Sonic Super Forms Invulnerability Removal

[Confluctor]

Invulnerability and Invincibility is a common word thrown around in fiction, probably the most common alongside omnipotent/omnipotence. Invulnerability is often used to note the strength of someone on a slightly higher level than others.

If there is no other proof of his invulnerability - being unharmed by any physical attacks that doesn't relate to his durability - then I am fine with it being removed.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

This is fine.

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Alright, I was notified of this thread a while ago so i'm going to organize my points in a better pace so people can understand in a more efficient manner. With that said, I'll cut to the chase.

Anyways, Super forms should not have Invulnerability. It does not qualify under our standards as set by this thread. Under our standards, simply being called 'invulnerable', 'indestructible', or 'unkillable' is not enough to qualify under invulnerability. That would just signify high durability. Super forms don't have a mechanism that necessitate them specifically negating damage.

To start from here, the Super States are consistently portrayed as being capable of taking no physical damage from foes not due to having a higher durability compared to their enemies(as even comparable beings, such as the Egg Wizard are not capable of harming them significantly despite having the Power Of the Stars, a source of energy that was stated to be superior to the Chaos Emeralds, with more boss fight examples being accounted). Again, this is not due to Super Sonic being an specific stone wall, it's a natural granted ability a super state possesses that allows them to bypass physical harm (though despite not possesing an official name). This is showcased very specifically in a lot of official gameplay stuff where the mechanic of his invulnerability functions basically the same from the Invincible power up that you get from the Classic games and onwards ever since the first game it was introduced, except that it has more extensive time compared to it. Regardless my point stands on the straight line.

Going through each scan on the Invulnerability section.

1. Statement of invulnerability, worthless.
2. Statement of invulnerability, worthless.
3. Statement of indestructibility, worthless.
4. Statement of invincibility, worthless.
5. Statement of invulnerability, worthless.

The statements themselves are supporting stuff to what was already showed on a bunch of different instances linked above on the same sentence you quoted, as again, when describing a super state's invulnerability, they never account his normal showings of his dura being above the verse's conventional setting as the opposition here seems to believe in. Even in Archie (an entire different canon that adapts some important aspects of the games, a super form's invincibility being one of them) doesn't have a contradiction to what was already established within the mainstream.

 

[Agnaa]

as even comparable beings, such as the Egg Wizard are not capable of harming them significantly despite having the Power Of the Stars, a source of energy that was stated to be superior to the Chaos Emeralds, with more boss fight examples being accounted

Couldn't that just be explained by it providing durability above what the Egg Wizard can dish out?

Again, this is not due to Super Sonic being an specific stone wall, it's a natural granted ability a super state possesses that allows them to bypass physical harm

Is that actually stated, or is that your interpretation of the text?

 

[Theuser789]

Disagree with OP. The method that gives them invulnerability is the Chaos Emeralds themselves and their miracle powers, that simple.

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Couldn't that just be explained by it providing durability above what the Egg Wizard can dish out?

Your example could be valid, when not accounting the fact that basically almost everyone who fights him isn't capable of doing this, except from some selected special cases (like the Phantom King for example who can only harm Super Sonic by using an specific PR energy attack that distorts space and some stuff)
Also as Theuser said:

The method that gives them invulnerability is the Chaos Emeralds themselves and their miracle powers

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

anyways, I gotta get busy in the next few hours so my time to give inputs here will be limited till afternoon.

 

[Agnaa]

Disagree with OP. The method that gives them invulnerability is the Chaos Emeralds themselves and their miracle powers, that simple.

That's not the mechanism, that's the source.

Risuka Mizukura has Invulnerability.

The source is her time magic.

The mechanism is stopping her body's time, preventing herself from being harmed, as her body's time being stopped means that no changes can be made to it.

Just having the source isn't enough, you need the mechanism that explains it.

Your example could be valid, when not accounting the fact that basically almost everyone who fights him isn't capable of doing this, except from some selected special cases (like the Phantom King for example who can only harm Super Sonic by using an specific PR energy attack that distorts space and some stuff)

I don't know what you mean by that. Couldn't an attack that distorts be reasonably considered to negate durability?

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Couldn't an attack that distorts be reasonably considered to negate durability?

yes, and?

 

[Agnaa]

I don't really understand what you're saying, then.

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Just having the source isn't enough, you need the mechanism that explains it.

if you are actually saying is true, then this site has some ****** up standards regarding this, to say the least.

