• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
First Argument
The first one already cannot work because it is a nominal fallacy (from Wikipedia: "The nominal fallacy, also known as the naming-explaining fallacy, is a logical fallacy in which it is incorrectly assumed that giving something a name is tantamount to explaining it), so I don't need to argue much more I suppose.
I agree with this one, and it should only be supporting evidence. Vulkin doesn't count as a reliable statement, because they are so naive that they believe attacking Frisk heals them. Vulkin cheerfully saying "thunder" isn't the same as the text box's narration describing the onomatopoeia as actually having occurred.
Second Argument
My rebuttal for the second one is that we cannot know if the cloud from which the lightning bolts are shot is really one, or at least that it works like a real cloud that'd shoot real lightning. First, the cloud adorns a smile and its shape is pretty much simplified, as you can see in the following picture (was taken from a blog):

Pixelplane.png


I know, some could say that it's just a game and that it has to be simplified; others could also say the smile shape is a coincidence and that this is a cloud. And as such, that's when the main part of this rebuttal comes: lightning-charged clouds cannot form underground. The following screenshot will illustrate my thoughts:

3d574a244f72d5f3f9f91b043e862e5b.png


Clouds that form at the ground level are not any clouds, they form what is called "fog," and fog is not charged in lightning (it is a pretty obvious thing but, for those who want details, maybe this Quora can help you). However, let's remember that we are not merely at the ground level, but also in the Underground, a place that is even under the ground and where the only natural clouds one may see are fogs. Reminding what the verse page says (I always bold in the quotes the parts that interest us):
In Undertale, players control a human child who has climbed Mt. Ebott and fallen into the Underground: a large, secluded region underneath the surface of the Earth separated by a magic barrier.

This means that the cloud created by Vulkin can only be of magical nature, or else it would be a fog and would thus not be able to shoot lightning. However, if the cloud is magical, so the lightning it shoots is too, meaning the lightning bolts do not act as real lightning and, thus, we cannot use lightning formulas for speed.
Cloud-to-ground lightning is considered to be real lightning, as long there is nothing suggesting otherwise.
The circumstances may be unrealistic, but what's stopping Vulkin's magic from simulating a cloud and lightning in an unrealistic circumstance? I side with the other people in this discussion on how other monsters magically generate things, including electricity, as having their realistic properties despite their unrealistic origin.
Third Argument
For the third argument, I need to include the rebuttal to the sole counterargument that was mentioned, so here I go.

Counterargument
Those lightning bolts do not behave or look like how the real lightning should.

Thread's Counterargument Rebuttal
We have a note on Undertale verse page:
Vulkin's electricity and Knight Knight's meteors were accepted as valid due to monster magic being showcased multiple times to be the same as their real counterparts, such as the fire magic from Toriel and Pyrope working as real fire, Sans and Papyrus' bones being actual ones or Mettaton using actual electricity from his core due to him being a robot.
Electricity does not travel like that too, however this wiki accepts those attacks being real electricity just fine. Same thing should be done to the argument that it is a real lightning.

Moreover, monsters do use magic, and although it is same as their real counterparts, it does not mean that they can’t manipulate it to apply those attacks better in combat (in Vulkin’s case, to use them in Danmaku style to attack Frisk). For example, fire does not naturally come in fireballs and obviously does not move like it does in Toriel’s fight, the reason why these fire attacks act this way is due to Toriel manipulating her magic to shape fire and direct it, so why can’t Vulkin do the same?

Alright, now that this is reminded, here comes my own rebuttal, or so to speak the rebuttal of the rebuttal. Monster Magic was not showcased to be the same as its real counterparts if we follow the examples that are given and nothing ever stated it.

From the Monster Physiology page:
Magic, Inorganic Physiology (Type 1) and Danmaku: Monsters' bodies, compared to human ones, do not have much physical matter because of them being made of magic to the same degree humans are made of water, being able to use their magic in various ways like making bullet patterns, which are showcased in most of their fights, with them also being able to control said magic.

This means that monsters are made of magic and so are the attacks they use. This means that Toriel's fire is magical, Pyrope's fire is magical, Sans and Papyrus's bones are magical, Vulkin's electricity is magical, and this without anything showing the contrary.

The only one I would accept this for is Toriel because she uses her fire to cook meals, which real fire would (and even then, that can be refuted to merely temperature manipulation since the context isn't high in quantity or quality either). However, we cannot assume every monsters with elemental-like magic has their magic working like its real counterparts just because one monster did, it is ridiculous.

For Pyrope, I clicked the video and it had... nothing? Maybe I skipped a moment, but all I saw was the fight with a monster. Was the argument about the fact it looks like it is made of flames? If so, I kindly would like to remind those would be magical flames, since monsters are made of magic.

