see your point. There are specific types of invulnerabilities that VSBW possibly may not have yet in their wiki.Reppuzan said:
- 156
- 10
I dont know if it were said before but should invulnerability get a page like immortality did?
To explain different types of invulnerability and if a character were to fit in 1 or multiple types it's added to the profile.
Thats just how I feel on it.
To explain different types of invulnerability and if a character were to fit in 1 or multiple types it's added to the profile.
Thats just how I feel on it.
- 167,676
- 76,256
What do people think about this suggestion?DontTalkDT said:
Personally, I think that there are two options here:
Either we treat the ability as absolute, in which case it is a NLF, or we make sure that the invulnerability page properly clarifies that it is not, and does not affect durability ratings, in which case it may be redundant to add to characters.
- 1,280
- 1,123
How about having it as something like "Nigh-Invulnerability" or "Questionable Invulnerability" or something along those lines?
I'm aware that some people may be put off by these names, but I myself feel like they would properly convey the point that these are not absolute.
I'm aware that some people may be put off by these names, but I myself feel like they would properly convey the point that these are not absolute.
- 11,444
- 1,997
@Ant
There's obviously going to be limits on everything, but I don't think it's good to pigeon-hole everything under the idea that invulnerability is absolute or it's not.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but the Achilles example still stands. It's explicitly stated to work based on the fact that it can't be bypassed without a divine weapon, divine blood, or otherwise divine attack irrespective of force. Obviously, someone who is infinitely stronger will obviously still stomp him, but it's still outright invulnerability.
There's also lesser forms of invulnerability. The Curse of Achilles from the Riordan series prevents all conventional exterior wounds as well damage to the bone and tissue. But the gods imply that it's not absolute in that Hestia was able to use the divine flames of her hearth to burn Luke Castellan, who had the curse at the time, and that the river gods were tempted to try and electrocute Percy Jackson when he had the curse.
It's still invulnerability, but it's not the same as "nigh-invulnerable" in that they're not merely resistant to damage but incapable of receiving conventional wounds.
There's obviously going to be limits on everything, but I don't think it's good to pigeon-hole everything under the idea that invulnerability is absolute or it's not.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but the Achilles example still stands. It's explicitly stated to work based on the fact that it can't be bypassed without a divine weapon, divine blood, or otherwise divine attack irrespective of force. Obviously, someone who is infinitely stronger will obviously still stomp him, but it's still outright invulnerability.
There's also lesser forms of invulnerability. The Curse of Achilles from the Riordan series prevents all conventional exterior wounds as well damage to the bone and tissue. But the gods imply that it's not absolute in that Hestia was able to use the divine flames of her hearth to burn Luke Castellan, who had the curse at the time, and that the river gods were tempted to try and electrocute Percy Jackson when he had the curse.
It's still invulnerability, but it's not the same as "nigh-invulnerable" in that they're not merely resistant to damage but incapable of receiving conventional wounds.
- 3,294
- 1,288
But isn't Achilles' invulnerability not absolute? Friendly actions bypass his invulnerability and if his heel is struck it's disabled from then on.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm nitpicking.
Sorry if it sounds like I'm nitpicking.
- 11,444
- 1,997
@TheC2
That's because it explicitly defends against attacks that have the intent "to harm" while a vampire's bite is described as "something that welcomes one into the vampire clan", thus bypassing it.
But case in point, Achilles was harmed by Chiron's arrows, but Balmung doesn't put a scratch in him.
It just adds to the point that we can have invulnerability without resorting to NLFs.
That's because it explicitly defends against attacks that have the intent "to harm" while a vampire's bite is described as "something that welcomes one into the vampire clan", thus bypassing it.
But case in point, Achilles was harmed by Chiron's arrows, but Balmung doesn't put a scratch in him.
It just adds to the point that we can have invulnerability without resorting to NLFs.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
