• 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.

Major Mario CRT 2: The Lost Levels

So, if Dino and the other staff members agree, should the fate manipulation and resistance to it be removed now?
 
Alright, layout the issues and mechanics of the said proposal for Fate Maniuplation but in a more straightfoward manner and we will determine if it has to be removed and needs a better elaboration on how it works.
 
@Dino

  • Mario's profile right now: Mario can't die or get incapacitated forever due to Fate Manip making that not happen.
  • What we see in games: Mario getting incapacitated beyond his ability to get free and getting saved by others. There may or may not be an instance of him dying too, and the Fate Manip does nothing to him getting damaged, knocked out or defeated.
  • What I propose: Mario does have Fate Manip making him always save Peach, and it does help him in adventures/fights to an interpretable degree, but incapacitating him beyond his ability to get free is possible as he could save Peach after that via other factors. And killing him is possible too for the same reasons.
 
Honestly Fate Manip is an inconsistent ability in a lot of verses yet it's treated at it's highest interpretation in those. What you have problems with are problems that occur in a lot of other character's cases as well. Perhaps a revision can be made on Fate Manip as a whole later on down the line as users have expressed very colorful thoughts regarding the ability.
 
Seems unnecessary considering it's ultimately going to just fall down to a case-by-case basis dependent on the mechanics and scenario of each Verse.
 
I'd like to point out that the reason for the large inconsistencies is because SMRPG is made from Square. After that game, they would never follow it up. Essentially it's like a Mario power-up or ability that we see in one game (two if you count Galaxy, but this will be from a different source), yet never brought up again. Such as Flip, Cappy, Zone Speed, Superguard, etc. So when using arguments about his fate manipulation and comparing them to other games to argue this and that, this case can be the exact same thing as "Why doesn't he use this ability in this situation?" I know this is a passive ability, but my point still stands that Nintendo games don't consistently keep up with what powers Mario has or doesn't has, such as his fire. He can use it without a fire flower like in Superstar Saga or in some sport games. Yet playing any other mainline game, he can't do it. Hell, the next M&L games just remove it. So why are we using other games as an example to argue inconsistencies. This is why I dislike using other games as an example, Nintendo doesn't focus on remembering to keep these abilities. You see a good ability in one game, they'll never bring it up again. And before anyone brings up the argument that we might as well remove it because it's never invested further upon, this would remove almost all of Mario's abilities.
 
I don't see how it is a problem. I'm not "thinking it as OP just because", you're completely being ignorant to the reasoning I tagged. Expecting a franchise with a history of over 200 games to always be consistent is quite frankly absurd, especially with how many different people and groups have worked on the installments throughout the years.

"There may or may not be an instance of him dying too, and the Fate Manip does nothing to him getting damaged, knocked out or defeated."

I'd be fine with saying it doesn't prevent incap if you can supply a decent amount of examples where it happens. However, you're trying to add a note based on something you think is wrong, yet you don't have the proof to sufficiently say that it doesn't prevent death. Link some examples please, make it multiple too. Pokemon gets the treatment similarly because it has so many different continuities too. If we took every anti-feat, even if it was one thing, we'd have things like Dialga dying to temporal paradoxes despite other continuities clearly going against such a thing affecting it.
 
If the staff have reached an agreement, it can probably be applied.
 
Hang on a bit Ant, I think it's best if we further discuss this, especially when another example of the same ability can be brought up.
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
Honestly Fate Manip is an inconsistent ability in a lot of verses yet it's treated at it's highest interpretation in those. What you have problems with are problems that occur in a lot of other character's cases as well. Perhaps a revision can be made on Fate Manip as a whole later on down the line as users have expressed very colorful thoughts regarding the ability.
Click to expand...
Just because Mario's fatehax might be removed doesn't mean you got to remove it in other franchises that might rival Mario, you just need to cope that some character have certain abilities and others don't
 
No one's suggesting the fate hax to be removed here. There's just different ideas about how effective it is.

Will respond later.
 
Some people did talk about removing it in the above posts, even the I said might be removed, I agree with Mario having the wish granting stuff
 
Ik, but that seems more because DRB misinterpreted what Eficiente was saying. The proposals are about what level the wish granting/fate manip is at.
 
@GyroNutz I fully understand what Efficiente is saying. He's requesting that the ability should have a better elaboration on how it works and it seems that people are ok with that. So it's just being altered, not eliminated.....unless there's something else that calls for the latter action.
 
Well I think we should note that using other games to prove what his fate manipulation can or can't do as mentioned above is something we take into consideration.
 
