Reactive Power Level should be deleted

[Eficiente]

Saying "Battle" is even an unnecessary formality as the profile already has a short text saying what's going on with evidence.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

As long as it doesn't get mistaken for extra criteria, sure. You can just mention AD.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

So if I sat down and got punched over and over again and got stronger without lifting a finger, that's AD and not RE? And is getting stronger in response to being punched not reacting to a perceived threat; the textbook definition of Reactive Evolution?

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

We aren't saying RPL/Statistical RE is wrong. We are saying it belongs as a subclass under AD.

You can of course describe it properly with keywords and proof on profile.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I believe it to be a semantics error since other subclass abilities like Analytical Prediction get placed into Precognition instead of Information Analysis.

We work based on what the perceived ability does, not what it technically is. With the example above while AP is technically just parsing information at a level where you can calculate the next move with a low margin of error, it practically works like Precognition, hence the subclass placement.

RPL on paper might be AD, but effectively it works and sounds like RE. To the average user it makes more sense to label it as such.

Edit: Another example would be Technique Mimicry. It goes under Power Mimicry even though on paper it shouldn't since PM is reserved for copying powers, but to the average person it just makes sense since it is effectively the same thing minus powers.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

believe it to be a semantics error since other subclass abilities like Analytical Prediction get placed into Precognition instead of Information Analysis.

Which I had firm disagreements with. Skill based predictions shouldn't be same as supernatural futuresight.
But here we are.

We work based on what the perceived ability does, not what it technically is. With the example above while AP is technically just parsing information at a level where you can calculate the next move with a low margin of error, it practically works like

I know, but it creates situations like some users claiming Precognition resistance or Type 4 Acausality can resist Analytical Prediction. Because AP is listed as precog.

I think we should go with technical definition and explanation, not perceived ones.

RPL on paper might be AD, but effectively it works and sounds like RE. To the average user it makes more sense to label it as such.

Ehh I don't think average users will go through any trouble. It will be easy to orient towards new format of AD page once it goes through imo.

 

[sanicspood]

If you battle someone and you make less progress than a normal person doing the same battle (i.e. same training) then you have neither of the powers. You have a weakness that makes you grow extra slowly.
To have a superpower you need to be better at the thing you're doing than the average person.

This is just a blatant misunderstanding of the power and my argument. None of you who agree with this removal actually read the page. Typically, no normal person grow during any fights they have with anyone. If you grow during fight, this makes you eligible for either ability depending on how quantifiable it is. Why are you acting like normal people, especially in fiction, grow during battles? Lol, we don't. We can only change strategies or stop holding back, not just blatantly get stronger. This also brings me to another point, if someone gets unquantifiably stronger during battle, how can we delete RPL is Battle AD specifically says it has to be more growth than you would get from training but we don't even know how much stronger they're getting?

 

[The_Impress]

Actually isn't RPL just conditioned Stat Amping?

 

[Vietthai96]

Actually isn't RPL just conditioned Stat Amping?

This is purely subjective matter, depend on point of view. Say RPL is conditioned Stats Amp is not wrong, since it increases stats on specific situation so it fall under stats amp. But at the same time it is not wrong to say it is a conditioned Accelerated Development, since it is a power that "accelerated" your "developments" in power level, under specific condition, or like Sir Oven's point, that RPL is just a form of Reactive Evolution, as you can react, evolve and adapt to the situation to overcome your adversary, in power level/stats aspect.

 

[Antvasima]

That's currently not mentioned anywhere on the RPL page, though, so I'm not sure if that is consistent with how the power is currently used.

Hmm. I was thinking of Doomsday of DC Comics and the Saiyans of Dragon Ball, who do have this feature as part of their reactive power levels, and we originally intended Reactive Power Level to be a more specific version of Reactive Evolution.

What do you and other staff and knowledgeable members here think? Should we include a mention of this in the description?

 

[Antvasima]

Shouldn't we also remove power level aspects from Reactive Evolution page as wel?? Keep it pure hax/resistances based.

Then we would have to perform lots of complicated investigative cleanup work for all of the characters that currently have the ability listed, so I would prefer if we keep it as is.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, I just read Sir Ovens' posts above and think that he made very good points.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

Then we would have to perform lots of complicated investigative cleanup work for all of the characters that currently have the ability listed, so I would prefer if we keep it as is.

