Revisions for Acausality Types 1 & 4

[Eseseso]

Kudos to @Planck69 for giving me permission to post here.

1. So this revision just got accepted and basically stripped Acausality 4 of its abilities. Basically, it no longer automatically grants resistance to Causality & Fate Manipulation and Precognition, and such must be listed in the section for Acausality 4.

However, I find this to be very cumbersome and redundant, as now to get anything out of the ability one would need to list the actual resistance(s) within the Acausality 4 justification, when they could easily just be listed/proposed in the Resistance section.

Thus, I am proposing that the current Type 4 Acausality be flat-out deleted due to now being a useless and powerless ability, with the current Type 5 Acausality taking its spot.

Will this be ugly and require a lot of page changes? Yes.

Will it remove a now-useless power? Also yes.


2. Acausality Type 1 should be granted an automatic Resistance to Causality Manipulation.

The ability is literally resisting a causality change in the past (and it's kinda in the name of the ability itself), and resisting a change in causality should naturally be considered a resistance to causality manipulation.


In short, I propose a removal of the current Type 4 Acausality entirely, and an addition of Resistance to Causality Manipulation for Type 1 Acausality.

Thanks again to @Planck69 for giving me permission to make this staff thread.

Please be civil, everyone.

Also, reminder that this is only for Staff and those given permission by staff to comment.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Iirc, Type 5 Acausality is only qualified for very high-tiered characters and commonly seen in extremely high-tiered characters such as tier high 1-a to 0 characters. So letting Type 5 take over the spot of Type 4 seems like far too much of a leap. However, I do agree that type 4 acausality is pretty much rendered useless since a character can simply show resistance over those certain haxxes, without needing type 4 to support it. Overall, I agree with the removal of type 4 acausality.

Causality Manipulation can also work in the present and the future; type 1 acausality only states the character doesn't exist in the past. At best it'll only qualify for limited resistance to Causality Manipulation as it can only resist the change of causality in the past. I'll can agree with it being a limited Causality Manipulation resistance, but I definitely don't agree with resisting the ability entirely.

 

[Eseseso]

Iirc, Type 5 Acausality is only qualified for very high-tiered characters and commonly seen in extremely high-tiered characters such as tier high 1-a to 0 characters. So letting Type 5 take over the spot of Type 4 seems like far too much of a leap. However, I do agree that type 4 acausality is pretty much rendered useless since a character can simply show resistance over those certain haxxes, without needing type 4 to support it. Overall, I agree with the removal of type 4 acausality.

I know it's a big leap and that making the change to thousands of pages is going to be an absolute pain, but I do think it's necessary.

 

[GarrixianXD]

I know it's a big leap and that making the change to thousands of pages is going to be an absolute pain, but I do think it's necessary.

What I’m saying is that we shouldn’t have type 5 acausality having any correlation to type 4. Removal of the ability from all pages isn’t big issue.

 

[Eseseso]

What I’m saying is that we shouldn’t have type 5 acausality having any correlation to type 4.

Oh, of course not.

It's just that, should the current type 4 be cut, the current type 5 will take its place.

 

[Deagonx]

I think Type 4 still serves the purpose of identifying characters with irregular relationships with causality. I won't ardently stand against deleting it but I think it's an overreaction.

I disagree with granting automatic causality manip resistance to Type 1. Not being able to be affected by Time Paradoxes doesn't automatically mean causality hax don't work on you (and not all time paradoxes are achieved with causality hax).

 

[Eseseso]

I think Type 4 still serves the purpose of identifying characters with irregular relationships with causality. I won't ardently stand against deleting it but I think it's an overreaction.

But if it grants no abilities that can't just be listed in the "Resistances" section on a profile, there's no point in keeping it around.

Having something like "Acausality 4 (Resistance to [XXX])" seems like redundant clutter

 

[Deagonx]

Having something like "Acausality 4 (Resistance to [XXX])" seems like redundant clutter

Presumably it would be written as part of a cluster, the way we often do when one feat/ability encompasses multiple things at once. Acausality 4 can still grant resistances, it just needs to be explained and justified how this irregular relationship with causality results in a resistance.

 

[Eseseso]

Presumably it would be written as part of a cluster, the way we often do when one feat/ability encompasses multiple things at once. Acausality 4 can still grant resistances, it just needs to be explained and justified how this irregular relationship with causality results in a resistance.

Then those resistances can be listed in the Resistances part of the profile.

 

[Deagonx]

Then those resistances can be listed in the Resistances part of the profile.

