Sans KARMA, and how it's poison effect works

[Buttersamuri]

So Undertale went into revisions recently that seem to be accepted. This revision taking away durability negation from the cast of undertale, as It seems to attack the actual physical body. The soul takes the same damage that they can do to the body. So if it can't hurt the body, it shouldn't hurt the soul. This taking away their ability to negate durability

But this raises the question of Sans KARMA, and how it's poison effect works. Does anything prove that Sans poison actually did effect the soul specifically itself, or was that on the presumption that they attacked the soul. And Someone who has potent resistance, or immunity to poison, would this negate KARMA, as their physical body can resist or are immune to the poison. And gotta be able to effect the Body in order to effect the soul

And a final question. Say someone who has Non-Physical Interaction grabs and holds one of Sans attacks. Would holding it still apply the poison damage if they can't resist poison?

 

[Buttersamuri]

Bump

 

[Super_Ascended_Sean_Pazdera]

No. Attacking your soul based on your sins is completely different from being injected with poison. Yes. They're still touching it.

 

[Buttersamuri]

No. Attacking your soul based on your sins is completely different from being injected with poison. Yes. They're still touching it.

Wasn't that " Attacking your soul based on your sins" entirely debunked since there was nothing that actually said or supported that.

 

[Super_Ascended_Sean_Pazdera]

No? Chara even mentioned feeling her sins being affected.

 

[Buttersamuri]

From what I've seen. That's not accepted anymore. And chara didn't mention that. They just felt their sins crawling down their back. Which is pretty vague.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Yes. It was completely debunked. KARMA has nothing to do with sins any more.

@Super

That assumes that:

A. The narrator is Chara (red text aside)

B. That the "sins crawling down your back" line isn't referring to guilt.

And C. That it only happens after you get hit by KR.

 

[Saikou_The_Lewd_King]

there is nothing

 

[Buttersamuri]

So as far as the question.

Would someone who's got a good resistance to poison Manipulation, or immunity, could they negate Sans KARMA. Since the way soul taking damage has changed

 

[Super_Ascended_Sean_Pazdera]

Because Chara would totally feel guilt while, and only while, being affected by KARMA

 

[The_Wright_Way]

...How does that refute anything I've said? You haven't even proven that it only happens while being effected by KARMA or that Chara is even the one talking there.

 

[Saikou_The_Lewd_King]

I mean I think it's fairly obvious that Chara is the one narrating, at least in Genocide, regardless of text color. Chara spoke in first person in normal text in New Home for example.

Regardless it doesn't change the fact that Karmic Retribution is bullshit.

 

[Buttersamuri]

Technically Frisk. Since hadn't become Chara yet in sans fight

 

[Super_Ascended_Sean_Pazdera]

Technically Chara since Frisk showed signs of being possessed ever since Toriel's house and Flowey pointed out this fact

 

[Igg31q35]

It is dependent on the amount of people that person has killed. Everything points to it, and the fact that people on this wiki continously try to deny it to downplay Sans is ridiculous.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

>Continuously try to deny it.

>Literally your first post on this site.

Hrmm.

Also, we currently allow KR to work on literally anyone, as opposed to just evil people. How is that downplay?

 

[Igg31q35]

You've been denying that it's based on how many people that you've killed for the longest time when literally everything in the game references the fact that this is the case. Just the fact that its named "Karmic Retribution", the narrator is Chara, and the fact that it happens after you get hit with one of his attacks should be enough evidence.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

1. The name of an attack means nothing. Star Destroyers don't destroy stars, goddammit.

2. How does Chara telling Frisk that "you feel your sins crawling down your back" prove anything? It could literally just be referring to guilt.

3. That just proves he has a poison attacks. And?

 

[Igg31q35]

"The name of an attack means nothing"

Except when you take into consideration that the entire Genocide route is about killing people nonstop.

Chara shows no remorse throughout the whole game so why would they suddenly feeling guilt now? This makes no sense unless you take into consideration Sans' ability, which is Karma.

