Non-Physical Interaction Minor Update

[Elizhaa]

Currently, Non-Physical Interaction's definition is:

• The power to interact with intangible or non-corporeal beings. Users can both see and interact with intangible, or non-corporeal, abstract, and nonexistent life-forms and entities, allowing them to make physical contact and possibly cause harm.

it seems like there is a confusion that just physically interacting with those types of objects would not be Non-Physical Interaction so I wanted to remedy this. So, I want to include objects also in the definition since in certain fictional verses like Bleach, objects can be also shared intangible, or non-corporeal, abstract, and nonexistent characteristics.

So, the new definition that I am proposing is:

• The power to interact with intangible or non-corporeal beings or objects. Users can both see and interact with intangible, or non-corporeal, abstract, and nonexistent objects or life-forms and entities, allowing them to make physical contact and possibly cause harm.

 

[Antvasima]

This seems uncontroversial to apply.

 

[Elizhaa]

Understood, I will apply the changes soon.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Question, why not include souls, or Acausal beings in there?

 

[Elizhaa]

Acausal entities tends be tangible so Non-Physical Interetion is not really needed to affect them. When these beings are intangible, incorporeal, or similar, Non-Physical Interaction is viable to affect them

Souls are implicitely included since they tends to be non-corporeal or intangible.

 

[Antoniofer]

Yeah, acausal doesn't mean being intangible, although for higher levels, they "eliminate" the effect of a cause, turning essentially immutable (note, not all acausal beings can do this).

Soul by defaul are disembodiments, that is the same as non corporal (of course, there's no hurt in adding it).

Also, there's something that has been bothering, is understable to put beings with Concept Physiology as intangible (one can't simply strike the air and touch an idea, and few of them are even nigh-omnipresent), but why do we assume that embodiments of something are untouchable by conventional means? Like, the entire point of embodiment is to have a physical body.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

ah okay..

I just seen some people say "Need NPI to affect acausal type 2, 4 and 5"

i didn't know non-corporal covers soul..

 

[Antoniofer]

If want to pass through Acusality you need a more powerful Causality Manipulation, Logic Manipulation of some kind of high tier immunity bypassing (assuming the acausality is like the example of above)

Non Corporeal cover a bunch of powers, basically anyone that do not have a physical body, be made by astral matter, information void or nothing in particular.

 

[Antvasima]

So what should we do here?

 

[Elizhaa]

I think Antoniofer's point make sense here.

>Do we assume that embodiments of something are untouchable by conventional means? I think the question is beyond the scope of this thread. However, I do believe we don't assume this. Sometimes the embodiments are tangible and just have Abstract Existence (Type 2). From what I notice, a lot of evidence tend to be required to prove Abstract Existence (Type 1). If you want to discuss more, we could discuss on my message wall.

 

[Elizhaa]

So what should we do here?

I believe not much. I made the changes already. I think the thread is okay as close.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will wait for a confirmation from Antoniofer though.

 

[Antoniofer]

Don't really have anything against OP, it seems fine, just wanted to clear up a doubt.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks. I will close this then.