We need to talk about Universal Energy Systems

[KLOL506]

Also Devil Fruits and Semblances from RWBY count too, as they are far more similar to Quirks and X-Genes.

Pretty sure you got ninja'd on that regard.

 

[thetechmaster36]

Just jumping in to say that Share Energy from Neptunia should qualify for a valid UES.

• Users need to have the capacity to use their powers to directly channel their power through physical objects in a way that quantifiably enhances them such as:
  • Empowering and enhancing weapons
  • Empowering the user’s own physical capabilities, such as their physical strikes
  • Power described as “radiating throughout” the user’s body could certainly imply this

Definitely fits this, Share Energy is directly stated to be a CPU's source of strength (and it's also why a lot of the profiles are formatted the way they are for their HDD Forms).

• Users need to explicitly draw from singular sources for their myriad of abilities

Although not all of the abilities aren't listed on the profiles yet, Share Energy is needed for them to use a lot of their abilities such as their HDD Forms.

• A removal of said power source needs to be represented as a dramatic loss in power for the user (even to the point of being no stronger than a normal human)

A loss of all of a CPU's Share Energy leads them to death (or, if they're on the edge, makes them extremely weak).

• Needs to explicitly be a common source of power within the verse
  • Not necessarily a main one but it needs to serve as a powersource for several characters

Share Energy is the most common source of energy in the series and is present throughout all three of the main games, so it fits for this.

 

[KLOL506]

Agreed.

If a verse has an energy system where everybody on the planet has the innate ability to use it, it won’t be allowed cause they can’t punch with it? That’s not fair

I mean, shouldn't they be able to empower their physical strength as well with enough training?

Not sure how we could make this any more flexible tho. Maybe just assume that training alone allows them to do this by default? I ain't got any better options than this.

But yes, if the universal energy source is something everyone on the planet has an innate ability to be able to use, I see no reason why they can't punch with it, especially if said energy source is repeatedly hammered down to be usable via sufficient training unless stated otherwise. Like Chakra from Naruto or Ki from Dragon Ball.

Of course, some exceptions exist like Demonic Energy from DMC or Hell Energy from DOOM.

 

[Axxtentacle]

I mean, I see no reason if you can empower other objects, you can't empower your own body. Generally you should be able to unless it's specified you can't in whatever verse.

But yeah, like I said in my first post, it shouldn't be a requirement especially based on the precedent that it hasn't applied before.

 

[Stefano4444]

Pretty sure you got ninja'd on that regard.

If you're talking about Aetheric Pariah, he only say Haki make more sense as applicable EUS.

He didn't say Devil Fruits should be used as an example of inapplicable EUS.

 

[KLOL506]

If you're talking about Aetheric Pariah, he only say Haki make more sense as applicable EUS.

He didn't say Devil Fruits should be used as an example of inapplicable EUS.

Pretty sure I remember someone else talking about Devil Fruits.

 

[Stefano4444]

Pretty sure I remember someone else talking about Devil Fruits,

Ah yeah, i know remember that i already mention Devil Fruits when i was talking about Quirks and Mutant Genes, my bad.

 

[KLOL506]

Ah yeah, i know remember that i already mention Devil Fruits when i was talking about Quirks and Mutant Genes, my bad.

 

[Axxtentacle]

I'm a little lost right now. What exactly are the conclusions that we've come to? I can't tell and a few people are saying a bit of conflicting things.


Edit: Nevermind, i've reread the doc because I didn't notice it was being changed. I'll comment on some of the things in the changed doc.

Higher feats only being represented in environmental effects would simply be an instance of Environmental Destruction

Honestly, since you're trying to say what ED feats don't scale in verses without UESs and they do in verses with UESs (that qualify of course) then this just shouldn't be a requirement/hinderance at all, since it's just saying ED feats don't scale without UESs. I'd suggest just taking it out of the doc entirely.

