• 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.

Resistance to passives in general.

Peppypony

She/Her
1,839
271
If Character A is confirmed within their own canon they have resistance to passives, let's say the canon quote is-
"the user is immune to any capability from the opponent that's always activated"
for example and always activated = passive (also in this verse, capability = power btw just like how powers in MHA are called "quirks").

Let's say Character B is from a different verse. If Character A had a match against Character B on this site, would it be a NLF for any say that none of Character B's passives won't work against Character A in matches? Or is it only a NLF to assume that Character A's resistance works on a 4D scale or any dimension beyond that when it's never been shown to be capable of doing so?
 
We would only assume that this ability only works against powers that it has been shown to work against, and similar abilities on the same level of its resistance.

Anything further would be NLF. And it would especially be NLF to assume it works on "all passives" regardless of complexity, smurfiness, and such.
 
What about nullifying instead of resisting?

Asriel Dreemurr’s power nullification (before it was changed to paralysis but only because it was agreed that it was just halting his opponent’s movement but that besides the point) was considered to be nullifying not just all his opponent’s powers but also halting their movement. That wasn’t considered a NLF? So why would nullifying only passive powers from the opponent be any different?

If so, then can you also explain why it’s a NLF with resistance but not power nullification?
 
What about nullifying instead of resisting?

Asriel Dreemurr’s power nullification (before it was changed to paralysis but only because it was agreed that it was just halting his opponent’s movement but that besides the point) was considered to be nullifying not just all his opponent’s powers but also halting their movement. That wasn’t considered a NLF? So why would nullifying only passive powers from the opponent be any different?

If so, then can you also explain why it’s a NLF with resistance but not power nullification?
My bad for taking so long to reply.

It is the same. You would only assume the character can nullify abilities it has shown/explained to be capable of nullifying, or those very close to them. Unless they have a very specific form of power nullification.

There is one person I can think of who has the ability to nullify most powers. That being Kamijou Touma from Magical Index. He has the ability to nullify all "supernatural" abilities.

Though, even he has his own limits. He can't affect nonexistents or those with powers beyond High 1-C for example.

It really just depends on how your character's ability functions.
 
My bad for taking so long to reply.
Don't worry about it. :)


So Asriel Dreemurr's (what used to be) power nullification is a NLF then?

Like, that could just be how it functions and me personally as long as you don't assume it works on anything 5-dimensional or anywhere beyond that or assume it that it'll work on those who resist power nullification, I don't really see the problem and it didn't seem like people saw it as a problem back then? Perhaps standards have changed since then? I mean, this was back in like 2016-2018.
 
I don't really know what Asriel Dremurr's power nullification was so I'm unable to answer that question.

Most power nullification has limits, whether it be dimensional limits, resistance limits, or certain abilities that it can't nullify. It just depends, as I said.
 
Back then from what I remember it was assumed it nullifies not just all of his opponent's powers but also their movement. The limits were assumed to be anything 5D or beyond (and I'm also assuming anyone with resistance to power null unless maybe the resistance isn't good enough because it's never shown to nullify resistance power null) because nothing in Undertale is even beyond 4D.

But a character's power nullification(that nullifies the opponent's passive powers)'s limits are that they cannot nullify non passive powers though?
 
But a character's power nullification(that nullifies the opponent's passive powers)'s limits are that they cannot nullify non passive powers though?
Sure, though if they've only ever been able to nullify things like passive stat inducement I wouldn't say that they could nullify something like passive existence erasure, for example.
 
What if they've been shown to nullify much more than just that though and it's never even been canonically confirmed or even shown that there aren't any passive powers it can't nullify?
 
What if they've been shown to nullify much more than just that though and it's never even been canonically confirmed or even shown that there aren't any passive powers it can't nullify?
Saying that it can nullify any passive is just NLF tbh.

If I say that "I can slap any face and leave a mark", but all of my feats are against weak children and adults; do you think it's okay for me to say I can leave a mark on superman's face based on that?


You have to base the tiering for the statement on either things that happen/happened, or things in the verse.

Like if in my verse I say "I can negate all magic" and it's not contradicted, then it's safe to say I can negate all magic IN MY OWN VERSE.
However, that doesn't automatically mean I can negate umineko magic or something.
 
Back
Top