DatOneWeeb said:
I'd like to point out that the reason for the large inconsistencies is because SMRPG is made from Square. After that game, they would never follow it up. Essentially it's like a Mario power-up or ability that we see in one game (two if you count Galaxy, but this will be from a different source), yet never brought up again. Such as Flip, Cappy, Zone Speed, Superguard, etc. So when using arguments about his fate manipulation and comparing them to other games to argue this and that, this case can be the exact same thing as "Why doesn't he use this ability in this situation?" I know this is a passive ability, but my point still stands that Nintendo games don't consistently keep up with what powers Mario has or doesn't has, such as his fire. He can use it without a fire flower like in Superstar Saga or in some sport games. Yet playing any other mainline game, he can't do it. Hell, the next M&L games just remove it. So why are we using other games as an example to argue inconsistencies. This is why I dislike using other games as an example, Nintendo doesn't focus on remembering to keep these abilities. You see a good ability in one game, they'll never bring it up again. And before anyone brings up the argument that we might as well remove it because it's never invested further upon, this would remove almost all of Mario's abilities.
Click to expand...
^
 
Tbf I think a lot of game characters suffer from that. But the wiki itself isn't always consistent.

However, I do agree that treating an ability like that based on inconsistencies would mean we'd have to clarify almost every ability of his isn't always consistent. I guess Mario can only perform limited Fire Manipulation now and needs prep from the Squid Sisters and the Fire Flower to perform advanced techniques. I guess his resistance to EE/Void Manip should be clarified as "only when it isn't gameplay". Hell, even the height of his jumps and what movement options he can perform have varied among the games, and that's supposed to be one of his consistent abilities.

However, I can also see the argument that because of the nature of Fate Manip it can be wildly interpretive (which is partly why I said that a CRT or talk on Fate Manip as a whole could do some good).

But, we can also bring up the other mindset toward the counterpoints that maybe the seemingly sentient force that can control fate just simply doesn't intervene in the situations Efficiente brought up because it knows that Mario will eventually get out of his perilous situations without it's direct aid.

besides, Game Overs and multiple lives along with other game mechanics have been consitently talked about in-verse and he already has res options so that covers the death part already
 
So should we apply the accepted changes here?
 
No, some are in disagreements and have new points that aren't adressed, Gyro still having a new response coming up, and the Gentle Pull being another reason for the fate manipulation.
 
Okay. I would appreciate input from other staff members.
 
So, could a fellow staff make the edits of the things accepted? Let's not forget how I also pointed out the Zone Speed's descriptions to miss how it needs a charge to be used first.

DatOneWeeb said:
I'd like to point out that the reason for the large inconsistencies is because SMRPG is made from Square. After that game, they would never follow it up. Essentially it's like a Mario power-up or ability that we see in one game (two if you count Galaxy, but this will be from a different source), yet never brought up again. Such as Flip, Cappy, Zone Speed, Superguard, etc. So when using arguments about his fate manipulation and comparing them to other games to argue this and that, this case can be the exact same thing as "Why doesn't he use this ability in this situation?" I know this is a passive ability, but my point still stands that Nintendo games don't consistently keep up with what powers Mario has or doesn't has, such as his fire. He can use it without a fire flower like in Superstar Saga or in some sport games. Yet playing any other mainline game, he can't do it. Hell, the next M&L games just remove it. So why are we using other games as an example to argue inconsistencies. This is why I dislike using other games as an example, Nintendo doesn't focus on remembering to keep these abilities. You see a good ability in one game, they'll never bring it up again. And before anyone brings up the argument that we might as well remove it because it's never invested further upon, this would remove almost all of Mario's abilities.
Click to expand...


  • The first part keeps wanting to make one belief the way the power works as only one and others as inconsistencies to it, which has no reason to be the case, "they didn't care" is not something in favor to the matter, it's the opposite. Imagine if Captain America or any Street level in some comic were to gain a significant boost in power that would make them herald level, we wouldn't just keep that regardless of the inconsistencies in all future comics that aren't continuations. Replace that with a new passive power and there are ways to get around it, maybe it doesn't have the scale/functions originally thought or maybe it's not actually passive. If a character states his favorite color to be green and years laters it clearly states it to be red then it doesn't mean it has 2 favorite colors, it means it's only one and green isn't its favorite color anymore, if the latter wasn't the intention of the writers but an accidental implication they made then you just have to deal with it, especially if red is stated many times to be his favorite color, is this perfectly clear? The implications in Mario's case aren't even "Well, this needs to be removed", not yet at least, just "It works differently as how one would think it does", which should honestly should be really easy for everyone to let go of, heck the note Mario right now has in his profile isn't how anyone would think the power works but some adaptation to it, which kinda turns the matter hypocritical.
  • Things like Flip, Cappy, Zone Speed, Superguard, his fire balls and others are obvious false equivalences. You can justify most as the characters not doing them in-character, and Mario only had Cappy in one game. Character doesn't use x power=/=it can't use x power, and the same happens in other verses, that didn't need to be said.
@PlozAlcachaz I constructed something based on what we have and you wanted to dismiss it based on giving Mario illogical privileges. To put it in perspective, we basically had an original source giving something that could be anything from a 1 to 10, you guys said it was 9, I said it was 1 based on other sources indicating that, no one should defend it's a 9 "because the first source just mattered so much & shouldn't be ignored", that legit doesn't make sense, the other sources matter just as much, shouldn't be ignored and the first one isn't even saying it's a 9, to affirm so is dogmatic. That's the problem.