Unless you can prove this wrong, change it.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

1. That still changes nothing.

2. Chara isn't talking about how they feel. They're talking about how Frisk feels. The exact quote is "you feel your sins crawling down your back". Chara doesn't refer to themselves in the 3rd person.

 

[Buttersamuri]

Isn't Karmic Reattribution name headcannon? I recall being told that's just what fans called it, but no official sources actually support that being what it is

 

[Igg31q35]

1. How does it change nothing when I'm looking at the context of the game?

2. That still doesn't mean anything either.


Once again, this only makes sense when you consider that Sans' ability is KARMA, there's no other reason why this line would be there. This line doesn't appear in the Undyne fight or anywhere else. Only in the fight where the character has KARMA as an ability is this a line. Gee, I wonder why?

 

[Buttersamuri]

It doesn't even say Karma now that I look at it again

 

[The_Wright_Way]

2. What? Yes it does. One of your main arguments is that Chara wouldn't feel remorse, but they're not talking about themselves. They're talking about Frisk, who full well would feel remorse.

It appears in this fight because it's the final boss. It's the cinematic moment, the killing of the last piece of your conscience. Sans is calling you out on your crap because past this point there is no return. It's driving the final nail home for the player.

 

[Igg31q35]

How do you know that Frisk would feel remorse? They're nothing but a blank of a character. It's even shown that they lack emotion in genocide when Sans interacts with them. You can say that this Chara possessing them, but even then the argument is kinda weak.

Again how does this prove that its not based on how many people you've killed? It could still be the case even with that. You can't prove a negative.

Once again, the lines, the ability's name, and the setting of where this fight takes place in the story all adds up that its based on how many people you've killed.

If Sans were really this strong why wouldn't he have used these abilites to stop you from the beginning? Oh because its based on how many people you've killed.

 

[Igg31q35]

2. What? Yes it does. One of your main arguments is that Chara wouldn't feel remorse, but they're not talking about themselves. They're talking about Frisk, who full well would feel remorse.
It appears in this fight because it's the final boss. It's the cinematic moment, the killing of the last piece of your conscience. Sans is calling you out on your crap because past this point there is no return. It's driving the final nail home for the player.

Also its shown that you're continously force feeding Chara determination until they become stronger than you and decide to part ways with you at the end of genocide when you choose not to destroy the world. Its Frisk doing this, not Chara.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Didn't Toby Fox literally state that the Pacifist Route is Frisk's canon personality?

Dude, you're out of evidence. Burden of proof is on you.

Because that's where he judges you at the end of every route.

Sans outright tells you why he doesn't stop you in the beginning. He doesn't care until the end. "I can't afford not to care anymore." You're literally ignoring in game statements at this point.

 

[Igg31q35]

Didn't Toby Fox literally state that the Pacifist Route is Frisk's canon personality?
Dude, you're out of evidence. Burden of proof is on you.

Because that's where he judges you at the end of every route.

Sans outright tells you why he doesn't stop you in the beginning. He doesn't care until the end. "I can't afford not to care anymore." You're literally ignoring in game statements at this point.

Provide me proof of that and if you can't then don't use it as evidence.

I already know that Sans says that during genocide, hence why he had to use abilities like KARMA in order to beat you. I've used in game statements, what the characters say, the context of where the fights are etc etc.

The burden of proof is actually on you, I've provided statements and evidence.

Where's the proof that it doesn't affect people based on how many that they've killed? Post that evidence and then we'll talk.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Also its shown that you're continously force feeding Chara determination until they become stronger than you and decide to part ways with you at the end of genocide when you choose not to destroy the world. Its Frisk doing this, not Chara.

1. You can totally choose to destroy the world with Chara.

2. Yeah, that's my point. You can't go back. Your hand is forced after this, even in other playthroughs.

 

[Igg31q35]

Also its shown that you're continously force feeding Chara determination until they become stronger than you and decide to part ways with you at the end of genocide when you choose not to destroy the world. Its Frisk doing this, not Chara.