Quite the opposite actually. We rarely mention Reactive Evolution for purposes of Statistical Development. Our use of it is purely for hax and resistances. Heck most people don't even know Reactive Evolution has that unnecessary aspect in it's description.

Changing it won't be any work at all. If any profiles have it, the verse expert users can take over the responsibility to fix it. We don't need to fret over it to find each and every profile and change it ourselves.

 

[DontTalkDT]

So if I sat down and got punched over and over again and got stronger without lifting a finger, that's AD and not RE? And is getting stronger in response to being punched not reacting to a perceived threat; the textbook definition of Reactive Evolution?

By the current definition reactive evolution explicitly is not just growing stronger, though, but also needs an Adaptation factor, no?

This is just a blatant misunderstanding of the power and my argument. None of you who agree with this removal actually read the page. Typically, no normal person grow during any fights they have with anyone. If you grow during fight, this makes you eligible for either ability depending on how quantifiable it is. Why are you acting like normal people, especially in fiction, grow during battles? Lol, we don't. We can only change strategies or stop holding back, not just blatantly get stronger. This also brings me to another point, if someone gets unquantifiably stronger during battle, how can we delete RPL is Battle AD specifically says it has to be more growth than you would get from training but we don't even know how much stronger they're getting?

Fighting is physical excercise. Exercise makes you build muscles and stuff. So normal fighting does make you stronger, if just very slightly. Given that's counteracted by decrease in stamina, but it's still a form of training.
Which answers your second question. Fighting is a form of training, so to get either of the abilities you have to get stronger than a normal human who trains by fighting.

Trust me, I read both pages. I literally made one of them.

Hmm. I was thinking of Doomsday of DC Comics and the Saiyans of Dragon Ball, who do have this feature as part of their reactive power levels, and we originally intended Reactive Power Level to be a more specific version of Reactive Evolution.

What do you and other staff and knowledgeable members here think? Should we include a mention of this in the description?

While some characters with RPL might also have the aspect that they grow stronger while getting hurt, I don't think all characters with RPL have that. Adding it as a requirement now would mean we have to look through all the pages with RPL and evaluate whether or not they get stronger by getting hurt.

We could modify RPL to be via battle or via getting hurt, I suppose. It's kinda mixing two separate things together, though. Would be the option with least work.

Third option would be to add the damage thing specifically to the pages that have it. AD is luckily written in a way to allow special cases.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

By the current definition reactive evolution explicitly is not just growing stronger, though, but also needs an Adaptation factor, no?

I mean how we currently treat the power is essentially just Reactive Evo but for power levels. Adaptation itself should technically also be part of Reactive Evo and I'm still baffled it's not.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I mean how we currently treat the power is essentially just Reactive Evo but for power levels. Adaptation itself should technically also be part of Reactive Evo and I'm still baffled it's not.

So, you want to change Reactive Evolution from being Adaptation and RPL to being Adaptation or RPL?
Idk, doesn't that make things more vague?

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

Training is fundamentally same as battle. Both cases you get hurt and become stronger.

In excercise you tear your muscles fibres and they regenerate more buffer later. Excercise is just systematically hurting yourself enough without debilitating yourself. Then regenerating stronger. Battle does same thing.
It's just a matter of intensity.

Yes you miserable humans, you are all watered down discount saiyans in real life.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

So, you want to change Reactive Evolution from being Adaptation and RPL to being Adaptation or RPL?
Idk, doesn't that make things more vague?

He wants Adaptation to be put under Reactive Evolution.

And Keep the RPL page for cases which involve statistical amplification in response to external stimulus, like getting injured.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, Reactive Evolution is a combination of Adaptation and Reactive Power Level, as the page says itself. Doomsday may be the best known example of it.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

IRL, how muscles grow is via tears/fatigue, and then it takes time to recover via resting. But Reactive Power Level works similar to when muscles grow without getting torn or fatigued in the first place. Saitama for example has AD, where he jumped from 9-B to 5-B doing nothing but 10-A levels of physical exercises combined with peakhuman endurance level feats for three years strait. But he does not have Reactive Power level since he stopped feeling his muscles tear and to his knowledge there's nothing left in his universe that can cause a single tear in his muscles. As for other characters, Zenkai is admittedly more like AD rather than RPL, but he does have his Super Saiyan God forms and Ultra Instinct forms that more or less correlate to RPL (With statements getting stronger, faster tougher with each second that passes). Rage Power is also something different; it's a power up that only happens when someone is angry, but they lose that power up when not angry anymore; Hulk basically defines that.