Direct correlation needs to be established between the universal system and outright power or potential capabilities (Midichlorians)

I'm not quite sure what this is trying to say, are you saying that the "energy" needs to correlate to someone's "power" in the verse? Like it's actually what powers them generally? If so, that's ok and that's a pretty obvious requirement, but if not, please explain it.

That's all I really have to comment on for now, i'm actually ok with the rest.

 

[KLOL506]

I'm a little lost right now. What exactly are the conclusions that we've come to? I can't tell and a few people are saying a bit of conflicting things.

Well for the most part, people are in agreement with Hellbeast's draft. But some, including me, think it's a little bit too inflexible at some parts. Mainly regarding external energy sources and who gets to tap into the universal energy source in case of a worldwide system where everyone can use it.

 

[Axxtentacle]

Well for the most part, people are in agreement with Hellbeast's draft. But some, including me, think it's a little bit too inflexible at some parts parts. Mainly regarding external energy sources and who gets to tap into the universal energy source in case of a worldwide system where everyone can use it.

I was editing my post as you replied to me lmao, but yeah there are still some things I'm unsure of.

 

[Hellbeast]

Read through the doc. The proposals look good, though I do wanna recommend one thing. For the verses that flat out qualify for the UES, if there are any blogs that these verses have that explain in detail how it scales to physical strength I’d recommend using those in the examples of those that qualify, just so that newcomers would get a better understanding on how say… Chakra and Demonic Energy scales Naruto and DMC respectively despite some visual inconsistencies with power.

This is my suggestion definitely; if any blogs already exist that’d be perfect but if not it’d be a help

Anyway, one point I want to add or rephrase: in the criteria for universality/ability-scales-to-physicals-ness, there's a point about "losing the power is a major loss". I might also add that removing the power should be either extremely difficult or painful/traumatic to the person losing it, or possibly lethal (as that would evidence a connection between their physical being and the abilities).

thst could be neat; will add

I don't think I agree with the criteria used. Some of it seems rather... arbitrary.

Could you elaborate? I know there’s the empowerment thing but that’s just something we already use on the wiki

With that said I absolutely agree that a standards page should exist for this concept. I just don't like that, for example, to qualify you must have some form of power that must be "common" within the verse.

Hmm well how would you change the criteria?

 

[KLOL506]

OK, so I re-read the document again and these are my thoughts:

Qualifying Criteria 1:

• Users need to have the capacity to use their powers to directly channel their power through physical objects in a way that quantifiably enhances them such as:
  • Empowering and enhancing weapons
  • Empowering the user’s own physical capabilities, such as their physical strikes
  • Power described as “radiating throughout” the user’s body could certainly imply this

I believe in a setting where everyone has innate access to the universal energy source and can enhance it via training should automatically qualify for getting Empowerment like that, not the other way around where you need to prove the existence of Empowerment to confirm a Universal Energy Source. Naruto and Dragon Ball are very obvious examples (Since both those verses repeatedly hammer down the fact that everyone can use ki/chakra, just that they'll have to train harder if they wanna grow stronger and have their ki/chakra reserves grow more controlled and potent). If anything, it should be a default assumption that in a verse with a tightly-integrated universal energy system people should be readily able to access and harness the UES's energy for their own means, especially for something as simple as enhancing their physical strength.

Them being able to empower their weapons with it is a plus honestly. But it shouldn't be used to leave out people that have innate access to the UES but don't use it to amplify the strength of their bodies because reasons. It should be fine as supporting evidence, however.

Qualifying Criteria 2:

• Users need to explicitly draw from singular sources for their myriad of abilities

Looks fine at a glance.

Qualifying Criteria 3:

• Direct correlation needs to be established between the universal system and outright power or potential capabilities (Midichlorians)

Now that I look at it, it's kinna restricting. You just need to prove that they can tap into the universal energy source to use for all their attacks, physical, elemental, whatever. That's it. But it should work nicely as supporting evidence if mentioned.

Qualifying Criteria 4:

• A removal of said power source needs to be represented as a dramatic loss in power for the user (even to the point of being no stronger than a normal human)

No problems here. You should also add that removal of said power source could also be represented as being able to cause excruciating pain/trauma or cause excess fatigue from which the character could potentially end up dying. So I'm perfectly fine with this.