Naturally, yes.

 

[Eseseso]

Naturally, yes.

Good.

Basically, their irregular causality can still be used as a potential reason for them resisting causality/fate/precognition hax, but the Type 4 Acausality power on its own now no longer serves a purpose.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Presumably it would be written as part of a cluster, the way we often do when one feat/ability encompasses multiple things at once. Acausality 4 can still grant resistances, it just needs to be explained and justified how this irregular relationship with causality results in a resistance.

Usually I'd agree with this but it's more difficult in this case because Acausality's an ability, while the resistances are... well, resistances. Usually, resistances are put in either a separate tab or at the end of the ability list

 

[CloverDragon03]

Anyways, the Type 4 thing I'm not too sure about atm, but I disagree with giving Type 1 an automatic Causality Manipulation resistance. See the Acausality page:

Type 1: Time Paradox Immunity: Characters with this type of Acausality are rendered immune to changes in the past and standard temporal paradoxes, but remain just as vulnerable in the present and can be affected by normal Causality Manipulation and similar abilities.

 

[Deagonx]

Understood. In any case I think it's still fine to have it on profiles. There's not really a better place to describe that information, and there are situations where it can be relevant aside from resistance to causality hax.

 

[CloverDragon03]

This is true. It can basically explain a sort of irregular relationship with cause and effect while not inherently resisting anything, much like how a number of our existing abilities don't automatically give resistances. Abilities in general aren't defined by their ability to give resistances

 

[GarrixianXD]

Will an irregular cause and effect system even mean anything by itself? It’ll be useless nonetheless if it doesn’t automatically gives the character defence against causality manipulation.

 

[Deagonx]

Will an irregular cause and effect system even mean anything by itself? It’ll be useless nonetheless if it doesn’t automatically gives the character defence against causality manipulation.

By definition it doesn't mean anything by itself because it's a catch all for a lot of different things. As Clover said our abilities are not defined by whether or not they give resistances. Types 1 and 3 also don't inherently grant any resistances that we would label. They grant specific unlisted immunities, but Type 4 is too broad for that. In any case the information will be useful for that purpose and it doesn't have any other good place to be put.

 

[CloverDragon03]

I think what it comes down to is if an irregular relationship with cause and effect is worth indexing in a power scaling sense. I imagine the main argument against Type 4 Acausality's existence is that while abilities don't inherently give resistances, they bring something to the table regarding what a character can do - whereas a simple irregular relationship with cause and effect is kind of a nothing burger on its own. That's what I make of it, anyway.

So, the question comes down to: Is it worthwhile to index, or not?

 

[Deagonx]

I agree with that take on the issue at hand. Personally I think it's worth keeping around. At the very least I'd prefer not to just completely axe it and move on. At some point I believe Ultima intends to revise Acausality top to bottom, which may render the whole thing moot.

 

[CloverDragon03]

I hesitate more to bring about any large scale changes to Acausality if Ultima intends to revise it from the ground up as is

 

[Eseseso]

I hesitate more to bring about any large scale changes to Acausality if Ultima intends to revise it from the ground up as is

I agree with that take on the issue at hand. Personally I think it's worth keeping around. At the very least I'd prefer not to just completely axe it and move on. At some point I believe Ultima intends to revise Acausality top to bottom, which may render the whole thing moot.

If one of you two could ping Ultima, then should he respond and further state his plans to revise Acausality, then I would have no issue putting this thread off.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

I've something to ask if you guyz don't mind. What about the characters that could leave the causality system in general?

I'm asking because Goku and cos could seem to dimensional travel within a space where the entire timeline was nuked for some reason. Logically speaking, they should not be bounded by any causality system there.

The same concept was also explored within OPM's recent manga chapter where the Void guy on panel was stated that he could leave the causality system of the universe entirely.

 

[AbaddonTheDisappointment]

If one of you two could ping Ultima, then should he respond and further state his plans to revise Acausality, then I would have no issue putting this thread off.

@Ultima_Reality, if you have time

 

[Antvasima]

I think that Deagonx seems to make sense here.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

I find myself disagreeing with this thread's premise for Deagonx's reasons.

 

[Antvasima]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT

Is it fine if we close this thread?

 

[DontTalkDT]

From my side, yes.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT

Is it fine if we close this thread?

Go on ahead.

 

[Eseseso]

Go on ahead.

Do you have any thoughts on this, before this is closed?

 

[Antvasima]

Apparently not.

I will close this thread then. Thank you to everybody who have helped out here.