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

if a literal common invincibility power up in video games gets contested by people throwing tantrums, then this thread is an entire mess built on subject.

 

[StekFence]

Idk, I kinda agree With the thread, statements of being invulnerable can easily mean you just have uber dura, unless it messes up scaling chains somehow, but being stated to like, have a time stopped body would explain the lack of damage without being able to be chalked up to dura.

 

[StekFence]

I think it’s the same way being stated to one shot anybody with a punch would just mean you have really high attack power for the verse

 

[ShadowWarrior1999]

I’m fine with removing invulnerability since there’s really no mechanism explaining how it works.

 

[ShakeResounding]

No choice but to agree with the removal of Invulnerability at that rate, as much as it pains to see it go again.

They'd have to be put back to Stonewalls, adjust some Durability sections accordingly, and remove any profiles tagged with Invulnerability.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Just having the source isn't enough, you need the mechanism that explains it.

I'm sorry, but nowhere in the page for Invulnerability it is written you have to show how they are invulnerable to get it. This is just your interperatation

 

[Agnaa]

I'm sorry, but nowhere in the page for Invulnerability it is written you have to show how they are invulnerable to get it. This is just your interperatation

Promestein decided to rewrite the page after this thread was accepted. I do wish that the page was clearer, but I think this lineage clearly shows what our standards on it are.

Some parts of it which imply that you have to show how they are invulnerable are:

It can be considered the defensive equivalent of Durability Negation, negating simple Attack Potency

And

This is distinct from simply particularly high durability, which may make a character seem invulnerable to weaker opponents. Only characters whose invulnerability is clearly more than simply being exceptionally durable for the verse's setting qualify.

If y'all really insist we could try to reword the page some more, though.

 

[StekFence]

I mean, even then, just statements of being invulnerable wouldn’t make sense to prove invulnerability, since you could explain it as having really high durability, and then super forms harming each other being super high AP for the verse.

I'm sorry, but nowhere in the page for Invulnerability it is written you have to show how they are invulnerable to get it. This is just your interperatation

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Promestein decided to rewrite the page after this thread was accepted. I do wish that the page was clearer, but I think this lineage clearly shows what our standards on it are.

Some parts of it which imply that you have to show how they are invulnerable are:

And

If y'all really insist we could try to reword the page some more, though.

Can you show the part in the thread itself where this is what is said? If you can't, your argument holds no water

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

I mean, even then, just statements of being invulnerable wouldn’t make sense to prove invulnerability, since you could explain it as having really high durability, and then super forms harming each other being super high AP for the verse.

You realize that these statements are just supporting evidence to many feats where they cannot be harmed?

 

[Confluctor]

As I mentioned earlier, invulnerability is a common word used by writers to show how great their durability is. But it doesn't mean they are invulnerabile, just stronger than other relevant characters at that time.

If we granted invulnerability for statements like this, that would be the second most used ability on the site after Superhuman physical characteristics

 

[Agnaa]

Can you show the part in the thread itself where this is what is said? If you can't, your argument holds no water

I think it makes more sense to concretely define Invulnerability as Attack Potency Negation, more strictly establishing it as abilities that render offensive force irrelevant. An example would be The Siberia, who's invincible due to physics manip that means she can just not be affected by physical properties like force if she doesn't want to be.

Why did I make a thread for this when the page for Invulnerability already says it should be "beyond normal durability"? Because it isn't being applied that way in practice and there's been confusion about it. For example:

• Doomguy has invulnerability listed with the Invulnerability Sphere. It does make him immune to everything within the context of his fighting, but there's no evidence or mechanic that would make it sidestep AP entirely.
• Sonic the Hedgehog (Game Character) has been having arguments over this recently. His super form usually doesn't take damage and has been called invincible, but again there's not evidence that this bypasses AP.
• Bernadine (Khimera) is listed as having invulnerability negation for being able to damage the protag while she's in a state of enhanced durability. Chelshia's own file doesn't even call it invulnerable.

It should be put under the same standards as Durability Negation is. We should require evidence of a mechanic that works outside the bounds of normal AP, and not just give it out for being called indestructible or invulnerable or whatever the same way we wouldn't give out dura neg for random statement of "this gun can pierce anything" or whatever.

 

[StekFence]

You realize that these statements are just supporting evidence to many feats where they cannot be harmed?

