- 6,253
- 2,677
yea the first is cannon if the others as of now they are not
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
- 16,960
- 4,860
Ignoring the unnecessary aggression put into this reply, you missed me saying "how this should be analyzed though should probably be discussed". All I said in my previous reply is that we should stop loosely handing out resistances. Finding the difference between resistances and caveats to separate them would come after.LSirLancelotDuLacl said:
Also:
>"So according to him Tatsuki, an 10-A character, has comparable Reiatsu to Yammy who is gonna be 6-C since she survived his RC? Ganju who is 8-C (and everyone else who was there confronting him) has comparable Reiatsu to 5-B Yhwach because they can stand in his presence without getting RCed? Do you see how dumb that sounds?"
Why not a single person reading this paragraph hasn't stopped to consider for one second how much of an obvious outlier this would be for the fodder characters I dont know. Even if AKM is just wrong, using this logic as a counter argument isnt a better idea either.
- 8,161
- 2,190
Actually, it's the logic you and him are using lol which is what makes it kinda funny. You don't get to push this point of view then turn around and say said result of that pov is an outlier.
Anyways if it bothers you how resistance is gained then I'm sure I don't need to tell you what to do.
Anyways if it bothers you how resistance is gained then I'm sure I don't need to tell you what to do.
- 8,753
- 1,617
I do apologize for the aggressiveness, but I am sick and tired of this level of bull.
Because that is what this is, utter bullshit, putting non existent limitations agreed on by no one and that have obviously been accepted for a long while to decide that such things are not resistance, and worse yet with literally no reason. Your logic works both ways, you can simply say the technique is weak or the X thing resists because is strong, your choice to go for the former is stupidly arbitrary and founded in absolutely nothing while remaining stubbornly unyielding for zero reasoning beyond "oh we must err on the side of caution". It's just dripping with illogicality, and am not even entirely sure that's a word, yet you Keep. On. Going.
And yes, saying "discussing how this is analyzed" does indeed change nothing. Good job not addressing how X resisting makes complete sense as the consequence of X being strong.
Because that is what this is, utter bullshit, putting non existent limitations agreed on by no one and that have obviously been accepted for a long while to decide that such things are not resistance, and worse yet with literally no reason. Your logic works both ways, you can simply say the technique is weak or the X thing resists because is strong, your choice to go for the former is stupidly arbitrary and founded in absolutely nothing while remaining stubbornly unyielding for zero reasoning beyond "oh we must err on the side of caution". It's just dripping with illogicality, and am not even entirely sure that's a word, yet you Keep. On. Going.
And yes, saying "discussing how this is analyzed" does indeed change nothing. Good job not addressing how X resisting makes complete sense as the consequence of X being strong.
- 16,960
- 4,860
>Actually, it's the logic you and him are using lol which is what makes it kinda funny. You don't get to push this point of view then turn around and say said result of that pov is an outlier.
We can if the characters being used as examples in your counter argument are ones who obviously have no business tangoing with higher tier characters at all. Like, 6-C Tatsuki? Its far more likely she is the outlier rather than it disproves an ability being AP limited. Also, from the energy equalization thread last time, Agnaa also pointed this out in regards to this very thing that I dont think has been referenced here yet:
"This ability doesn't work on people of a similar or higher energy" isn't contradicted by "A weaker user resisted a stronger user". To actually contradict it you'd need to show a person with weak energy affect someone with stronger energy, as that proves that it can affect people that are stronger and don't have resistance."
And something Cal said to go with that:
"What Agnaa said. If anything it proves there's even more of a caveat and the ability just isn't that good."
We can if the characters being used as examples in your counter argument are ones who obviously have no business tangoing with higher tier characters at all. Like, 6-C Tatsuki? Its far more likely she is the outlier rather than it disproves an ability being AP limited. Also, from the energy equalization thread last time, Agnaa also pointed this out in regards to this very thing that I dont think has been referenced here yet:
"This ability doesn't work on people of a similar or higher energy" isn't contradicted by "A weaker user resisted a stronger user". To actually contradict it you'd need to show a person with weak energy affect someone with stronger energy, as that proves that it can affect people that are stronger and don't have resistance."
