Our rules on Acausality

[Dragonmasterxyz]

Okay, this is something that has been on my mind for the longest.

Odd Rules?
Our rules for Acausality are weird. To quote the page

"Acausality is defined as the ability to exist outside of causality, or the natural flow of manipulation defined by cause and effect.

An entity that is acausal has no true beginning or end, and is thus essentially immune to offensive causality manipulation and time travel. Even if you go back in time and kill an acausal being in the past or prevent him/her/it from being born/created, it will still exist in the present and other timelines. Often, even if an acausal being is killed in the present, it can still survive by appearing from another timeline. Thus, acausal beings are very difficult to permanently destroy, often requiring the use of high-level reality warping."

Seems sound right? But this issue is, what about characters who are specifically stated to revive themselves throughout space and time. Of course we've also split the immunity to Time Paradox into its own thing. Should we do so with this timeline resurrection?

3-D and 4-D Acausality
Now my question is, what is the difference. How does one qualify for 3-D acausality or 4-D acausality? What even is this? Could some explain this for me? I don't think fiction has actually ever distinguished between 3-Dimensional or 4-Dimensional acausality.

What are our CURRENT Requirements?
As of right now, what does one need to do in order to have acausality? What is the exact requirement?

Is it too Complicated?
Personally I feel that we've made this too complicated, however, I don't have a way of simplifying it. However, our current terms are very confusing as is. So how can we simplify this?

That is all.

 

[PaChi2]

3-D acausality:

Effect still goes after cause, even if they dont match, even if there is none.

4-D acausality

Cause and effect dont match at all with this guy. Like, you cant even use the strict meaning of both words since they dont go together.

 

[FateAlbane]

I have no earthly idea where 3-D and 4-D acausality possibly came from.

I've never ever seen such a distinction being seriously made as some kind of line in any work of fiction (unless we consider the occasion where some characters with a degree of noping Causality are still affected by a larger scale phenomenon - usually on a higher dimension - and there's this other character who STILL isn't affected).

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I agree that our current rules and standards for Acausality are a mess and extremely overcomplicated, and this started with splitting Acausality and Time Paradox Immunity into two things.

 

[DodoNova2]

this is interesting, the rules of Acausality are complicated for me too

 

[ALRF]

>I have no earthly idea where 3-D and 4-D acausality possibly came from

This...i too have a hard time understanding the difference between them nor where did it comes from

 

[The_Everlasting]

I agree that our current rules and standards for Acausality are a mess and extremely overcomplicated, and this started with splitting Acausality and Time Paradox Immunity into two things.

This.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Also, it is frankly ridiculous that we treat staying alive in the present even after you're killed in the past as something other than Acausality. It's just absurd. That's the very standard example of Acausality in fiction and yet it was arbitrarily decided that it was something else entirely.

I have no idea why we have to make so many complications and distinctions to something that should be simple and straightforward.

 

[PaChi2]

Personally I'd simplify it into:

Full blown Acausality: Destined for 1-A who transcend duality and all stuff.

Resistance to causality manipulation.

Time Paradox immunity.

 

[ThisIsMySwagPack]

I agree with Matthew. Acausality was way more simple before.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Personally I'd simplify it into:
Full blown Acausality: Destined for 1-A who transcend duality and all stuff.

Resistance to causality manipulation.

Time Paradox immunity.

This is the opposite of simplifying. This is just making things even more complicated and you are not quite understanding acausality.

Even 3D beings can be Acausal. They just have to resist or nullify causality.

 

[ALRF]

@PaChi your idea will make things extremely complicated

Well apart from this, i agree with Matthew

 

[FateAlbane]

I disagree with insta-classifying TP Immunity as Acausality, tho.

 

[DodoNova2]

Someone who does not die even if the killed are present Does not really have a "start" or "end" nah?

 

[PaChi2]

@Matt

Nope, simply, unless you are 1-A, you fall under "resistance to causality manipulation". And if your only shown feat is not being affected by a time paradox, over this "resistance" you get Time paradox immunity. Its not that complicated.

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

I very much agree with Matt too. It's way to over complicated as is and apparently quite a few characters were left with the wrong ability.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

@Matt
Nope, simply, unless you are 1-A, you fall under "resistance to causality manipulation". And if your only shown feat is not being affected by a time paradox, over this "resistance" you get Time paradox immunity. Its not that complicated.

No, you don't need to be 1-A to be Acausal.

 

[The_Everlasting]

"Nope, simply, unless you are 1-A, you fall under "resistance to causality manipulation"."

Being completely unaffected by a cause or effect of something is not resistance to causality manipulation.

 

[FateAlbane]

Basically, I agree with everything, though I wouldn't mind the distinction between TP Immunity and Acausality. It's a fairly common power in Fiction while Acausality can be way worse.

