Wikisource
He/Him- 707
- 153
Something I've started thinking about lately.
How should we deal with things that are fundamental/foundational, for example "at the conceptual level"? Typically, most verses describe the attack at a conceptual level, which may be a hyperbole in nature but let's ignore that and assume that the attack is actually "at a conceptual level".
So they will destroy those concepts depending on the feat being performed but in general, they are usually given as "Concept Destroy" or at least what I see on some characters' profiles that I know. The problem is, on the conceptual manipulation page there is a paragraph like this.
Its content says that simply interacting with concepts is not enough for a Concept manip, so attacking a character with an AE1 Concept at the concept level (i.e. they will remove that character's concept) will What feat does it provide? NPI concept or concept destruction? Also does recovering from a conceptual level attack directly provide High Godly Regen? And should we provide similar feats based on attacks from a different aspect? The given aspects are the foundation of reality, they basic/maintain reality. (For example: information, plot, history...).
It's also worth noting that characters are often described as concept level attacks but it may not actually destroy the concept but attack the concept in some way so it should be NPI Concept?
Characters are bound to the concepts they can interact with, so how should we deal with cases where we only say they destroyed concepts without specifying which concepts they destroyed? In the case of all concepts, we should only mention the concepts already in the verse, right?
How should we deal with things that are fundamental/foundational, for example "at the conceptual level"? Typically, most verses describe the attack at a conceptual level, which may be a hyperbole in nature but let's ignore that and assume that the attack is actually "at a conceptual level".
So they will destroy those concepts depending on the feat being performed but in general, they are usually given as "Concept Destroy" or at least what I see on some characters' profiles that I know. The problem is, on the conceptual manipulation page there is a paragraph like this.
Its content says that simply interacting with concepts is not enough for a Concept manip, so attacking a character with an AE1 Concept at the concept level (i.e. they will remove that character's concept) will What feat does it provide? NPI concept or concept destruction? Also does recovering from a conceptual level attack directly provide High Godly Regen? And should we provide similar feats based on attacks from a different aspect? The given aspects are the foundation of reality, they basic/maintain reality. (For example: information, plot, history...).
It's also worth noting that characters are often described as concept level attacks but it may not actually destroy the concept but attack the concept in some way so it should be NPI Concept?
Characters are bound to the concepts they can interact with, so how should we deal with cases where we only say they destroyed concepts without specifying which concepts they destroyed? In the case of all concepts, we should only mention the concepts already in the verse, right?
Last edited:
