• 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 Regeneration Downgrade (High-Godly to Mid-Godly)

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, mid-godly can still be negated by HGR negation (or MGR negation), or by erasure of type 2 info or type 1/2 concepts. Maou Gakuin supporters are just coping by saying it'd still functionally be high-godly when it won't be.
 
Anyways, since I obviously missed a lot, did anyone bring evidence of sources being harder to regenerate than type 1/2 concepts?
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
No, mid-godly can still be negated by HGR negation (or MGR negation), or by erasure of type 2 info or type 1/2 concepts. Maou Gakuin supporters are just coping by saying it'd still functionally be high-godly when it won't be.
Click to expand...
???? It is functionally be high Godly. Now move on with this topic till DT comes and clarify the line that you could not explain it.
 
ImmortalDread said:
???? It is functionally be high Godly. Now move on with this topic till DT comes and clarify the line that you could not explain it.
Click to expand...
On what basis? If it worked like HGR it'd be HGR, but it doesn't and it isn't. If the downgrade goes through I better not see any "but it still works like HGR" shit in other threads.
 
And if it is not passed? I better not hear you saying it's not.

See how pointless your conversation is?
 
Reiner said:
Meh, stop the cat fight and to the thread, what will be decided in the thread will be, nothing else, plancks said he wants confirmation from DT since the thread contradicts the definition itself.
Click to expand...
DT response. In that thread.
Personally, I would draw the line where one can conclusively say that someone with mid-godly regen definitely won't be able to come back from it, although that's just my opinion
Click to expand...
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
No, mid-godly can still be negated by HGR negation (or MGR negation), or by erasure of type 2 info or type 1/2 concepts. Maou Gakuin supporters are just coping by saying it'd still functionally be high-godly when it won't be.
Click to expand...
No? How can someone with mere MGR negation bypass Maou's MGR if it includes regenerating from all aspects erasure including their fundamental concept? You'd need HGR negation for that.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Using DT's opinion in that thread is a bit disingenuous when he ultimately agreed with Ant's proposal, which is the more conservative standard we have now.
Click to expand...
You mean this?
It indeed is not remotely as far reaching as Type 1 or 2 concept erasure. However, it might be comparable to narrative, information or history erasure.
Click to expand...
Personally, I would draw the line where one can conclusively say that someone with mid-godly regen definitely won't be able to come back from it, although that's just my opinion
Click to expand...

..
It supports source being qualified if anything.
 
Oh yeah, DT was even the one who proposed that standard to begin with, so it really feels like you're shouting yourselves in the foot here.

"I would just change the regeneration text a little to:
The ability to regenerate after the erasure of body, mind, and soul, along with at least one even more fundamental aspect of a character's existence, such as their place in the narrative, their entire history, or the underlying information or concept(s) (Type 1 or 2, 3 only rarely with strong evidence of being similar to the former types) needed for them to exist.
Click to expand...
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Oh yeah, DT was even the one who proposed that standard to begin with, so it really feels like you're shouting yourselves in the foot here.

"I would just change the regeneration text a little to:
Click to expand...
and he elaborated how and what does standards meant before making the changes?
you seem to be purposely being incredulous. ignoring the Author's intent is Death of Author fallacy
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
You're arguing something that was DT's personal opinion and not actually reflective of what the standards currently are.
Click to expand...
Wdym? Everyone here believes in what DT says, Type 3 regen will be high godly if they're deeper than soul, also:
Reiner said:
Regeneration from one more fundamental aspects of one's existence than soul = regen from Type 1 and 2 concept = source.

LHS = RHS.
Click to expand...
How it's contradictory? If anything, you're contradicting what is written by saying that something deeper than soul doesn't qualify.
Planck69 said:
Normally yes, but further information and description of the difficulty would be needed for Type 3 concepts specifically. I await that being given or DontTalkDT clarifying what is meant in that page. Until then, the premise of the downgrade is fairly solid.
Click to expand...
Plancks, can you think it over once again and sure that Type 3 has been mentioned not just to refer that it may still be on equal stand as soul rather than deeper than it?
 
thetechmaster36 said:
mmh, yes, i too love to yell at my foot sometimes, it's very therapeutic
Click to expand...
im on mobile 😭
TheGreatJedi13 said:
and he elaborated how and what does standards meant before making the changes?
you seem to be purposely being incredulous. ignoring the Author's intent is Death of Author fallacy
Click to expand...
Except he clearly agreed with Ant's version of the draft, and Ant was the one pushing for type 3 to not qualify, so you can point to whatever previous arguments he made, but it won't changed that what he agreed to.
 