Considering they are powered by 7 of the most op rocks in existence, then yeah I’d say not being harmed would make sense. But it can still mean the rocks are giving them really high durability.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

As I mentioned earlier, invulnerability is a common word used by writers to show how great their durability is. But it doesn't mean they are invulnerabile, just stronger than other relevant characters at that time.

You do realize that they cannot be harmed even by stronger characters than themselves right? Your example is completely wrong

If we granted invulnerability for statements like this, that would be the second most used ability on the site after Superhuman physical characteristics

The statement merely support many feats of them being immune to damage

 

[Agnaa]

You do realize that they cannot be harmed even by stronger characters than themselves right?

Which means that their durability is higher than the stronger character's AP.

 

[Theuser789]

Shouldn't this apply to a lot of characters with invulnerability too? I know it's a "whataboutism" but I am pretty sure half of the verses with invulnerability don't explain how they become invulnerable.

 

[Agnaa]

Shouldn't this apply to a lot of characters with invulnerability too? I know it's a "whataboutism" but I am pretty sure half of the verses with invulnerability don't explain how they become invulnerable.

When the thread changing the standards was initially passed, Wokistan went through (either many or every) page with Invulnerability, and removed the ones that didn't qualify. This included the Sonic pages.

However, about a year later, it was re-added.

If there have been other cases of people mistakenly re-adding it (or any pages which Wokistan didn't get to), they should be removed as well.

 

[Confluctor]

You do realize that they cannot be harmed even by stronger characters than themselves right? Your example is completely wrong

Have you ever heard of the concept of stonewalls?

The statement merely support many feats of them being immune to damage

Okay, can I see at least 5 invulnerability feats? Like actually shown stuff.

Also didn't Solaris **** him over?

 

[Agnaa]

Okay, can I see at least 5 invulnerability feats? Like actually shown stuff.

Also didn't Solaris **** him over?

I'd be cautious about this line of questioning; I don't want to end up with 20 pages of nitpicking about dura feats that Super characters have, none of which ultimately have an explanation that'd justify Invulnerability instead of just higher dura.

EDIT: And look what the next six posts are

 

[StekFence]

I’m pretty sure in terms of Solaris, the main problem was putting him down, since they needed to target past present and future as I recall

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Also didn't Solaris **** him over?

yes he harmed him, but other comparable guys like the Egg Wizard not

 

[Dust_Collector]

Been a while since I played Sonic Unleashed but can't Dark Gaia harm and damage Super Sonic with his attacks? I know using a wiki as proof ain't great but the Sonic Network mentions he's strong enough to harm Super Sonic with his raw strength in the final boss fight of that game so I was wondering if that's true or not, would kinda go against Super forms being straight up invulnerable if it is.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Okay, can I see at least 5 invulnerability feats? Like actually shown stuff.

Look into almost anything Super Sonic related and you'll find it. All it takes is a simple seatch of Super Sonic Boss battles on youtube

Also didn't Solaris **** him over?

Solaris can negate durability with his haxes and that's how he harms Sonic

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

Been a while since I played Sonic Unleashed but can't Dark Gaia harm and damage Super Sonic with his attacks?

yeah he can, but for what reason is never actually specified, he just controls some source of darkness with his attacks and that's it.

 

[ShakeResounding]

Been a while since I played Sonic Unleashed but can't Dark Gaia harm and damage Super Sonic with his attacks? I know using a wiki as proof ain't great but the Sonic Network mentions he's strong enough to harm Super Sonic with his raw strength in the final boss fight of that game so I was wondering if that's true or not, would kinda go against Super forms being straight up invulnerable if it is.

Alternate versions of the same game have Dark Gaia unable to harm Super Sonic

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

These standards are pretty sus imo....


Like, there are multiple feats of Sonic and co. being invulnerable across the various games in their super forms.

Do we really have to discard all these because "There's no explanation"? It's just absurd.

 

[Gabs22_Gamer]

I guess my contribution was already given, but eh, don't think I can help much here now.

 

[Zencha9]

These standards are pretty sus imo....


Like, there are multiple feats of Sonic and co. being invulnerable across the various games in their super forms.

Do we really have to discard all these because "There's no explanation"? It's just absurd.

i would think so since it would be weird like where does the invul come from is it law based or power null ?

 

[StekFence]

These standards are pretty sus imo....


Like, there are multiple feats of Sonic and co. being invulnerable across the various games in their super forms.

Do we really have to discard all these because "There's no explanation"? It's just absurd.

If there is no explanation, what’s the difference between crazy durability and invulnerabl?