• 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.

Maou Gakuin Downgrades are Back Again (For the Second Time)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Starfeldway said:
mahika am neutral since I don't even know a thing about the novels although @Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara makes sense and if anos regeneration is as he/she explains it to be then sure
Click to expand...
Fuji saying Self Resurrection is not Regeneration but explanation page states otherwise. Using resurrection on themselves is literally self Resurrection.
When in the hands of a character who uses resurrection on themselves, giving them some degree of Immortality, this ability often co-exists with Regeneration, though the process can take some time. This ability is not to be confused with Necromancy, the ability to raise the dead as undead beings, but it also covers Reincarnation, characters who, upon death, eventually reincarnate the bodies of others - not as a mechanic of the verse, but through their own powers.
Click to expand...
 
EldemadeDityjon said:
Next time you say something like this I am just gonna report you. The page stated character can use Resurrection themselves and get immortality and regeneration it didn't says anything you claimed this is clearly bias you are showing right now.

Can you read now ? This is the biggest size in wiki you can see I can't help you if you keep ignoring this.
Click to expand...
Report me then.

It does not say that every character who uses self-resurrection also has regeneration, just that the two often go hand in hand. While I would like more elaboration on the standards for when self-resurrection also grants regeneration as a power, we don't have that right now, so for now we shouldn't just assume that Anos qualifies. But of course, the fact that no character with self-resurrection has regen as a result of that makes me a little suspicious.
 
Shmooply said:
Real.
Let's just save the HGR thing for another thread. This thread and the previous one already got too derailing and off-topic-y.
Click to expand...
  • If smth is stated to be y then it's y. -me
  • If it's done via spell then don't. -other (assertion). -other
  • Stated in standard? -me
  • No, it's non passive. (assertion) -other
  • So stated in standard that non passive don't qualify? (Question) -me
  • No. -other
  • ??? -me
  • Anyway give me example of any verse that has non passive regen. -other
  • I only know 7 verses and non of them has spell based regen/healing to disqualify or qualify, how am I supposed to give? It's asking for smth negative. Besides which standard stop regen from being regen? -me
  • No standard says nothing. But I don't know any verse that has regen via spell or non passive regen. And if I don't know any verse who has non passive regen means it doesn't qualify. (assertion). -other
  • Proof. -me
  • Because I said so. -other
The assertion hasn't been made by me, I am not obligated to prove the opposition, if the regen is stated then it's regen, it's upto u to prove that it isn't as per standard not as per some other fiction. We follow standards not a particular fiction, even whataboutism doesn't apply here as non passive regen of this type has not been disqualified ever.
 
Last edited:
Dereck03 said:
I don't know who was the genius who came up with the idea of bringing Rimuru to a Maou thread.... They seems to like war.
:pepeworrydumb~1:
Click to expand...
I dunno whataboutism is cringe.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Report me then.

It does not say that every character who uses self-resurrection also has regeneration, just that the two often go hand in hand. While I would like more elaboration on the standards for when self-resurrection also grants regeneration as a power, we don't have that right now, so for now we shouldn't just assume that Anos qualifies. But of course, the fact that no character with self-resurrection has regen as a result of that makes me a little suspicious.
Click to expand...
Where did I said every character. We are talking about specific verse and clear cut statements.
In MGK scans states as Regeneration. If you can't Regenerate the body how would a character Resurrects. If you want to question the standard make a staff thread and remove the line where self Resurrection is stated be both immortality and regeneration instead of showing your constant bias.
 
Okay, let me rephrase that. The page does not say that a character who uses self-resurrection will inherently have regeneration alongside it. If it did work like that, then characters with self-resurrection would have regen listed alongside it, but they don't.

Also, it being stated as being regeneration shouldn't be a factor. The ability itself is more along the lines of resurrection, so we'll treat it as such. Though, if you're really not gonna listen to reason, would listing it as "Mid-Godly via <Ingall>" be a better replacement? As long as the obvious restrictions on their regen/resurrection are explained.
waiting on that report btw
 
Deagonx said:
Dereck how strongly do you feel about the above matters and are we able to all come to an agreement about the rest and get the changes made? I don't know much about how concepts are classified so I haven't said anything in that regard
Click to expand...
Info stuffs i share the same oppinion as you, in the resistance negation i still digress. I will make a quick stay.