For Sans and Papyrus's bones, I don't even get what's the argument for the bones to be real. Is it because Papyrus was able to put them in a box? Magic doesn't mean they have to be non-physical, and so magical bones could perfectly be put within a box too.

And as for Mettaton, the choice of video was pretty confusing. Did we assume that because Mettaton's core shot lightning bolts? Then there is still the same issue: is it even real electricity or real lightning? Nothing states so. Magical electricity can also perfectly power up a machine, but since it's magical we cannot assume it will have all the same properties as real electricity.

That said, we cannot assume directly that the lightning of any monster in the Underground is real, and thus the probability for Vulkin's lightning to be magical only gets higher. It also explains the electricity's weird direction, by the way.
No one denies that monsters use magic and magical versions of natural things, but what's denied is the magic simulating inauthentic versions of those natural things. Given how there is evidence of magically simulated things having the properties those things naturally have, it's consistent to treat them that way. For example, while magical electricity and natural electricity can both power up a machine, I see no reason to fuss over whether the electricity is magical or natural when it serves its realistic purpose as electricity either way.

Regarding your other questions:
  • I think the point about Pyrope was that Frisk turning up the thermostat makes the monster "hotter." This indicates the monster, in flames yet made of magic, was already hot, and Frisk increasing the areas heat by natural means was applicable with Pyrope's heat.
  • I think you're right about the clip of Papyrus' bones being in a box, but as ShionAH pointed out before, the Annoying Dog likes to chew them, which real dogs do because bones have minerals and nutrients they can get, so Papyrus' bones have realistic properties. I can see the argument that this doesn't matter since the Annoying Dog is made of magic too, but if that's true, it's weird how the Annoying Dog cares so much about taking Papyrus' bones specifically. It's more than likely that the joke is the Annoying Dog takes bones because he's a dog.
Fourth Argument
How does an Attack Potency/Tiering rating relate to one's capability to manipulate real lightning in any single way? This is completely unrelated and useless. I may have missed something, but as it is said purely in the thread, nothing shows how it should relate.

The only relation I could find is the energy lightning would produce, but even then that's not how you calculate energy with lightning: you need ampere, volts and stuff.


Let me know if you find anything regarding this, but for now I am simply ignoring this argument due to how stupid it looks compared to the rest.
The fourth argument from the other thread wasn't to prove Vulkin's lightning is realistic more so than it was to update people on how it wouldn't be as out of place to consider the lighting as realistic, unlike past circumstances. With Vulkin's attack potency being closer to the energy lighting would produce, it's just one less reason to deem it as inconsistent for their lighting to have realistic properties. It's indeed not worth mentioning, since there's nothing to disprove and, at least as far as I'm aware, no one is using it as a leading point.
 
I can see the argument that this doesn't matter since the Annoying Dog is made of magic too
I don't think this is even confirmed. Non-monsters can be opponents in the game already (Flowey and the Human SOULs), and nothing says that AD is a monster either.
The fourth argument from the other thread wasn't to prove Vulkin's lightning is realistic more so than it was to update people on how it wouldn't be as out of place to consider the lighting as realistic, unlike past circumstances. With Vulkin's attack potency being closer to the energy lighting would produce, it's just one less reason to deem it as inconsistent for their lighting to have realistic properties. It's indeed not worth mentioning, since there's nothing to disprove and, at least as far as I'm aware, no one is using it as a leading point.
"Closer"? My guy it went like waaay over the required AP now. It was relevant in the last downgrade as the characters were also booted to 9-A, now Vulkin is 8-B, aka way over the required 8-C AP.

Anyway, the main argument against the "the lightning does not behave realistically" is the fact that monsters are stated to use their magic to create bullet patterns, meaning that they manipulate the element to make said danmaku (like Toriel using her fire magic to both make fireball danmaku and as normal fire).
 
I agree with this one, and it should only be supporting evidence. Vulkin doesn't count as a reliable statement, because they are so naive that they believe attacking Frisk heals them. Vulkin cheerfully saying "thunder" isn't the same as the text box's narration describing the onomatopoeia as actually having occurred.
Thunder statement should be true, as Vulkin in the very same statement says “Helpful speed up!!!, and getting hit by those attacks increases your speed.

(Look it up here)
 
Thunder statement should be true, as Vulkin in the very same statement says “Helpful speed up!!!, and getting hit by those attacks increases your speed.

(Look it up here)
Thanks for the reminder, though a character can get certain details right and certain details wrong. Vulkin appears to know some things about what they're capable of, but when they mistake damage for healing, we still have to be skeptical.
 
Thanks for the reminder, though a character can get certain details right and certain details wrong. Vulkin appears to know some things about what they're capable of, but when they mistake damage for healing, we still have to be skeptical.
I mean, this is the very same statement. “Helpful speed up” comes right after “thunder”. If it was another dialogue, sure, but here it is literally the same one. And healing is not exactly the same tbh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top