Qualifying Criteria 5:

• Needs to explicitly be a common source of power within the verse
  • Not necessarily a main one but it needs to serve as a powersource for several characters
  • If the said source is also a core underpinning to the verse’s metaphysical or natural elements this would certainly be a helpful piece of evidence (such as the Force “binding the universe together” and being tied to all life)

Seems okay, no problems here, though at some point you can expect these characters to eventually duke out against each other where the commonality of the energy source may become irrelevant and simple powerscaling should more or less even out the odds. Also I agree with the "core underpinning part", that should certainly help out as supporting evidence, that point should take more precedence than the system itself serving as a power source for the characters I believe.

Ineligible Criteria 1:

• Reliance upon an External source to access abilities such as:
  • Totems being used to grant users assorted magical powers
  • Magical weapons granting the use of mystical attacks the user cannot otherwise replicate
  • Characters being wholly mundane without items would be a feat for the items and not the user

I share the same concerns as DDM and Axx regarding this (The totem portion specifically). If the Totem serves as a universal energy source for the entire verse, then it is fine for it to fall under the normal universal energy source guidelines. The rest seem fine, I think.

Ineligible Criteria 2:

• Higher feats only being represented in environmental effects would simply be an instance of Environmental Destruction

Not sure if I agree with this, just because it is a storm or creation feat or somesuch doesn't mean it suddenly falls out of favor of use, especially if they can then harness said power and focus it onto their bodies. Basically proves Axx's point. Without any direct statements or confirmations from the story itself, the only other surefire way you can scale Environmental Destruction Feats to yourself is via a universal energy system. Of course, if it's greatly above the character's usual showings (where the environmental effects attacks take considerably more effort than their normal showings), just leave it as its ultimate attack if it is offensive, or as a separate ED feat assuming it isn't used in an offensive manner.

Ineligible Criteria 3:

• Attacks being "outliers" for a character's physical statistics can be used as evidence against it qualifying

I'm fine with this, as long as you don't use it to downgrade a god-tier's feat just because the fodders have lower showings. Context matters immensely when dealing with stuff like this, a god-tier might have only one Universal feat but if the plot makes it to be an incredibly important event (Usually in the very end of a story where it surpasses everything else and there's no chance for fodder level enemies to even compare, just to show how OP the final god-tier boss is), then it's enough to suggest that the feat isn't an outlier. Otherwise, you might as well axe the universe-busting feat Goku has right now because he did it only once despite using God Ki and Super Saiyan God to amplify himself to levels that far surpass his DBZ self. And we both know that that's not gonna work in any scenario. But then again, I believe this specific Criteria is already rendered redundant with our Outlier policy page so...

Ineligible Criteria 4:

• Characters losing their energy source and still being capable of replicating the same feats

Seems fine at a glance.

Ineligible Criteria 5:

• Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

Yeah sure, why the hell not. MHA's Quirks are a great example. Endeavour serves to be one.

Honestly, given what I see, they should really serve as guidelines and not as absolute mandatory rules, but still highly recommended. This is how they should really work to be honest. If it fulfills one condition, everything else becomes supportive evidence in the long run.

 

[Axxtentacle]

There's actually 1 thing I need to comment on.

• Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

Couldn't technically an individual have a power that functions like a UES but isn't quite a UES since it's only his power? I'm not quite sure how we'd treat it in that case.

 

[KatBoi69]

There's actually 1 thing I need to comment on.

• Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

Couldn't technically an individual have a power that functions like a UES but isn't quite a UES since it's only his power? I'm not quite sure how we'd treat it in that case.

I brought this up earlier. The number of users really shouldn't matter, just how the individual's powers function.

 

[KLOL506]

There's actually 1 thing I need to comment on.

• Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

Couldn't technically an individual have a power that functions like a UES but isn't quite a UES since it's only his power? I'm not quite sure how we'd treat it in that case.