And yeah, RPL was added as a sub-power of RE which was in turn a more advanced version of Adaptation. Though, Adaptation can sometimes just given to characters who are limited to someone being a quick learner in desperate situations and doesn't always correlate to jumping tiers or learning and/or resisting new hax abilities.

 

[Newendigo]

Actually isn't RPL just conditioned Stat Amping?

Yep, is just stat amping but with the mandatory requirement to be mid battle or something.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

Its also a continuous stat amp as long as the condition applies, so basically stacking. So it isn't "once at a time" deal like some transformation.

That's why it's broken I guess.

 

[sanicspood]

Fighting is physical excercise. Exercise makes you build muscles and stuff. So normal fighting does make you stronger, if just very slightly. Given that's counteracted by decrease in stamina, but it's still a form of training.
Which answers your second question. Fighting is a form of training, so to get either of the abilities you have to get stronger than a normal human who trains by fighting.

Trust me, I read both pages. I literally made one of them.

A physical exercise doesn't mean you're going to get stronger, though? You can't get stronger from fighting bc the way muscles work is that they harm themselves and they heal by repairing/replacing damaged muscle fibers by fusing muscle fibers to form new muscle protein strands or myofibrils getting stronger from it. That's why people just don't fight their siblings all the time and turn into like body builders, same with people in light weight classes in any combat sport. Fighting would simply just burn calories making you skinnier. Which is why MMA fighters are skinny. They don't bench, but instead they just condition themselves really. Fighting is only a form of training when you're trying to improve skill, but that doesn't even work half the time. Also, losing stamina doesn't make you weaker if you're truly growing. Cause you'd just recover and be stronger.

 

[Newendigo]

You know that Stat Amp can literally achieve the exact same thing by continously being used.

And that not Stat Amps are temporal.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

I know stat amp can be applied repeatedly. But it's very rare. Only instance I recall is Issie Hyudou from HiSchool DxD.

Besides stat amps must be actively applied, i.e voluntary. It isn't something your body can do naturally and continuously as if it were a heartbeat, i.e involuntary.

 

[Antoniofer]

I would neither bother with Reactive Power Level, as is just a conditioned Statistic Amplification; whenever the augmentation requires to take damage or keep fighting for some time, or if is permanent or not, is not really relevant. At least Adaptation involve developing new powers to immediate threats, and Accelerated Development is basically the ascended version of a prodigy.

 

[Antvasima]

So, to keep within the format of AD but to incorporate what is on the RPL page, maybe:

Reactive Power Level: The character's capabilities increase faster than normal by engaging in combat. They hence become more and more capable over the course of a fight and can potentially strengthen themselves to match or exceed opponents that were previously on par with or superior to them.

Well, if I remember correctly, they mainly grow stronger from receiving damage in combat, so that probably needs to be mentioned as well.

That's currently not mentioned anywhere on the RPL page, though, so I'm not sure if that is consistent with how the power is currently used.

Hmm. I was thinking of Doomsday of DC Comics and the Saiyans of Dragon Ball, who do have this feature as part of their reactive power levels, and we originally intended Reactive Power Level to be a more specific version of Reactive Evolution.

What do you and other staff and knowledgeable members here think? Should we include a mention of this in the description?

While some characters with RPL might also have the aspect that they grow stronger while getting hurt, I don't think all characters with RPL have that. Adding it as a requirement now would mean we have to look through all the pages with RPL and evaluate whether or not they get stronger by getting hurt.

We could modify RPL to be via battle or via getting hurt, I suppose. It's kinda mixing two separate things together, though. Would be the option with least work.

Third option would be to add the damage thing specifically to the pages that have it. AD is luckily written in a way to allow special cases.

I would appreciate further staff input regarding this issue.

