-
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.
Removal of Immortality Negation
- Thread starter Crabwhale
- Start date
- 19,316
- 9,888
Did DDM comment after my input was given because I've not seen him comment about what I argued at all.
- 7,744
- 10,224
Sounds reasonable
- 19,316
- 9,888
- 19,316
- 9,888
It's mostly either trimming down the page/moving it to the immortality section to make the power null page more concise, or just outright deleting it. I'm in favor of the former due to many verses having Immortality negation in the first place, and having some form of explanation on the ability would help answer a lot of questions on what counts and what doesn't.
- 29,927
- 31,002
Yeah, saw some points and think the former can work.
- 19,316
- 9,888
@DarkDragonMedeus btw in regards to your comment on how there's normal ways to get around some immortalities, the section talks about some of your points like the whole "kill someone beyond their regen showing" as it would only be considered immortality negation if someone had Majin Buu levels of immortality, and someone is stated to kill immortals easily and all they did was stab them once and they just dropped dead without much elaboration beyond "I can kill immortal beings".
Vietthai96
He/Him- 9,232
- 12,282
I don't understand the reason why immortality, regeneration negation should be placed in regeneration or immortality page, this power is pratically power null at aim specifically at immortality, regeneration; it make no sense to place a specific power null in immortality or regeneration page, completely unrelated. At best we should just trimmed the page down, remove anti-magic is fine since it is not really too specific
- 11,200
- 12,503
- Thread starter
- #51
Yeah I'm gonna just go with the easier route here.
Bambu is for removing, Armor is for removing, Prop did not state an opinion, Planck is neutral, DDM and Glass are for moving it, I'm switching my vote to outright deletion as I initially proposed.
Bambu is for removing, Armor is for removing, Prop did not state an opinion, Planck is neutral, DDM and Glass are for moving it, I'm switching my vote to outright deletion as I initially proposed.
- 19,316
- 9,888
Planck isn't neutral, he said he doesn't mind trimming it or moving it to another page, so that's me, Planck and DDM who said that this should just be cleaned up and not removed.
- 7,875
- 8,098
You didn't really provide enough context in the OP which had me all confused, but if it's just stemming around just removing Immortality Negation in general, why's that exactly? As there can be some indications and statements that could be prior to Immortality neg hax, instead of just taking it out entirely in general. Why not just simply come up with some standards so that they could all qualify for what the ability stands for?
Vietthai96
He/Him- 9,232
- 12,282
My vote is nonexistent since i'm a blue nam, but i against remove/detele them or move them to another page. Just trim them down, they are noteworthy and niche powers, enough to warrant them to be mentioned and as i said before, they are, fundamentally, power null that aim specifically at something, moving them to another page no sense, making a new page for them is out of question, it is redundant
- 11,200
- 12,503
- Thread starter
- #55
I may have misinterpreted "trimming" as "deleting", my b.
- 11,200
- 12,503
- Thread starter
- #56
Because I simply don't believe the ability is unique enough to warrant it.
- 7,875
- 8,098
Just for this reasoning that rather comes off as personal, I disagree with this for the time-being then. As this could have so many possibilities of being noteworthy
- 19,316
- 9,888
So that's 4 for trimming/moving the ability somewhere else (Me, Planck, DDM, and Propellus), and 3 for deletion (Crab, Bambu and Armor)
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,476
- 18,670
To what extent would you guys even want to trim it that it doesn't just end up looking like the Anti-Magic bit
Like they're already super close in terms of level of exposition, is the thing you're scrapping so much to save just the "Users" bit?
Like they're already super close in terms of level of exposition, is the thing you're scrapping so much to save just the "Users" bit?
- 19,316
- 9,888
Either the users bit or just the whole "dimensional level stuff" we can trim down to make it more concise.
- 11,200
- 12,503
- Thread starter
- #62
It...isn't?
The fact of the matter is that on a fundamental level immortality negation is power null. There are specifications and alterations unique to certain verses that use it, but that should be covered in the profiles where it is relevant anyway. The redirection from listings of said immortality negation to power null on pages aren't so unintuitive as they're being painted and in the absolute worst case scenario they may require some editing.
- 7,875
- 8,098
You didn't give any actual reasoning why it should be removed other than a just "simply".
And I recalled giving this suggestion before:
Similar threads