That is indeed a slippery slope. But in cases where it does happen, we might have to discern the difference between their power-based attacks and physical attacks and whether they can use said power to amplify their physicals or if their power-based attacks are comparable in strength to their physical attacks, since it's a separate thing and not unified. At least, that's what we do with Johnny Storm and Endeavour.

 

[KLOL506]

I brought this up earlier. The number of users really shouldn't matter, just how the individual's powers function.

Yeah, this.

 

[KatBoi69]

My only gripe, as this stands, is the fact that "empowering objects" is the first criterion when it has little to do with universality and more to do with the "being good with the power means good physicals" subtext.

Like the list really should be named "Criteria for Scaling non-AP feats to AP Based on a Universal Power System".

 

[Lightning_XXI]

I'll follow KLOL's example and list my thoughts aswell

Eligible Criteria:

• Needs to explicitly be a common source of power within the verse
  • Not necessarily a main one but it needs to serve as a powersource for several characters
  • If the said source is also a core underpinning to the verse’s metaphysical or natural elements this would certainly be a helpful piece of evidence (such as the Force “binding the universe together” and being tied to all life)

Well, this one I don't really see the issue

We can have multiple energies in a series, if every single one has feats of UES, then they should be fine, of course it's hard to see such a thing in a show, but I believe it's possible

for the Ineligible Criteria:

Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

We can have one single user of a certain type of energy, if he has the feats for UES, it wouldn't be a problem to qualify as such despite him being the only user

 

[KLOL506]

I'll follow KLOL's example and list my thoughts aswell

Eligible Criteria:



Well, this one I don't really see the issue

We can have multiple energies in a series, if every single one has feats of UES, then they should be fine, of course it's hard to see such a thing in a show, but I believe it's possible

for the Ineligible Criteria:



We can have one single user of a certain type of energy, if he has the feats for UES, it wouldn't be a problem to qualify as such despite him being the only user

I have updated my example, please re-check if you have the time.

 

[RatherClueless]

Alright, I have a pretty strong opinion when it comes to this, so I'll just get it out of the way from the start. I hate the idea of it with all my heart and think a UES shouldn't exist unless the verse is very specific about it.

Why do I think that. Well, I'll explain it on the basis of a basic magic system.

1. A mage may use a variety of spells that range from massive explosions to small flames. They may deal different amounts of damage and/or consume different amounts of mana. Although they all draw from the same energy source, they may not be comparable in the slightest.
2. Even if the amount of mana consumed is the same, the AP may still greatly vary. For that there can be two reasons:
2.1 A spell that is more refined may consume less mana and do more damage.
2.2 A certain type of spell needs more mana for a similar effect. For example, if a mage needs, lets say "100 Mana" to create an explosion worth X Joules, then that doesn't mean the same amount of mana will create a barrier capable of withstanding X joules and shouldn't be assumed either.
3. Assuming sth like a spell that can boost a persons physical abilities makes them comparable to their magic output is like throwing a match into a car tank and saying the explosion is comparable to what the car's engine can output. They are completely different usages.
4. It ignores feats (to a certain extent). If a character has feats with magic that are way above that characters physical feats, enhanced or not, it'll still end up scaling. The amount of times I've seen people say "oh yeah, but muh UES, so it doesn't matter. They probably just held back or sth." or "Nah, that's just AoE fallacy. That totally falls under UES" is just painfull.

So yeah, I am pretty biased when it comes to this. Anyways, now to the main points.

• Users need to have the capacity to use their powers to directly channel their power through physical objects in a way that quantifiably enhances them such as:
  • Empowering and enhancing weapons
  • Empowering the user’s own physical capabilities, such as their physical strikes
  • Power described as “radiating throughout” the user’s body could certainly imply this

Even if none of these are true, it can still be a UES. Weapons enhanced by energy are often weaker than just a massive energy blast. The AP might also heavily depent on the weapon. Like how sharp it is or how well it can conduct the energy. Not to mention, I can't think of an awful lot of verses that use energy in that way to begin with (or at the very least make a big point of it). UES can also apply when a character doesn't have a way to boosts physical characteristsic. If a character has a spell that creates lightning and one that creates fire and both use the same mana, we scale it via saying there is a UES. Physicals are just an additional thing that can be scaled be a UES. The energy source may also be external and not radiate within the body. There are several verses where magic is drawn from the surroundings. This doesn't mean it isn't a UES.