Until someone actually answered my question, I won't be replying further in this thread.
afzofah said:
Anyway, if this downgrade pass through, would someone with HGR negation (to concept) somewhat be able to negate character with resistance to MGR negation from this verse (Graham for example)? Since HGR neg is basically = you can permanently erase someone with HGR, and such thing doesn't apply to Graham, who's still alive after being slashed by Venuzdonoa, which can permanently put down people who has the ability to regenerate their source/concept (basically HGR, but let's put it as "higher-degree" MGR for now).
Click to expand...
 
Sigh...my intention was to fully steer clear from this thread but it has now become such a pain in the ass.

On the topic of why type 3 concepts shouldn't be HGR, my understanding of it is because of type 3 concepts whose nature isn't elaborated upon. What i mean by this is type 3 concepts that are affected by the alteration of their object an example being destruction of the object destroying the concept too or objects that can't be altered by the alteration of it's concept, in other words the object defining the concept an example being concepts based on perception.
In this case though, the source cannot be affected by any alteration to it's object be it the body, mind or soul and is described as being a fundamental aspect of existence that makes people what they are.

In the first place going by the definition of HGR which is the regeneration from complete destruction of the body, mind, soul along with one more fundamental aspect of their existence. The very definition of HGR coupled with the definition of the source already qualifies it for the standard beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Moving on, viewing this from an angle of how it affects site standards as stated by @afzofah this is creating Mid-godly regen that cannot be negated by High-godly regeneration negation as these characters are capable of regenerating from the destruction of all their aspects. So you destroy type 1/2 concepts, so what? Theses concepts mean absolutely nothing to their existence in the first place so if you think about it clearly it's easy to see how redundant this is.

In light of how this actually affects site standards, allow me to digress and move to the issue of the source being a type 3 concept in the first place.
All sources are equal in nature being one and the same meaning you can't have one source being type 3 and another being type 1/2 which brings us to this conundrum, how do we treat the God's?
The definition of the source has it as being the fundamental aspect that makes/defines what something is. God's are Type 1 Concepts, so what has effectively been created here is a type 3 concept that makes a type 1 concept what it is governing and defining its existence, in other words, a type 3 concept being superior to a type 1 concept and realizing this now actually makes me roar with laughter but I'll leave it to the people who created this mess to sort it out themselves.

While still on the topic of Gods, they are undoubtedly type 1 concepts. Regenerating their bodies in the first place should've been High-godly from the onset. It's confirmed that <Ingal> by passes the need for a mind, soul in it's entirety thus if a god were to use <Ingal> it's High-godly regeneration for them as they're regenerating a type 1 concept and regenerating from source destruction is even harder than that if not outright considered impossible by some. Thus with the nature of all sources being one and the same, the issue of needing to prove regenerating it being as difficult as regenerating type 1/2 concepts is settled already.

Furthermore, some of the characters who are able to regenerate their source do it after it's been conceptually erased by type 1 concepts. I mean Anahem and Averneyu are the Yogiiri Takatou of MG who control death, the end & destruction and these characters are able to say "no **** you" to these concepts with others like graham not giving a **** if they've been erased and simply carry on existing, Venuzdonoa being able to say "no **** you" to itself and Anos destruction not caring about these things and continues to remain an absolute Giga Chad at the top of the food chain.

To end things off, if it wasn't obvious already, the reasons behind this entire thing is stupid and I obviously disagree.
 
Tatsumi504 said:
Sigh...my intention was to fully steer clear from this thread but it has now become such a pain in the ass.

On the topic of why type 3 concepts shouldn't be HGR, my understanding of it is because of type 3 concepts whose nature isn't elaborated upon. What i mean by this is type 3 concepts that are affected by the alteration of their object an example being destruction of the object destroying the concept too or objects that can't be altered by the alteration of it's concept, in other words the object defining the concept an example being concepts based on perception.
In this case though, the source cannot be affected by any alteration to it's object be it the body, mind or soul and is described as being a fundamental aspect of existence that makes people what they are.

In the first place going by the definition of HGR which is the regeneration from complete destruction of the body, mind, soul along with one more fundamental aspect of their existence. The very definition of HGR coupled with the definition of the source already qualifies it for the standard beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Moving on, viewing this from an angle of how it affects site standards as stated by @afzofah this is creating Mid-godly regen that cannot be negated by High-godly regeneration negation as these characters are capable of regenerating from the destruction of all their aspects. So you destroy type 1/2 concepts, so what? Theses concepts mean absolutely nothing to their existence in the first place so if you think about it clearly it's easy to see how redundant this is.

In light of how this actually affects site standards, allow me to digress and move to the issue of the source being a type 3 concept in the first place.
All sources are equal in nature being one and the same meaning you can't have one source being type 3 and another being type 1/2 which brings us to this conundrum, how do we treat the God's?
The definition of the source has it as being the fundamental aspect that makes/defines what something is. God's are Type 1 Concepts, so what has effectively been created here is a type 3 concept that makes a type 1 concept what it is governing and defining its existence, in other words, a type 3 concept being superior to a type 1 concept and realizing this now actually makes me roar with laughter but I'll leave it to the people who created this mess to sort it out themselves.

While still on the topic of Gods, they are undoubtedly type 1 concepts. Regenerating their bodies in the first place should've been High-godly from the onset. It's confirmed that <Ingal> by passes the need for a mind, soul in it's entirety thus if a god were to use <Ingal> it's High-godly regeneration for them as they're regenerating a type 1 concept and regenerating from source destruction is even harder than that if not outright considered impossible by some. Thus with the nature of all sources being one and the same, the issue of needing to prove regenerating it being as difficult as regenerating type 1/2 concepts is settled already.

Furthermore, some of the characters who are able to regenerate their source do it after it's been conceptually erased by type 1 concepts. I mean Anahem and Averneyu are the Yogiiri Takatou of MG who control death, the end & destruction and these characters are able to say "no **** you" to these concepts with others like graham not giving a **** if they've been erased and simply carry on existing, Venuzdonoa being able to say "no **** you" to itself and Anos destruction not caring about these things and continues to remain an absolute Giga Chad at the top of the food chain.

To end things off, if it wasn't obvious already, the reasons behind this entire thing is stupid and I obviously disagree.
Click to expand...
Wow that's a lot of text that has 0 relation to the basis of this downgrade. In any case, no, it wouldn't be MGR that functions as HGR. It would just be MGR. I'm not gonna bother responding any further as long as you keep misunderstanding why this upgrade is even a thing,

Oh, and in case the standards are confusing, the basis of this change was that characters who get their type 3 concepts erased could still come back by regenerating from a type 1/2 concept. For example, a concept of a single apple (type 3). could regenerate from the broader concept of all apples (type 2).

Finally, being destroyed by a type 1 concept isn't quite the same as regenerating a type 1 concept. If someone burns my body to ashes with conceptual fire and I regenerate, that wouldn't be HGR. We always give regeneration based on what it is shown to regenerate, not the nature of the attack you regenerate from.
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Finally, being destroyed by a type 1 concept isn't quite the same as regenerating a type 1 concept. If someone burns my body to ashes with conceptual fire and I regenerate, that wouldn't be HGR. We always give regeneration based on what it is shown to regenerate, not the nature of the attack you regenerate from.
Click to expand...
literally the worst analogy.
If a fire can destroy type 1 concept that is fundamental for existence and someone uses it against me to ensure that i truly die and nothing fundamental of me remains and i managed to regenerate from it that alone should suffice. they are shown to regenerate even after an attack that even targets fundamental aspect that alone on itself is a proof
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Finally, being destroyed by a type 1 concept isn't quite the same as regenerating a type 1 concept. If someone burns my body to ashes with conceptual fire and I regenerate, that wouldn't be HGR. We always give regeneration based on what it is shown to regenerate, not the nature of the attack you regenerate from.
Click to expand...
@Theglassman12 time to downgrade Castlevania Dracula 🤣🤣🤣
Funny this is considered as High Godly Regeneration with same Arguments above Tatsumi gave.
Regeneration (High-Godly; Has Death's regeneration,[9] which can bring itself back after being erased from existence while being the abstract concept of Death.[4])
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Fuji if you need me to elaborate Dracula has death Regeneration for his Regeneration ability not his own just like how all MG characters has ingal so what you Claiming doesn't make sense. As Glassman literally upgraded his own verse with deaths Regeneration as high godly regeneration for whovever has it. I don't see any scans stating Dracula has CM type 1 fundamental concepts. Dracula Regeneration is literally based on death having high godly regeneration. Atleast from the profile that's what it looks.