 

[Eficiente]

Let's cover 1 thing at a time, yes? First of all, all comparisons to Reactive Evolution shouldn't be done as the power should stand as ts own thing, which is why the page should be reworded roughly like this:

"Reactive Evolution is the ability to, in response to threats and adverse situations, evolve in ways the user previously lacked. This allowing them to be better capable of dealing with said issues faced, and this evolution can come in the following ways:

• Developing new powers or abilities
• Developing new resistances
• Developing on stats. However, if this is the only way in which they "evolve", then Accelerated Development should be given instead to avoid redundancy."

This has the following purposes:

• It clarifies to not use Reactive Evolution when they're only grows in power
• It still keeps that as part of what makes the ability as it is intuitive by its name. The reason why it asks to use other ability being merely redundancy.

We do this and then boom, I won't hear another person talking about Reactive Evolution here because that has no room to happen.

 

[Newendigo]

• Developing new powers or abilities
• Developing new resistances
• Developing on stats. However, if this is the only way in which they "evolve", then Accelerated Development should be given instead to avoid redundancy."

Yeah, this is just how I alway saw Reactive Evolution's requirements.

 

[Antvasima]

Let's cover 1 thing at a time, yes? First of all, all comparisons to Reactive Evolution shouldn't be done as the power should stand as ts own thing, which is why the page should be reworded roughly like this:

"Reactive Evolution is the ability to, in response to threats and adverse situations, evolve in ways the user previously lacked. This allowing them to be better capable of dealing with said issues faced, and this evolution can come in the following ways:

• Developing new powers or abilities
• Developing new resistances
• Developing on stats. However, if this is the only way in which they "evolve", then Accelerated Development should be given instead to avoid redundancy."

This has the following purposes:

• It clarifies to not use Reactive Evolution when they're only grows in power
• It still keeps that as part of what makes the ability as it is intuitive by its name. The reason why it asks to use other ability being merely redundancy.

We do this and then boom, I won't hear another person talking about Reactive Evolution here because that has no room to happen.

To me this seems uncontroversial to apply.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, about this:

https://vsbattles.com/threads/reactive-power-level-should-be-deleted.136713/post-4773537

 

[Eficiente]

It's still negative to keep the page. None of my points were addressed should that be aimed but I can address those;

• Keep RPL as part of what AD is with another wording means users will try to write different wordings to justify both things in a profile when they're the same. That's finding the hair in the egg.
• Keep the "more and more capable over the course of a fight" can still mislead to mean "the combat skills grow too", and "can potentially strengthen themselves to match or exceed opponents that were previously on par with or superior to them" can still mislead to "they can become as strong as their foe if they survive for a while rather (than a bit stronger under their own percentage of power)". Becoming as strong as your foe by surviving long enough being a DB thing.
• Grow stronger from receiving damage in combat is also a DB thing applied on profiles while the page doesn't say this and nor does it fit the name of the power. If anyone would somehow rather apply this new made up thing to the page rather than deleting it then I do not know to tell them that's dumb. It's just Stats Amp with something that triggers it, but it can also be called AD or Empowerment. AD has room to everything RPL is and more due to the "Others" type, I would imagine one can also just not write any type at all and just say & show what can the characters do.

---
On Reactive Evolution, this is a better portrayal:

"Reactive Evolution is the ability to, in response to threats and adverse situations, evolve in ways the user previously lacked. This allowing them to be better capable of dealing with said issues faced, and this evolution can come in the following ways:

• Developing new powers or abilities
• Developing new resistances
• Developing on stats. However, if this is the only way in which they "evolve", then [[Accelerated Development]] should be given instead to avoid redundancy.

This ability is also similar to [[Adaptation]], but with the powers & resistances gained being more varied and ridiculous rather than simply adapting to better utilize one's resources to survive environments or having only few times grown abilities or resistences. With Reactive Evolution, a user is ideally always supposed to be able to "evolve", if over long periods of time, with new abilities or resistances, while Adaptation meets clear limits in this regard. While Reactive Evolution is often times always active, its effects may not always kick in to benefit the user, and this needs to be evaluated through feats & scaling. Likewise, the latter determines the complexity and scale of the powers, resistances and stats gained."

This meets 1 more purpose: It leads to use Adaptation if a character isn't confirmed to always grow powers/resistances and maybe only showed having once or in some few isolated cases in a long career grown new powers/resistances with no explanation or elaborate details about it.