• Users need to explicitly draw from singular sources for their myriad of abilities

So does that mean characters like Naruto wouldn't have a UES since he can use several sources of energy?

• Direct correlation needs to be established between the universal system and outright power or potential capabilities (Midichlorians)

Assuming I am understand this correctly, I can agree with that. If, for example, magic is just random reality warping with no real connection to AP, it shouldn't scale.

• A removal of said power source needs to be represented as a dramatic loss in power for the user (even to the point of being no stronger than a normal human)

If there is a character that is enhanced by said power 24/7, then yeah, they should be weaker without it.

• Needs to explicitly be a common source of power within the verse
  • Not necessarily a main one but it needs to serve as a powersource for several characters
  • If the said source is also a core underpinning to the verse’s metaphysical or natural elements this would certainly be a helpful piece of evidence (such as the Force “binding the universe together” and being tied to all life)

I dont see the point of this one. If there is only one character in a verse that can use lets say magic, why wouldn't it be a UES? That just seems like a very arbitrary criteria.

• Reliance upon an External source to access abilities such as:
  • Totems being used to grant users assorted magical powers
  • Magical weapons granting the use of mystical attacks the user cannot otherwise replicate
  • Characters being wholly mundane without items would be a feat for the items and not the user

Why exactly does this matter? Where the energy comes from shouldn't determine whether it's a UES. If an item grants the user mana to cast magic with, why wouldn't this be a UES? I honestly can't see a single valid reason for this.

• Higher feats only being represented in environmental effects would simply be an instance of Environmental Destruction

Fully agree unless the verse is very specific about it. Characters scaling to some random clouds being created, even though they don't have any feats in the same ball park, is just crazy to me, ngl. This is even worse when physical abilities are scaled to it.

• Attacks being "outliers" for a character's physical statistics can be used as evidence against it qualifying

Fully agree on this as well. I already stated why I agree with this in the very beginning.

• Characters losing their energy source and still being capable of replicating the same feats

I feel like there might be exceptions to this. For example, maybe a spell continues to work after being casted, regardless of whether the character still has any mana left.

• Power sources being limited to only or two characters could imply it’s simply a an individual quirk, rather then anything larger

I fail to see how this matters.

 

[KingTempest]

OK, so I re-read the document again and these are my thoughts:


I believe in a setting where everyone has innate access to the universal energy source and can enhance it via training should automatically qualify for getting Empowerment like that, not the other way around where you need to prove the existence of Empowerment to confirm a Universal Energy Source. Naruto and Dragon Ball are very obvious examples (Since both those verses repeatedly hammer down the fact that everyone can use ki/chakra, just that they'll have to train harder if they wanna grow stronger and have their ki/chakra reserves grow more controlled and potent). If anything, it should be a default assumption that in a verse with a tightly-integrated universal energy system people should be readily able to access and harness the UES's energy for their own means, especially for something as simple as enhancing their physical strength.

Them being able to empower their weapons with it is a plus honestly. But it shouldn't be used to leave out people that have innate access to the UES but don't use it to amplify the strength of their bodies because reasons. It should be fine as supporting evidence, however.



Looks fine at a glance.



Now that I look at it, it's kinna restricting. You just need to prove that they can tap into the universal energy source to use for all their attacks, physical, elemental, whatever. That's it. But it should work nicely as supporting evidence if mentioned.



No problems here. You should also add that removal of said power source could also be represented as being able to cause excruciating pain/trauma or cause excess fatigue from which the character could potentially end up dying. So I'm perfectly fine with this.



