Resistance Types?

[Accelerate420]

I've been on the site for a while and I've observed a lot of threads and the like. One thing I've noticed that could benefit the site is the use of Resistance Types. We do have Immunity, yes, but characters have varying degrees of Resistances as we know. For example: A character that can resist fire yet still receives minor damage from it (RPG characters especially can have resistances to elements yet still receive minor damage to them I:E SMT) however the wiki tends to treat resistance as an immunity in matches I've seen to begin with. I:E If one character has an inherent resistance to a hax, people treat it as if it has 0 effect at all. Not to say that will always be the case as these are a case by case basis. So, why don't we type resistances? Something such as:

Type 1: Undamaged/unaffected by x factor. Said factor has 0 effect upon the target but is not regarded as an outright immunity.

Type 2: Little effect. The character is still receiving influence but it holds little potency in terms of harming them.

Granted these two can be fleshed out and maybe others can imagine there being more types. I understand that resistance becomes null by those who are of a higher power of course and that's why immunity exists. After all, Soul hax from a higher dimensional character still won't do anything to someone who already lacks a soul.

I'm curious why we don't consider these factors as they can be more helpful in leading to a conclusive debate, is there a specific reason we keep Resistances in one category?

 

[Apeironaxim]

Going by your Fire/Elemental example, I've seen profiles put how much of the damage is resisted/reduced, for example "Resists 80% of fire damage". With that in mind, I don't think putting Resistances into types makes much sense. Rather, the makers of the profiles should instead be obligated to specify how the resistance works in such a case as only resisting a portion of the damage in the justifications. Same thing with any other resistances that aren't elemental related, such as if they resist 80% of a mind spell's potency or something.

 

[Accelerate420]

That's a way to go about it, yeah. You can find a need not to use types if people were more thorough with their profile management regarding resistances and giving to what extent. I do think it'd make it easier in terms of profile managing though as finding specifics for resistances in terms of statistics isn't always possible.

 

[QuasiYuri]

Same opinion as Apeironaxim.

Types would be useless, and resistances are rarely a true percentage of how weak a power is against you.

 

[Accelerate420]

It's not about giving a percentage, it's about falling into a category. You obviously can never get a 'true' statistic on such things without rare cases. It's merely to balance out the board to have more accurate matches.

 

[Antoniofer]

As rules, we do not use Immunity in order to avoid nlf, although that do not stop users from treating resistances as immunities in practice (mostly coming from rpg, where non-damaging effects are binary).

Better to simply write how does the resistance works (like reducing the effectivity of the power, or maybe the character is affected normally but the effects last less time).