Many of venuzdonoa's feats come from destroying logic/reason in the verse which is not something that the manipulation of order can do. The application of law manipulation in the verse does not compare to venuzdonoa's manipulation of reason and it would be contradictory to categorize reason/logic under "Law Manipulation" so if we base it directly on the feat is "Venuzdonoa negating Jerga's immunity so that Evansmana who could not affect him because he was immune to it then could affect him" this is Resistance negation whichever way you look at it.

Let's quote the page
Resistance Negation is the ability to remove an opponent's ability to resist certain effects, allowing the user to then affect them with those abilities. In extreme cases, this ability can even override apparent immunity.
Click to expand...


Concept stuffs should be fine to leave it for other thread.
 
Dereck03 said:
Info stuffs i share the same oppinion as you, in the resistance negation i still digress. I will make a quick stay.

Many of venuzdonoa's feats come from destroying logic/reason in the verse which is not something that the manipulation of order can do. The application of law manipulation in the verse does not compare to venuzdonoa's manipulation of reason and it would be contradictory to categorize reason/logic under "Law Manipulation" so if we base it directly on the feat is "Venuzdonoa negating Jerga's immunity so that Evansmana who could not affect him because he was immune to it then could affect him" this is Resistance negation whichever way you look at it.

Let's quote the page



Concept stuffs should be fine to leave it for other thread.
Click to expand...
To contest this somewhat, Venuzdonoa's abilities being far above order/laws wouldn't really discredit it being law manipulation. It'd just be a higher degree of law manipulation than order.
 
Vietthai literally warned how its all semantic at this point about removing or adding mid godly and yet people still try to contest it.
The reason these crt don't progress is exactly because of this semantics.
We index profile to deliver an idea to casual viewers about abilities and nature. These semantics are merely something only hyper nerds would care about and tbh it is just a tiring charade of trying to explain what William Shakespeare meant when the Chair is red.

As for law/logic manipulation. Since law is on itself is broad explaining other abilities it grants from what it does is necessary and important the same way you explain what other ability one can get from reality warping.
So tbh being able to bend logic to remove resistance should still be notated as is that falls under law manip and should be described as can resisted if one has sufficient resistance to venuz law manip (almost impossible to do anyway)
 
Oh, it's time to completely ignore what the page says that proves the ability is textbook X ability. And the verse simply explains that reason has nothing to do with order and that they have no similarities.

This is a wiki for indexing powers that go according to the classification of each ability so now you try to ignore the textbook of one ability by saying it could be another? Well, if you want Law Manipulation so badly, then change the definition of Resistance Negation or add Higher degree of "Law Manipulation" and "Resistance Negation" at the same time for venuzdonoa.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Okay, let me rephrase that. The page does not say that a character who uses self-resurrection will inherently have regeneration alongside it. If it did work like that, then characters with self-resurrection would have regen listed alongside it, but they don't.

Also, it being stated as being regeneration shouldn't be a factor. The ability itself is more along the lines of resurrection, so we'll treat it as such. Though, if you're really not gonna listen to reason, would listing it as "Mid-Godly via <Ingall>" be a better replacement? As long as the obvious restrictions on their regen/resurrection are explained.
waiting on that report btw
Click to expand...
Sure, idm, it's spell based regen after all, so nothing hurts it being stated in page.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Also, it being stated as being regeneration shouldn't be a factor. The ability itself is more along the lines of resurrection, so we'll treat it as such. Though, if you're really not gonna listen to reason, would listing it as "Mid-Godly via <Ingall>" be a better replacement? As long as the obvious restrictions on their regen/resurrection are explained.
waiting on that report btw
Click to expand...
as long as it is listed as passive one since Anos can cast those spells simply from his source, then sure, Idm, the functionality of the ability will remain the same.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Fuji can't even win the argument because the standards are clearer than the sun.
Click to expand...
Do you have anything to say that isn't constant shittalking? Literally half this presence in this thread has either been "can't wait to downgrade touhou" or"you can't even argue because you KNOW you're wrong", like ******* hell, just shut up.