Seems okay, no problems here, though at some point you can expect these characters to eventually duke out against each other where the commonality of the energy source may become irrelevant and simple powerscaling should more or less even out the odds. Also I agree with the "core underpinning part", that should certainly help out as supporting evidence, that point should take more precedence than the system itself serving as a power source for the characters I believe.



I share the same concerns as DDM and Axx regarding this. If the Totem serves as a universal energy source for the entire verse, then it is fine for it to fall under the normal universal energy source guidelines



Not sure if I agree with this, just because it is a storm or creation feat or somesuch doesn't mean it suddenly falls out of favor of use, especially if they can then harness said power and focus it onto their bodies. Basically proves Axx's point. Without any direct statements or confirmations from the story itself, the only other surefire way you can scale Environmental Destruction Feats to yourself is via a universal energy system. Of course, if it's greatly above the character's usual showings, just leave it as its ultimate attack if it is offensive, or as a separate ED feat assuming it isn't used in an offensive manner.



I'm fine with this, as long as you don't use it to downgrade a god-tier's feat just because the fodders have lower showings. Context matters immensely when dealing with stuff like this, a god-tier might have only one Universal feat but if the plot makes it to be an incredibly important event (Usually in the very end of a story where it surpasses everything else and there's no chance for fodder level enemies to even compare), then it's enough to suggest that the feat isn't an outlier. Otherwise, you might as well axe the universe-busting feat Goku has right now because he did it only once despite using God Ki and Super Saiyan God to amplify himself to levels that far surpass his DBZ self. And we both know that that's not gonna work in any scenario. But then again, I believe this specific Criteria is already rendered redundant with our Outlier policy page so...


Seems fine at a glance.


Yeah sure, why the hell not. MHA's Quirks are a great example. Endeavour serves to be one.

Honestly, given what I see, they should really serve as guidelines and not as absolute mandatory rules, but still highly recommended. This is how they should really work to be honest. If it fulfills one condition, everything else becomes supportive evidence in the long run.

Pretty much agree with this

 

[KLOL506]

I'll leave the magic system out for actual magic-based UESes and their relative experts. I'm just gonna tackle the main points that you covered.

Even if none of these are true, it can still be a UES. Weapons enhanced by energy are often weaker than just a massive energy blast. The AP might also heavily depent on the weapon. Like how sharp it is or how well it can conduct the energy. Not to mention, I can't think of an awful lot of verses that use energy in that way to begin with (or at the very least make a big point of it). UES can also apply when a character doesn't have a way to boosts physical characteristsic. If a character has a spell that creates lightning and one that creates fire and both use the same mana, we scale it via saying there is a UES. Physicals are just an additional thing that can be scaled be a UES. The energy source may also be external and not radiate within the body. There are several verses where magic is drawn from the surroundings. This doesn't mean it isn't a UES.

I... kinda have to agree to this, but I'd not use the "how sharp it is" argument since we don't calculate piercing damage here nor is it a viable argument to use since it abuses surface area so much. But yes, there's no need to restrict a verse with universal energy source where people have the innate ability to use it but for some reason don't use it in their physical attacks.

So does that mean characters like Naruto wouldn't have a UES since he can use several sources of energy?

One word: Chakra. It's all chakra bruv. Ask a proper Naruto expert and they'll tell you right as rain.

Assuming I am understand this correctly, I can agree with that. If, for example, magic is just random reality warping with no real connection to AP, it shouldn't scale.

Again, this completely defeats the purpose of a universal energy source if made as a mandatory condition. Main point of a UES is to be able to tap into it and harness its powers for your own needs, whether defensive or offensive. This should be used for nothing more than supportive evidence.

If there is a character that is enhanced by said power 24/7, then yeah, they should be weaker without it.

Also agree.

I dont see the point of this one. If there is only one character in a verse that can use lets say magic, why wouldn't it be a UES? That just seems like a very arbitrary criteria.

Mostly just use it as supporting evidence, don't make it an absolute requirement.

Why exactly does this matter? Where the energy comes from shouldn't determine whether it's a UES. If an item grants the user mana to cast magic with, why wouldn't this be a UES? I honestly can't see a single valid reason for this.

