- 32,359
- 20,298
Yes agreed. I still stand by my guideline and also by my opinion that like 90% of all verses that use them would get removed.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What about this case?There's absolutely no reason to assume lights on a space are stars by default. Burden of proof asks for evidence to the positive claim, which is that they are stars, since they being stars would effectively be saying that the dimension is big enough to house celestial bodies within it. Unless there's evidence that this character can create a pocket dimension of such a size, we shouldn't assume they can by default, so I'm sticking with Matthew.
But those are stars dudePersonally I feel that we shouldn’t assume such realms contain actual stars unless there is sufficient evidence that they are, that seems reasonable to me
This also sounds reasonable to me.Personally I feel that we shouldn’t assume such realms contain actual stars unless there is sufficient evidence that they are, that seems reasonable to me
Can you remind me of their conclusions please?I'm still in agreement with Kukui, Andy, and Ultima.
This seems fine to me as well, as that sort of an example falls within "Sufficient Evidence" to meIf you're taken to a dimension where a starry sky exists, it is logical to consider the stars actual stars. That's pretty much common sense as far as "Bodies of space" are concerned. Since assuming those aren't stars would also have to come back and there would be other things that would require evidence. Saying "It's only a planet or town sized dimension combined with illusion creation" actually requires more assumptions than saying it's a dimension large enough to contain starry skies.
We don't have problems with point 1 or 3, it's point 2 is what a lot of people have problems with Matt's interpretations.
Well if someone survives said technique, then it scales to their durability and if the first character can damage the one who survived said technique with regular attacks, then their regular attacks would scale to the techniqueI said this before, but id like to point up again as I think it should also be somewhat discussed.
We're all pretty much on agreement that pocket dimension feats explicitly need to be proven to scale to AP regularly in order for it to count. So how would we judge the feats that a character does through some kind of technique? Like if a character uses an energy beam that creates a starry dimension during the attack phase, but its only created during the techniques actual usage. Or if a character has a power that allows them to create/manipulate/destroy starry dimensions.
Would we scale it to regular AP? Or would we specify that only the specific power or technique is that strong and seperate them from their regular stats?
Not really relevant to the thread, so idk why you're quoting me of all people to answer it.
Point 2 is for stuff that's like, there's no evidence that anything is even being created. Like a vague wavy background change being interpreted as dimensional creation is my problem.We don't have problems with point 1 or 3, it's point 2 is what a lot of people have problems with Matt's interpretations.
Would you be willing to write a draft page @DontTalkDT? Or is some other knowledgeable staff member willing to do so? I would appreciate the help.Okay, so point 1 and 3 are likely fine to apply then?
If so, we should probably create a new page that explains our new standards, and move the pocket reality manipulation page extra explanation text to there as well:
Pocket Reality Manipulation
Pocket Reality Manipulation is a power which revolves around manipulating and creating pocket realities. Pocket realities, in this case, refers to realms that are spatially separate from other realms (including universes) and either are of less than universal size on the inside or appear as less...vsbattles.fandom.com