I am not even sure how Dracula or Death has high godly regeneration though. But i am talking about both having same ability where one is explained and other don't still both are considered to have same level of Regeneration.
 
Last edited:
EldemadeDityjon said:
@Theglassman12 time to downgrade Castlevania Dracula 🤣🤣🤣
Funny this is considered as High Godly Regeneration with same Arguments above Tatsumi gave.
Click to expand...
It's not. Being killed by a conceptual attack and being killed as a living concept are two very different things. Maou Gakuin fans stop using whataboutism challenge [IMPOSSIBLE]

TheGreatJedi13 said:
literally the worst analogy.
If a fire can destroy type 1 concept that is fundamental for existence and someone uses it against me to ensure that i truly die and nothing fundamental of me remains and i managed to regenerate from it that alone should suffice. they are shown to regenerate even after an attack that even targets fundamental aspect that alone on itself is a proof
Click to expand...
That doesn't change that all they're regenerating is their body, soul, mind, and source (type 3 concept). Can you prove these characters are having their type 1 concepts destroyed, and then regenerating those?

btw if this was how it worked then everyone in touhou would have HGR LMAO
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Wow that's a lot of text that has 0 relation to the basis of this downgrade. In any case, no, it wouldn't be MGR that functions as HGR. It would just be MGR. I'm not gonna bother responding any further as long as you keep misunderstanding why this upgrade is even a thing,
Click to expand...
Wow, from what I've observed about you, you can mostly only refute by denying what's outrightly stated. The entire reason we were waiting for DT was to clarify what would be enough for a type 3 to be High-godly. I then state my own reasoning on why type 3 was singled out and now it has nothing to do with the thread? LMAO
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Oh, and in case the standards are confusing, the basis of this change was that characters who get their type 3 concepts erased could still come back by regenerating from a type 1/2 concept. For example, a concept of a single apple (type 3). could regenerate from the broader concept of all apples (type 2).
Click to expand...
Except that these characters are doing no such thing so this is actually what has nothing to do with the thread.
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Finally, being destroyed by a type 1 concept isn't quite the same as regenerating a type 1 concept. If someone burns my body to ashes with conceptual fire and I regenerate, that wouldn't be HGR. We always give regeneration based on what it is shown to regenerate, not the nature of the attack you regenerate from.
Click to expand...
Wow, way to skip the part of God's regenerating their bodies which are type 1 concepts.
Has nothing to do with what i said. A type 1 concept was used to erase all aspects of a character, what does burning a body have to do with this?
EldemadeDityjon said:
@Theglassman12 time to downgrade Castlevania Dracula 🤣🤣🤣
Funny this is considered as High Godly Regeneration with same Arguments above Tatsumi gave.
Click to expand...
Stop it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Dog3352
  • Locked
Updating Source to CM type 1
Replies
9
Views
2K
EldemadeDityjon
EldemadeDityjon
Nexus_still_slams
Again ? ... No (Fate Changes and Downgrades)
Replies
34
Views
3K
Burning_Full_Fingers
Burning_Full_Fingers
Megaraptor149
  • Locked
Park Mujin Mid-Godly/High-Godly Regeneration
Replies
15
Views
2K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Dark_Soul20189
  • Locked
Minor Maou Gakuin rework
2 3
Replies
94
Views
8K
Dark_Soul20189
Dark_Soul20189
Robo432343
High Godly Regeneration CRT
Replies
2
Views
1K
Ang4I00
Ang4I00
Back
Top