Agree to this.

Fully agree unless the verse is very specific about it. Characters scaling to some random clouds being created, even though they don't have any feats in the same ball park, is just crazy to me, ngl. This is even worse when physical abilities are scaled to it.

cough Creation Feats CRT cough another Creation Feats CRT cough

But seriously. NO. JUST... NO.

Also, I'll just repeat what DontTalkDT said regarding Creation Feats here which was subsequently applied to above CRTs:

"Yeah, as far as we agreed in the thread you don't need a normal city level feat to prove that a city level creation feat scales (that would be completely pointless tbh).
It's sufficient to proof that your creation spells don't use more of your power than your attack spells. Of course it's a different issue should it be a complete outlier, but that is outlier business as usual."

By your logic we might as well nuke every single Tier 5, Tier 4, Tier 3 and Tier 2 creation feat that exists and are scaled to physical AP via Universal Energy Source, which, to put it bluntly, WE WILL ABSOLUTELY NOT DO, and have done these two CRTs above to finally come to a conclusion about it. If you have problem with random clouds being created and then being scaled to physicals via UES, tackle it in another thread. This is absolutely not the place to do it.

But if you're thinking about getting rid of Universal Energy Source-based Creation Feats for Tier 5, 4, 3, 2 and above, I'd suggest you drop it, we have explicit rules which FORBID downgrading them now.

Fully agree on this as well. I already stated why I agree with this in the very beginning.

Refer to what I said about this specific condition regarding outliers:

I'm fine with this, as long as you don't use it to downgrade a god-tier's feat just because the fodders have lower showings. Context matters immensely when dealing with stuff like this, a god-tier might have only one Universal feat but if the plot makes it to be an incredibly important event (Usually in the very end of a story where it surpasses everything else and there's no chance for fodder level enemies to even compare, just to show how OP the final god-tier boss is), then it's enough to suggest that the feat isn't an outlier. Otherwise, you might as well axe the universe-busting feat Goku has right now because he did it only once despite using God Ki and Super Saiyan God to amplify himself to levels that far surpass his DBZ self. And we both know that that's not gonna work in any scenario. But then again, I believe this specific Criteria is already rendered redundant with our Outlier policy page so...

I feel like there might be exceptions to this. For example, maybe a spell continues to work after being casted, regardless of whether the character still has any mana left.

I guess so.

I fail to see how this matters.

Depends on the individual character's power honestly. Case-by-case basis. If their powers show signs of UES, good, they qualify. If not, then scale their power's AP and dura separately from their physicals while still keeping both the physical AP/dura value and the superpower AP/dura value.

 

[Theglassman12]

Fully agree unless the verse is very specific about it. Characters scaling to some random clouds being created, even though they don't have any feats in the same ball park, is just crazy to me, ngl. This is even worse when physical abilities are scaled to it.

Just saying that you finding it crazy that people scale to these feats and that’s it is an Argument of Incredulity. If you don’t believe that the feat remotely scales to the characters at all you need to prove it.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I agree with KLOL's points

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I agree with KLOL and disagree with RatherClueless

As I always have and will continue to do

 

[KLOL506]

I agree with KLOL and disagree with RatherClueless

As I always have and will continue to do

BASED

 

[KatBoi69]

I agree with KLOL and disagree with RatherClueless

As I always have and will continue to do

Yeah....yeaaaaah.

Same.

 

[KLOL506]

Yeah....yeaaaaah.

Same.

ABSOLUTELY BASED

 

[RatherClueless]

but I'd not use the "how sharp it is" argument since we don't calculate piercing damage here nor is it a viable argument to use since it abuses surface area so much.

Piercing damage isn't even a thing, so why would I even use it as an argument? My point was that the effectiveness depends on the previously existing properties of the weapon, so weapon cross scaling is very iffy to begin with, which is why I dont believe it's a good criteria to use.

One word: Chakra. It's all chakra bruv. Ask a proper Naruto expert and they'll tell you right as rain.