1. You can totally choose to destroy the world with Chara.
2. Yeah, that's my point. You can't go back. Your hand is forced after this, even in other playthroughs.

Address my previous argument too please.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

1. Search came up blank. No WOG. Regardless, we can use canon hints. For instance, Frisk's name is only revealed in the True Pacifist route.

2. That doesn't address my point. He literally ******* says that he only fights you then because he has to fight you then. You gave him no choice but to care about the situation. No mention of KR is ever even made by him. There is literally no proof that he waited because of KR. That is entirely your invention.

3. And I've debunked them. You've yet to do the same.

4. I did. We are. And I'm unimpressed.

To debunk further.

You say that Frisk being emotionless because of Chara is a weak argument but don't say why. However, there is evidence supporting this. We already see Chara beginning to narrate and take control ("Where are the knives", picking fights with nothing, one-shotting Toriel, etc). So, yes, Frisk bein emotionless because of Possession is totally believable.

 

[Igg31q35]

1. Search came up blank. No WOG. Regardless, we can use canon hints. For instance, Frisk's name is only revealed in the True Pacifist route.
2. That doesn't address my point. He literally ******* says that he only fights you then because he has to fight you then. You gave him no choice but to care about the situation. No mention of KR is ever even made by him. There is literally no proof that he waited because of KR. That is entirely your invention.

3. And I've debunked them. You've yet to do the same.

4. I did. We are. And I'm unimpressed.

To debunk further.

You say that Frisk being emotionless because of Chara is a weak argument but don't say why. However, there is evidence supporting this. We already see Chara beginning to narrate and take control ("Where are the knives", picking fights with nothing, one-shotting Toriel, etc). So, yes, Frisk bein emotionless because of Possession is totally believable.

1. LMFAO so you used nothing but an assumption that you had in your head to attempt to debunk something? Next time try using some real evidence. Frisk's name being Frisk is not evidence.

2. That doesn't change anything. He has seen you kill people and is now basing all of his strategies off of the powers you have gained from killing people. Why is it so hard to believe that one of the main abilities he has, KR, wouldn't be based off of how many people you've killed?

3. You've literally been doing nothing but providing weak statements and context clues about where the fight takes place.

4. You've debunked literally nothing I've said so far.

Again Frisk is nothing but a blank slate that you decide what happens with. Them becoming emotionless from possession is believable but it literally doesn't change the argument one bit.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Buddy, your entire argument is based off one statement at this point. I've already addressed everything else.

1. Cool. Address the point.

2. Prove it.

3. Your entire argument is based off the name "Judgement Hall" and the "You feel your sins crawling down your back" line. It's the Judgement Hall because that's where he judges you in every route and the sins refer to guilt.

 

[Igg31q35]

Buddy, your entire argument is based off one statement at this point. I've already addressed everything else.
1. Cool. Address the point.

2. Prove it.

3. Your entire argument is based off the name "Judgement Hall" and the "You feel your sins crawling down your back" line. It's the Judgement Hall because that's where he judges you in every route and the sins refer to guilt.

My entire argument is based off of the context of where the fight takes place, the lines that are said, and Sans' character as a whole.

And you've provided....?

Nothing.

Again please provide me with one solid argument as to why it isn't the case that Sans' abilities are based off of how many people you've killed.

The burden of proof is on you to provide this, I've already said my piece multiple times, now its time for you to say yours.

 

[Buttersamuri]

The context but no actual evidence backing it up. Which is the problem, not jumping to a conclusion that has no actual evidence backing it up. You have yet to even address the issue that it isn't even called Karmic Retribution. That was a fan made name made by the fans. The game just shows it as KR

 

[Igg31q35]

The context but no actual evidence backing it up. Which is the problem, not jumping to a conclusion that has no actual evidence backing it up. You have yet to even address the issue that it isn't even called Karmic Retribution. That was a fan made name made by the fans. The game just shows it as KR

The only evidence you'll take is if Sans literally says it?

