Removal of Johnny Test's Supernatural Luck

[RandomGuy2345]

Though if it doesn't get evaluated, then Johnny gets to keep his full on Supernatural Luck...

I think it's a good idea to necro this thread.

 

[Da3ggman]

Though if it doesn't get evaluated, then Johnny gets to keep his full on Supernatural Luck...

I think it's a good idea to necro this thread.

NOOOOOOOOO-
But seriously, should I contact a mod and ask them to evaluate it?

 

[RandomGuy2345]

NOOOOOOOOO-
But seriously, should I contact a mod and ask them to evaluate it?

Please lol.

 

[Da3ggman]

I'm mostly neutral, the second clip isn't luck because that chain reaction was seemingly intentional, so it's more of a skill feat rather than luck.
The others are classic gags, but I see that some of them could just be a result of Dark Vegan just being very incompetent.
The armada thing, was given because everyone was sure they would have died, and Dukey's joke about Johnny surviving because he's the mc doesn't really work for fate manip and stuff like that.

What do you think now that the debate is basically finished?

 

[Everything12]

Opinion unchanged.

Just having things happen in your favour isn't enough for Supernatural Luck, not even if it happen consistently. Only statements of being supernaturally lucky or similar evidence grants it.

 

[Da3ggman]

Opinion unchanged.

So you vote for the removal of Supernatural Luck completely?

 

[Everything12]

Yes. For one that isn't how a limited rating is used at all. It is for abilities that are more limited in their ability to be used or function than they standardly are. Possibly and likely are the ratings given to abilities that have some evidence supporting them but not enough.

Though this lacks such evidence to back even a possibly rating, without any solid statements to confirm that these coincidences are because of being lucky.

 

[Da3ggman]

Yes. For one that isn't how a limited rating is used at all. It is for abilities that are more limited in their ability to be used or function than they standardly are. Possibly and likely are the ratings given to abilities that have some evidence supporting them but not enough.

Though this lacks such evidence to back even a possibly rating, without any solid statements to confirm that these coincidences are because of being lucky.

Thanks for explaining. Also counted.

 

[Da3ggman]

Yes. For one that isn't how a limited rating is used at all. It is for abilities that are more limited in their ability to be used or function than they standardly are. Possibly and likely are the ratings given to abilities that have some evidence supporting them but not enough.

Though this lacks such evidence to back even a possibly rating, without any solid statements to confirm that these coincidences are because of being lucky.

@RandomGuy2345 what do you think of this?

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

I mean, Johnny's luck feats are explained with his "star of the show" thing, no?

 

[Da3ggman]

Bump

 

[Da3ggman]

Bump

 

[GoCommitDi]

Is this still alive? I agree with the changes

 

[Bruhtelho]

honestly, i'm gonna have to agree with the change. Supernatural luck can only be given if something/someone is directly stated to be lucky and taken straight from the page "Being lucky or unlucky in itself is not enough to have this ability - a character's exceptional luck must be a real ability or supernatural aspect of them" its never been stated to be Johnny luck that gets him outta situations nor a real ability that is ever brought up by anyone besides when he has the supernatural clover thingy which is directly stated to grant goodluck.

 

[RandomGuy2345]

its never been stated to be Johnny luck that gets him outta situations nor a real ability that is ever brought up by anyone besides when he has the supernatural clover thingy which is directly stated to grant goodluck.

Doesn't this apply to many other verses who don't state anything about a character getting lucky?

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

Doesn't this apply to many other verses who don't state anything about a character getting lucky?

Yeah, we gotta remove those

 

[RandomGuy2345]

Yeah, we gotta remove those

Imho, a verse shouldn't need a statement about a character(s) getting lucky in order for said character(s) to have Supernatural Luck. The absurd amount of bullshit they survive or the amount of bullshit they achieve with sheer luck alone should be enough.

 

[Bruhtelho]

Imho, a verse shouldn't need a statement about a character(s) getting lucky in order for said character(s) to have Supernatural Luck. The absurd amount of bullshit they survive or the amount of bullshit they achieve with sheer luck alone should be enough.

then with that like almost every protagonist on the wiki gains it cause they survive things or stuff goes in their favor.

 

[RandomGuy2345]

then with that like almost every protagonist on the wiki gains it cause they survive things or stuff goes in their favor.

I'm not just talking about the run of the norm "Oh this event happens in this favor for character A", I'm talking about absurd shit that happens in their favor, and I've already shown a few examples of absurd things happening in Johnny's favor. It's not just normal shit.

 

[Bruhtelho]

I'm not just talking about the run of the norm "Oh this event happens in this favor for character A", I'm talking about absurd shit that happens in their favor, and I've already shown a few examples of absurd things happening in Johnny's favor. It's not just normal shit.

well make an ability CRT for it cause thats how we accept Supernatural Luck until something is changed because no statements of it means its a no go for that ability :/

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

Johnny's situation is different tho
Since his "Star of the Show" statement probably counts as a Supernatural Luck statement

 

[Bruhtelho]

Johnny's situation is different tho
His "Star of the Show" statement probably counts as a Supernatural Luck statement

the Star of The Show thing was dropped cause it was from Dukey who has on several occasions is shown to break the 4th Wall and could of very easily been one of those gags.

 

[RandomGuy2345]

the Star of The Show thing was dropped cause it was from Dukey who has on several occasions is shown to break the 4th Wall and could of very easily been one of those gags.

Thing is that specific 4th Wall Break actually gives an explanation as to why Johnny survived the attack that was supposed to kill despite it's gaggy nature, as opposed to his other 4th Wall Breaks, where he's aware of the fact that he's a cartoon character.

 

[Board3659]

I think it should just me Limited Supernatural Luck imo

 

[Reiner04]

Agree

 

[Da3ggman]

So what's going on with this thread? Should I just start a new one with some of the explanations seen here? All the mods have agreed to the complete removal, but it seems like a bit of a bitch move to just remove it since a lot of regular users (and the expert on the verse) disagree on their reasoning.

 

[Board3659]

So what's going on with this thread? Should I just start a new one with some of the explanations seen here? All the mods have agreed to the complete removal, but it seems like a bit of a bitch move to just remove it since a lot of regular users (and the expert on the verse) disagree on their reasoning.

it was since it used to be staff aprove

you need more staff since only 1 disagreed. Also RandomGuy the expert at Johnny test had far more arguments than just single sentence disagreements

 

[Da3ggman]

you need more staff since only 1 disagreed.

Everything and DarkDragon Disagreed, both being Admins

Also RandomGuy the expert at Johnny test had far more arguments than just single sentence disagreements

RandomGuy is the expert I am referring to in my original comment.

 

[Board3659]

Everything and DarkDragon Disagreed, both being Admins

I still think 2 staff isn't enough though when it was previously staff aproved

 

[Da3ggman]

I still think 2 staff isn't enough though when it was previously staff aproved

You are correct. But do you really think any more staff are gonna join in on the thread? I'm honestly thinking about remaking the thread with more concise points.

 

[Board3659]

You are correct. But do you really think any more staff are gonna join in on the thread? I'm honestly thinking about remaking the thread with more concise points.

I agree imo ... remake it