And something Cal said to go with that:
"What Agnaa said. If anything it proves there's even more of a caveat and the ability just isn't that good."
- 8,753
- 1,617
"Have no business tangoing with the higher tier characters".
Why can't a 10-A resist the hax of a 6-C? Are you saying resistances are related to AP now? This gets better.
Agnaa... who himself only made one comment and straight up said he actually doesn't enough about RC to argue about it... You must be joking at this point.
Edit: His words quoted, for added fun.
"Again, I don't know enough about RC to say whether it is implied to not work on stronger opponents or not, but I know enough about logic to disprove that argument. (This was referring to one of the arguments, yet he has said nothing further after this. Not sure he has even seen the rest of the thread).
Hell, those weaker people resisting it implies that it's not just that stronger people have a resistance, since weaker people can resist it too(which is what everyone has been saying. Tatsuki also resisted despite being weaker)."
Why can't a 10-A resist the hax of a 6-C? Are you saying resistances are related to AP now? This gets better.
Agnaa... who himself only made one comment and straight up said he actually doesn't enough about RC to argue about it... You must be joking at this point.
Edit: His words quoted, for added fun.
"Again, I don't know enough about RC to say whether it is implied to not work on stronger opponents or not, but I know enough about logic to disprove that argument. (This was referring to one of the arguments, yet he has said nothing further after this. Not sure he has even seen the rest of the thread).
Hell, those weaker people resisting it implies that it's not just that stronger people have a resistance, since weaker people can resist it too(which is what everyone has been saying. Tatsuki also resisted despite being weaker)."
- 15,970
- 8,190
In my view, Tatsuki's case is not an outlier but a case of resistance. Also, from my perspective, it is best to get a CRT on Tatsuki's case with knowledgeable members inputs' on being whether or not her case is a outlier than claim that it is without an accepted CRT.
- 6,253
- 2,677
Yes it seems that all that have doubts about the RC can come here read the whole thing also it seems to me with all evidence provided RC is still counted as soul hax and should not be changed at all as it would go againts all that has been shown and stated on the very source material.
- 8,161
- 2,190
I believe it was already in the original revision for soul manipulation for Bleach, heck she's the source of it all since she the weakest of the bunch that can survive it. And did it again against Aizen.Elizhaa said:
- 6,253
- 2,677
So yea if anyone does not agree with RC being accepted as it is they should make a CTR to change or eliminate it if they dont do either then RC shall be use as it has been and remain the same thats about it.
- 8,161
- 2,190
@Elizhaa
Yeah, I mean just general resistance since she can survive a city wide soul suck I mean. So it's one of the most prominent examples.
Yeah, I mean just general resistance since she can survive a city wide soul suck I mean. So it's one of the most prominent examples.
- 15,970
- 8,190
I think it is a good option to make a CRT, for those who disagreed; preferably knowledgeable members should contacted so they can provided evidence for the arguments.TOAAPRESENCE1 said:
Personally, I will say I was of somewhat a skeptic of RC but after reading the evidence provided I think it is more solid. I am still openminded if new points come forth.
- 6,253
- 2,677
I agree that they should make a CTR but every time they mention RC is not accepted and we say they should make a CTR to change it or eliminate it they instead just say they dont need to because is not accepted and keep arguin that is not accepted.Elizhaa said:
- 8,161
- 2,190
Not sure what else is there to discuss?
- 15,970
- 8,190
Ah, I was busy but I will reply.
I could move the thread to a CRT but I think there should be more agreements like from the OP, first.
From a CRT standard, I am not sure the thread did accepted is accepted yet since because from the evaluating staffs' final evaluation is not overall on the point of view. Akm look to oppose the RC being without caveats. I am not sure on Damage's views.
So, I think more inputs for other of these staffs would be needed, particularly those familiar with Bleach, if this thread has to be a CRT.
Personally, I think the thread been a discussion thread is fine.