"The entire route is you killing people, Sans has watched you kill people and based his powers off of the abilities you have gained from killing people. Oh yeah but its totally not called Karmic Retribution that's just crazy talk and fan interpretation."

 

[The_Wright_Way]

You desmiss my arguments for bring context clues, but then proudly parade that you use context clues?

Fine. Here are your arguments.

1. It takes place in the Judgement Hall.

2. It's called KARMA.

3. Quotes from Sans(?)

4. Sins crawling on your back.

5. Sans based his powers off you killing people.

And here are mine.

1. Aside from names not meaning anything, this is because he judges you in this area at the end of every route. That's it. Also, your own logic works against you here. If the reveal of Frisk's name means nothing, why would the name of a location mean anything more?

2. No, it isn't. It's called KR. And, again, your own logic and the above names mean nothing provide otherwise. If I can't use context clues to prove my case neither can you.

3. I'm literally the only one who quoted anything Sans said. You've provided nothing. Nowhere does Sans say anything about KR.

4. Sins crawling on your back. Occam's Razor. Chara describing how Frisk feels requires less assumptions then Sans having his own version of Soul Penance. Context clues (remember, if I can't use them, you can't use them) suggest that Frisk's true personality is that of the Pacifist Route. Including:

You only learn Frisk's name in the Pacifist Route.

"Despite everything, it's still you" and "still just you, Frisk"

5. Never proven, shown, or implied anywhere.

Bring something new to the table. Otherwise, this argument is over. Anything else is just Argument Ad Nauseam Fallacu.

 

[Igg31q35]

You desmiss my arguments for bring context clues, but then proudly parade that you use context clues?
Fine. Here are your arguments.

1. It takes place in the Judgement Hall.

2. It's called KARMA.

3. Quotes from Sans(?)

4. Sins crawling on your back.

5. Sans based his powers off you killing people.

And here are mine.

1. Aside from names not meaning anything, this is because he judges you in this area at the end of every route. That's it. Also, your own logic works against you here. If the reveal of Frisk's name means nothing, why would the name of a location mean anything more?

2. No, it isn't. It's called KR. And, again, your own logic and the above names mean nothing provide otherwise. If I can't use context clues to prove my case neither can you.

3. I'm literally the only one who quoted anything Sans said. You've provided nothing. Nowhere does Sans say anything about KR.

4. Sins crawling on your back. Occam's Razor. Chara describing how Frisk feels requires less assumptions then Sans having his own version of Soul Penance. Context clues (remember, if I can't use them, you can't use them) suggest that Frisk's true personality is that of the Pacifist Route. Including:

You only learn Frisk's name in the Pacifist Route.

"Despite everything, it's still you" and "still just you, Frisk"

5. Never proven, shown, or implied anywhere.

Bring something new to the table. Otherwise, this argument is over. Anything else is just Argument Ad Nauseam Fallacu.

Sorry but it seems like I've provided the stronger arguments here. Take of it what will you will. Sans doesn't say anything about KR because its his own ability, he wouldn't reveal his strategy to the player lmfao.

Nowhere have I said you couldn't use context quotes, you're using made up quotes from Toby Fox and just the fact that Frisk's name is Frisk.

Its implied based off of the route, the place the fight takes place in and the fact that its called KR, which could easily mean Karmic Retribution.

Anyway, if you wish to continue this fest any further just keep messaging.

 

[Buttersamuri]

"Provided the Stronger argument". I'm sorry but You've hardly even provided argument, let alone a stronger one. You're making blind assumptions based on name fallacy's and headcannon. KR can stand for a lot of things. It could stand for nothing. We don't know. Calling it Karmic retribution is baseless.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

1. Then why are you claiming to use his quotes as an argument?

2. You dismissed my arguments are "weak statements and context clues". Pick one. Notice: I immediately recinded my Toby Fox argument when I realized it was bunk. Stop holding dropped arguments against me. Also, way to strawman. It's literally "It's still you Frisk" vs "It's me". Said by the narrator, Chara, on that second one.

3. "KR could mean Karmic Retribution" Prove it.

We're going in circles at this point.