Death being a thing that can happen is due to how similar things can happen, it doesn't need to be evidence for it to happen in the same way it doesn't need to be evidence for it to not happen. I already said that I don't consider Pokemon accurate, I think I don't need to explain the implications of it.
 
So you expect there to be absolutely no inconsistencies for Mario over the span of 35+ years and 200 games? That's not giving it special treatment just because why not, you'd be making a logical exception because of this. How did I support a 9? I openly said I was fine if it couldn't prevent incap but that you needed a decent amount of examples. Nobody ignored those instances, but there's literally a page on inconsistencies for a reason.

Death being a thing that can happen is due to how similar things can happen, it doesn't need to be evidence for it to happen in the same way it doesn't need to be evidence for it to not happen.

What "similar things"? It objectively does need evidence, you're trying to objectify that something can't do X without any actual reasoning. We assume it won't happen because of the implications of how fate protection works. Not only that, I've asked others and I've got zilch in response to him ever dying. If he hasn't died, your interpretation would be an unsupported hypothetical.

The implications of such do matter. Unless you're going to do the exact same thing for Pokémon right after this, you're actively encouraging we engage in double standards which I hope I don't have to explain to you why that's stupid.
 
Zone Speed's descriptions are perfectly fine. It's already noted that the characters capable of using it utilize energy in a basic sense since that's all the information given. If you are referring to how a character depletes and regains it during gameplay, there's no narriative explaination behind it. Just a mechanic that's made for balancing purposes which simply restores itself rather easily during matches like a typical fighting game. Including the limitation would make much more sense if requires an outside source in using it or replenishing it eg. Consuming an item or a person giving the characters this ability. It just seems selective to include a restraint that's not much different from other games also utilizing this, mechanically-speaking. Anyway, have everyone reached a conclusion yet about the Fate thing so the changes can be implemented?
 
I'm willing to let DRB edit it based on what he agrees with, but I needed to know what profiles to unlock. Just Mario?
 
Thank you both for helping out.
 
@Dino I don't agree with it on the Zone Speed, in games where techniques like that apply but characters can do them at any time we have context indicating that to be the case. If it doesn't have narriative explainations then so what? That's just one resource and what we see & do in gameplay is another, I'm not necessarily saying that Zone Speed works exactly as shown in game but that it requiring a charge gives the implication of it not being something that can be used at any time. If I were to make a Mega Man-like game I would not add in the narriative how charge attacks and ammunition are limitations, showing it in gamepay does the job, same with a game more complex.

As for the Fate Manip I already said everything needed to be said more than once, I have no interest in keep talking about it for as long as the opposition wants to.
 
We actually were given context about that it's not the case. In the story mode, we were able to use it instantly as soon as they were tutored about the move in the Bask Ruins without "requiring a charge". The whole "They have to build it up first" only came into play afterward, so it's just a mechanic and a selective weakness.

Anyway, DDM I think you should unlock Mario's profile. It seems the description of the fate ability lies primarily on his profile, so I'll include the proper elaboration on it based on what Eficiente established. If there's other characters in need of editting, we can simply do that when they are spotted. I also wish to add the martial arts in the ability in Mario's profile. I really don't know why it keeps being removed considering games like SMRPG and SM64 supports it.
 
It's done. To be honest, I'm not sure if I explained it right. I just included the main issue concerning the ability while removing anything else that might contradicts it. I also included the M.A ability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Accelerated_Evolution
  • Locked
Super Mario - Travel Speed VS Combat Speed
Replies
12
Views
826
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
MicDaniel
Mario, Accelerated Development/Preparation and Zone Speed Statistics amplification.
Replies
35
Views
2K
AStrangeverse
AStrangeverse
ZespeonGalaxy
  • Locked
Tier 6 Mario Revision
2
Replies
73
Views
7K
ZespeonGalaxy
ZespeonGalaxy
Robot972
Origami King Buffs
2 3
Replies
92
Views
4K
Caleb1775
Caleb1775
ShakeResounding
WAHOOOO! Mario Bros AP Revision/Upgrade! (M&L Brothership Spoilers)
2 3
Replies
117
Views
6K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
Back
Top