I could move the thread to a CRT but I think there should be more agreements like from the OP, first.
From a CRT standard, I am not sure the thread did accepted is accepted yet since because from the evaluating staffs' final evaluation is not overall on the point of view. Akm look to oppose the RC being without caveats. I am not sure on Damage's views.
So, I think more inputs for other of these staffs would be needed, particularly those familiar with Bleach, if this thread has to be a CRT.
Personally, I think the thread been a discussion thread is fine.
- 8,161
- 2,190
The staff on the knowledgeable section for the verse don't want to be bothered with it.
As for Damage he seems to be unaware of the standards regarding souls such as the way potency is measured and that people are assumed to have one unless shown otherwise.
As for Damage he seems to be unaware of the standards regarding souls such as the way potency is measured and that people are assumed to have one unless shown otherwise.
- 31,401
- 27,693
@Sigurd; I'm aware of the standards. I just don't personally agree with the default assumption of assuming every verse has souls.
- 4,327
- 2,978
I'll be honest, I don't either. It practically enforces real life religious beliefs onto our standards among all fictional works. It's not based on actual proof grounded in reality like our calc standards or tiering ratings.Damage3245 said:
But it is what it is unless the wiki changed it's standards.
- 4,327
- 2,978
The Wiki is not ready to have those discussions as seen in the Soul King soul potency thread from before.
- 8,753
- 1,617
Way I see it, either assumption is highly arbitrary at the end of the day, but only one levels the playing field so that soul manipulation isn't selectively efective only on certain verses.
- 31,401
- 27,693
I wouldn't say it levels the playing field. Rather it gives an unfair advantage to verses that utilize Soul Manipulation.LSirLancelotDuLacl said:
I prefer the side which requires fewer assumptions, namely along the lines of "Don't assume they have souls unless there is evidence to support it."
Saying that "You can assume both verses have souls" sounds like a qualifier like "Equalized speed", not something that should be default.
- 8,753
- 1,617
Not sure how letting a tool be usable against everyone without resistance, just as mind manip, EE, space manip and many others, is unfair.
And that's my entire point. If the subject isn't brought up in the verse, both are assumptions with nothing for or against them. Saying one is has less assumptions or is more credible without reason is in itself an assumption. Occam's razor doesn't work here, and neither option is "safer", but one is actually more fair.
And that's my entire point. If the subject isn't brought up in the verse, both are assumptions with nothing for or against them. Saying one is has less assumptions or is more credible without reason is in itself an assumption. Occam's razor doesn't work here, and neither option is "safer", but one is actually more fair.
- 5,227
- 3,365
I generally assume Humans/Humanoids have souls in fiction because the majority of the time it's revealed they do, I seriously can't think of any mainstream fiction that hasn't demonstrated their characters have souls (I'm not saying all fictional characters have souls, just that from what I've seen, most of the time they do). Hence why I personally think they should be assumed to have one unless stated otherwise.
- 1,812
- 1,328
Because soul, consciousness and essence can be equal or very similar under some point of view, depends how they are treated, it is not forcing some verse to have soul, if the meaning is something abstract that someone has regardless, if shown to have one the 3 aspect I mentioned, it's safer to assume that everyone has one than the opposite, that is my point of view and why I agree with the wiki.
- 13,587
- 5,754
Isn't the whole other verses have souls part of verse equal? Humans in one having it and the other neither confirming nor denying their humans have souls results in them being treated as having souls.
- 4,327
- 2,978
Which is why I don't think the wiki will ever accept the Soul King's soul manipulation potency.AppleLord said:
I don't know how we can get that through when people don't want to accept Bleach's unique cosmology.
- 1,154
- 659
@IMade
Are you talking about SK's infinite soul potency? I mean if it's legit I don't see why it won't be accepted. But then there's this thread now.
Are you talking about SK's infinite soul potency? I mean if it's legit I don't see why it won't be accepted. But then there's this thread now.
- 8,161
- 2,190
No, he's talking about everything having souls and etc.
Similar threads