Reiner said:
Sure, idm, it's spell based regen after all, so nothing hurts it being stated in page.
Click to expand...
Current staff votes are in favor of just plain resurrection, so I'll leave it up to them.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
To contest this somewhat, Venuzdonoa's abilities being far above order/laws wouldn't really discredit it being law manipulation. It'd just be a higher degree of law manipulation than order.
Click to expand...
Bruh.... first of all in the verse venuzdonoa dont manipulate law, and every ability of venuzdonoa is a extension of can destroy the reason, law manipulation is just one of a extension the other one yeah in this case is resistence (immunity is more correct) negation
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Do you have anything to say that isn't constant shittalking? Literally half this presence in this thread has either been "can't wait to downgrade touhou" or"you can't even argue because you KNOW you're wrong", like ******* hell, just shut up.
Click to expand...
I never said I will downgrade the verse. did I? Sounds a tough assumption
 
ImmortalDread said:
as long as it is listed as passive one since Anos can cast those spells simply from his source, then sure, Idm, the functionality of the ability will remain the same.
Click to expand...
It's not passive, he still needs to cast the spell. Thought-based abilities aren't passive.

Not gonna even bother with whatever the **** Dread is doing here. Either actually pull the trigger on the downgrades or stop talking, thanks.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Current staff votes are in favor of just plain resurrection, so I'll leave it up to them.
Click to expand...
Will take care of that. @Deagonx @Theglassman12
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
would listing it as "Mid-Godly via <Ingall>" be a better replacement? As long as the obvious restrictions on their regen/resurrection are explained.
Click to expand...
What do you think about this? The current discussion led to the page stating that both abilities can and often co-exist, and practically in the verse both resurrection and regeneration were used, both are valid here, so use of Mid-Godly via <Ingall> should be valid, you can look at the rest of the discussion for more context if needed.
Vietthai96 said:
tbf, from Mid-Godly, resurrection and regeneration isn't that much different, the argument to remove "regeneration" is pretty much sematically because the verse wrote resurrect instead of regenerate. So i disagree with removing Mid-Godly regen, it can be both regen and resurrect, since characters practically reform themselves
Click to expand...
Oblivion_Of_The_Endless said:
It used both actually
Click to expand...
Character explicitly regenerated and revived since to revive you have to regenerate first.
 
 
Lol, that's why asking "which fiction has it" despite regen page saying it can have is not a argument. No one in the world remembers all of fiction P&A, we only know limited number of franchise and thus follow standards for any other rather than particular fiction. I don't know how it even became a argument.
 
 
Dereck03 said:
One last attempt. @Planck69, we would like to hear your opinion about

resistance negation

fear manipulation

and MGR.

Don't be scared by so many links, each one only has 1 post.
Click to expand...
You forgot Information Manipulation type 2. Which @Deagonx leaning towards agreeing on keeping it on Anos profile.
 
Last edited:
ImmortalDread said:
Fuji was fighting glassman for life to let the downgrade accepted, obv she will agree :devilish:
Click to expand...
Bruh... I don't even care for this thread but this straight up outta line and pretty disappointing behaviour for you (along with other older comments).

I'm not going to comment any further on this CRT but any other petty, snide and otherwise derailing/whataboutism comments should be deleted. All this is going to achieve is to continue to feed the negative and toxic rep MGK threads incessantly attract and cause future issues for everyone (unfortunately) involved.
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Can you please stop ******* derailing for once in your life?
Click to expand...
ImmortalDread said:
I did not mention DMC, did I? So, this post of yours counts as derailment as well.
Click to expand...
StrymULTRA said:
Then she complains if I "derail" coz I point out a blatant violation of the standards.

Def not your average LN fan.
Click to expand...
I rest my case, I'm outta here peace! ✌
 
StrymULTRA said:
Then she complains if I "derail" coz I point out a blatant violation of the standards.

Def not your average LN fan.
Click to expand...
Too bad, I am not the one who involved DMC, Tensura or Undertale as far. (only touha, and even by that, I only asked her progress because its slow)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Dereck03
  • Locked
Last (?) Maou CRT
Replies
34
Views
4K
Dereck03
Dereck03
Dereck03
  • Locked
Anos' unexpected upgrade.
Replies
33
Views
6K
Dereck03
Dereck03
CloverDragon03
  • Locked
Maou Gakuin no Futekigousha CRT: Addressing Venuzdonoa’s “Logic Manipulation”
3 4 5
Replies
175
Views
12K
UchihaSlayer96
UchihaSlayer96
Dereck03
  • Locked
Minor Anos' Resistance additions
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
Dereck03
Dereck03
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
  • Locked
Anos is Back, and so are Maou Gakuin Downgrades
6 7 8
Replies
304
Views
17K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
Back
Top