Take for example someone like Sol Bad Guy who hasn't ever shown any signs of surviving offensive Causality Manip. He had to actually resist a TP to the face, he didn't outright nope it before feeling any of its possible effects (take for instance Zamasu in the future of Dragon Ball. Is that Acausality, too?).

 

[FateAlbane]

Hence, why the distinction in itself isn't that bad and could be useful for the less extreme cases. Other than that, yes, It's being generally overcomplicated.

 

[Reppuzan]

@Matt

Well, personally, I think it was necessary due to numerous other showings.

For instance, characters like Future Zamasu were unaffected by being killed in the past, but are not so unhinged from the laws of causality that they can't be punched and kicked in his own present.

In addition, there are other characters who can be killed under normal circumstances but are immune to grandfather paradoxes, like BB and Tiamat.

But yes, I wholly agree that we're overcomplicating this issue with the idea of 3-D and 4-D Acausality.

 

[DodoNova2]

(take for instance Zamasu in the future of Dragon Ball. Is that Acausality, too?).

Zamasu comes from another timeline

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

The problem with Acausality started with people being incapable of understanding that Acausality is a power like any other, and there are both low-end and high-end applications of it. Naturally someone who is Acausal over Higher-Dimensional Time will be more impressive than someone whose parents are killed in the past but remains alive in the future, but both are Acausality.

One is simple a higher level of Acausality then others. You don't need to split them into multiple powers.

This is the equivalent of confining Fire Manipulation to setting houses, trees, and buildings on fire, and then when a character sets a Planet on fire you need to invent another power called "Cosmic Fire Manipulation".

No, both characters are using fire to achieve their feats, one is simply more powerful at it than the other.

Same goes for Hax powers like Acausality.

 

[FateAlbane]

Causality is a power with tons of more versatility than fire manipulation going burning more and bigger things. I don't see how that comparison is viable.

 

[FateAlbane]

If we set it all into Acausality (even TP immunity) we would need to go giving "Types" to the power, which could complicate stuff even more. Not sure if it's for the best.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

We just have to specify in the profile why the character is Acausal. Simple.

 

[PaChi2]

http://powerlisting.wikia.com/wiki/Causality_Immunity

^My point is changing this "immunity" into "resistance" in the profiles. And let the 1-As get the Immunity. Its simple.

 

[FateAlbane]

@Matt That sounds good enough for me, yes.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

http://powerlisting.wikia.com/wiki/Causality_Immunity
^My point is changing this "immunity" into "resistance" in the profiles. And let the 1-As get the Immunity. Its simple.

Immunity is typically a NLF anyways aside from examples. And I am 100% against only giving "Actual Acausality" to 1-As.

 

[DodoNova2]

but if we have to give "Level" for Acausality, what would be the intermediate levels? we already have:

• 1- Acausality (exist even if your past no longer exists in the Timeline)
• 2- Full Acausality (To be essentially 1-A that are above any dimension / Causality

there are other levels so give me some idea

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I think levels of Acausality is pretty terrible, and what you are describing as "Full Acausality" is already covered by Transduality.

 

[PaChi2]

@Matt that's why I propose calling it Resistance.

What you call Acausality is what I call resistance to causality. Because (imo) acausality goes with "inmunity" and Inmunity is NLF, except for our 1-A overlords.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Acausality doesn't go with Immunity. That comes from the misinterpretation that being Acausal means that no normal attack can harm you.

 

[Reppuzan]

@PaChi

But there's a difference between resisting a time stop and not being affected at all when your past self is killed.

It's one of the few times I'm willing to condone the use of "immunity".

 

[FateAlbane]

Using a metaphor of sorts...

Consider Causality a river with a current.

Acausals are outside the river.

No matter how strong the current possibly becomes, it doesn't matter because they are outside such a flow.

 

[DodoNova2]

Anyway Time Paradox Immunity = Acausality?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Time Paradox Immunity is an application of Acausality. It doesn't have to be its own power.

 

[PaChi2]

@PaChi

But there's a difference between resisting a time stop and not being affected at all when your past self is killed.

It's one of the few times I'm willing to condone the use of "immunity".

We must specify the reasons for said resistance anyway. The same way "resistance to time manipulation" can come from a time stop or from being imprisoned in a time loop.

 

[Reppuzan]

@Matt

I hate to argue semantics, but Acausality is literally defined as "lacking ties to causality", which is why I took it to the logical extreme and condoned the previous revision.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

@Repp

Yeah, this is why people misinterpret Acausality, because of the unfortunate name. I never got the impression that Acausal characters are 100% detatched from Causality and thus can never be killed by normal ways.