 

[Ballsdeep69]

I would say the important destination is that RPL is a supernatural ability conditional boost that can fluctuate higher or lower depending on the opponent like Nobunaga who's damage scales depending on the opponents divinity or mystery or Ungrim Ironfist who's strength becomes equal to his enemy's durability but only if it's higher.

Don't remove RPL but rather change it to be something more about being a boost that scales off the potency of something or "unlike adaption which adapts to hax used by their enemy, Reactive Power level adapts to the opponents "powerlevel".

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT

What do you think about mine and Eficiente's recent comments?

 

[Eficiente]

@Ballsdeep69 That was a pretty ignorant comment. It doesn't pay attention to what the RPL page says, how it's mostly used, what other powers we have & what they say and what arguments against RPL exist. Along being in a staff thread I had to delete it, it misleads people who paid as much attention and there is no point in replying to it when you can just read all of the above to reply to your own comment. Otherwise I may need to say again the same stuff for like the fourth time.

 

[sanicspood]

I’ve still yet to be refuted

 

[Eficiente]

I was aiming to dismiss it as it wasn't sensical, but I can explain the why of it and not leave it at my word.

If you grow during fight, this makes you eligible for either ability depending on how quantifiable it is.

No, either is good as they're both the same, hence RPL should be deleted.

Yeah, that's the point. Battle AD specifies "regular" training and AD progresses more than that during battle. RPL literally isn't the same bc it doesn't specify any of that making it much more vague so it can progress you during battle but less beneficial than just conventional training. Read the pages.

This also brings me to another point, if someone gets unquantifiably stronger during battle, how can we delete RPL [if] Battle AD specifically says it has to be more growth than you would get from training but we don't even know how much stronger they're getting?

First of all, even if that was an issue we would just reword that and remove the training bit. But it's not an issue as this growth better than growth in "regular training" refers as in a regular training a human w/ no superpowers would have. As in, they do training and their growth goes from 1 to 1, but a character with with Battle AD or RPL may battle and their growth may go from 1 to 2. Even you say here that training doesn't make you stronger, but Battle AD or RPL are pretty much Stats Amp triggered by battle rather than the lesser achievements humans can do, Battle AD isn't less vague because it doesn't it doesn't bring up regular training, you're just tangled up in an awful logic that somehow makes you believe so. Despite having said everything I needed to, I don't even believe this made you understand for the same reasons I suspected that you might have just been trolling in the thread, so please consider to not comment anymore if that's the case.

 

[sanicspood]

No, either is good as they're both the same, hence RPL should be deleted.

No, they AREN'T the same. Both have different requirements for the ability hence RPL shouldn't be removed. Literally, none of you read your own pages.

First of all, even if that was an issue we would just reword that and remove the training bit. But it's not an issue as this growth better than growth in "regular training" refers as in a regular training a human w/ no superpowers would have. As in, they do training and their growth goes from 1 to 1, but a character with with Battle AD or RPL may battle and their growth may go from 1 to 2. Even you say here that training doesn't make you stronger, but Battle AD or RPL are pretty much Stats Amp triggered by battle rather than the lesser achievements humans can do, Battle AD isn't less vague because it doesn't it doesn't bring up regular training, you're just tangled up in an awful logic that somehow makes you believe so. Despite having said everything I needed to, I don't even believe this made you understand for the same reasons I suspected that you might have just been trolling in the thread, so please consider to not comment anymore if that's the case.

If that's the case, then remove battle AD instead of RPL... OR just save a bunch of time and keep both. not inherently for RPL, once again read your own pages. RPL can very easily just be growing stronger in small increments as the fight drags on which is less than normal training. With battle AD, your power is INHERENTLY going to go from 1 to 2. With RPL IT IS NOT INHERENT to go from 1 to 2, but just higher into 1. I never said that training doesn't make you stronger? That's literally just a blatant strawman. What I said was in the context of the fighting because you claimed just regular fighting magically makes you stronger which is factually false. Battle AD literally does bring up training and you'd know that if you actually read your own page, Eficiente. You're so biased toward your own position you literally just cannot concede the fact that you are wrong or even consider the possibility that you could be wrong.

 

[Eficiente]

I deleted that for being trolling, if any staff disagrees then I would like to see their reasons for it.

 

[sanicspood]

what? what did i say that was trolling??