- 21,390
- 2,976
I think that's the reason why they would be considered ghost type in this case. Then HtH would work on Shedninja.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No. That is simply an NLF. It cannot affect anything in another reality.DragonEmperor23 said:The range for HtH is based on desire and not actual distance so I think it would still work.
No, HtH only gives the same amount of damage the user got.GyroNutz said:If so then either Shedinja one-shots TMQ forcing an inconclusive or TMQ hits himself hard, doesn't die instantly but OHKs Shedinja due to bypassing wonder guar
Because it can one-shot him. HtH doesn't give deadly harm without thunder himself dyingGyroNutz said:Shedinja dies from any amount of damage than can affect him.
Being able to interact with non-corporeal/intangible beings isn't enough to harm Shedinja. You also have to be hitting it with an attack that doesn't get completely no-selled by Wonder Guard. If HtH and stands were treated as Psychic or Fighting or Normal type then these wouldn't cut it. If HtH and stands were treated as ghost type then yes, Shedinja can be harmed.ProfessorLord said:Stands are able to explicitly interact with the incorporeal and the intangible . (Reimi should also be an intangible seeing as how she's a literal ghost.)
Explain to me why HtH doesn't work on Shedinja?
Factually incorrect though. Wonder Guard is immune to only attacks, it is not immune to abilities or certain status inducing attacks such as tail whip, poison powder, damage from burn, weather effects, entry hazards, etc. There is a lot that Wonder Guard does not protect.GyroNutz said:Being able to interact with non-corporeal/intangible beings isn't enough to harm Shedinja. You also have to be hitting it with an attack that doesn't get completely no-selled by Wonder Guard. If HtH and stands were treated as Psychic or Fighting or Normal type then these wouldn't cut it. If HtH and stands were treated as ghost type then yes, Shedinja can be harmed.
No it doesn't, Pain Split is a status move that is explicitly able to bypass Wonder Guard. It forcefully inflicts damage onto the opponent or user, depending on which has more health and slightly raises the others. It functions very similar to HtH, and it is able to bypass Wonder Guard despite being a normal type move.GyroNutz said:Wonder Guard makes Shedinja immune to damage reflection + damage sharing that isn't explicitly a type that it is weak to, you can't just label it as an ability to ignore this
No, it is not. Its a flase equivalency, there is a rather big difference.GyroNutz said:Also naming moves that don't work in a similar way to HtH is a strawma
Your whole argument breaks down when you realise that pain split isn't damage reflection. HtH is 'whatever happens to me happens to you as well'. Pain split is 'lets equalize our health'.ProfessorLord said:Because the games don't account for other more potent types of damage reflection. What if a 1-A were to reflect damage onto Shedinja? Are you really telling me he would still be immune? Therefore it is NLF and wank.
It's not just named similarly, it functions similarly and looks similar as well. Please look at my post and educate yourself, I updated it.
This is when one person corrupts an opponent's argument into something different, a "straw man" that they set up just to knock it down.GyroNutz said:No, it's a strawman.
"HtH can't affect Shedinja as other damage reflecting moves don't affect Shedinja"
"That's not true as pain split works (even though it cant harm) on Shedinja! You can't say that damage reflecting moves dont affect Shedinja as 1-A moves haven't been shown to be reflected! Nerr!"
It's literally a parallel to the example given in the Fallacy page, check it out.
I was not talking about you. I was talking about equating HtH to abilities that are not explicitly damage reflection.ProfessorLord said:Stop arguing about fallacies, what I said was not a false equivalency anyways. (Though if it was, it would be a false equivalency not a strawman.)