I know? The point was that they are all different energy sources, not different energy types. Even then though, why cant a character use several UES? Obviously they cant be cross scaled.

Again, this completely defeats the purpose of a universal energy source. Main point is to be able to tap into it and use its powers for your own uses, whether defensive or offensive.

Since I have no idea how that has anything to do with my point, I'll assume I actually didnt understant the initial point correctly.

cough Creation Feats CRT cough another Creation Feats CRT cough

Yeah, I am not gonna read all this. Also, I never mentioned Creation feats, but ED feats, but whatever, might as well respond anyways.

Also, I'll just repeat what DontTalkDT said regarding Creation Feats here which was subsequently applied to above CRTs:

"Yeah, as far as we agreed in the thread you don't need a normal city level feat to prove that a city level creation feat scales (that would be completely pointless tbh).
It's sufficient to proof that your creation spells don't use more of your power than your attack spells. Of course it's a different issue should it be a complete outlier, but that is outlier business as usual."

urgh . . . what? Assuming I am understanding this correctly, thats rly dumb. So your best feat (the creation feat) has to use less energy than your weaker feats to be valid for scaling? Am I understanding this right? Isn't that crazy counterintuitive? Wouldn't this be counterevidence if anything? If the highest energy consumption ever shown wasn't the creation feat, then why should we assume that the character in question can exert power far beyond that to match the creation? If anything this shows that the creation doesn't work like any of the other feats, even if it does use the same energy source.

By that logic we might as well nuke every single Tier 5, Tier 4, Tier 3 and Tier 2 creation feat that exists and are scaled to physical AP via Universal Energy Source, which we will absolutely not do and have done these two CRTs to finally come to a conclusion about. If you have problem with random clouds being created and then being scaled to physicals via UES, tackle it in another thread. This is absolutely not the place to do it.

Well, I don't have an issue with creation feats. I have an issue with UES existing to begin with, but like you have said, that's a completely different can of worms. Also, I literally have a thread for that.

But if you're thinking about getting rid of Universal Energy Source-based Creation Feats for Tier 5, 4, 3, 2 and above, I'd suggest you drop it, we have explicit rules against downgrading them now.

Well, that wasn't really my plan, but making rules against changing standards is kinda dumb, ngl. All it does is make things stagnant, even if better solutions are found.

Just saying that you finding it crazy that people scale to these feats and that’s it is an Argument of Incredulity. If you don’t believe that the feat remotely scales to the characters at all you need to prove it.

You are advocating for an Argument from Ignorance. See, I can throw around fallacies as well. That's an issue in and of itself. The burden of proof shouldn't be on me, but on the people who want the feat to scale, which is one of the reasons why I dislike UES so much, as they are a lazy excuse to work around presenting evidence, forcing your opponent to prove a negative. (Having to prove that your false claim is in fact false, which is going to be rather hard as in most cases there will be an absence of evidence for that.)

Honestly though, I dont even know why you act as if an Argument from Incredulity is something necessarily bad. If I asked you whether there were any Elephants in your backyard today (assuming you have a backyard) and you said "no, duh", how would I look if I retorted that with a "Haha, that's an argument from Incredulity, you silly boy. Did you check for footprints? I think not!".

Having common sense isn't a bad thing, tho knowing this forum, I guess some people here might actually think it is.

 

[RatherClueless]

Lovely seeing so many people admit their bias, making their opinions literally worthless.

 

[KLOL506]

Lovely seeing so many people admit their bias, making their opinions literally worthless.

I'd rather you toned it down a bit, calling people biased and all that.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Lovely seeing so many people admit their bias, making their opinions literally worthless.

Or maybe we've never agreed with your scaling ideology as we all believe it is extremely flawed and is a detriment to Vs Battles Wiki as a whole

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

I think people on both sides should calm down. Be respectful guys.

 

[KLOL506]

Piercing damage isn't even a thing, so why would I even use it as an argument? My point was that the effectiveness depends on the previously existing properties of the weapon, so weapon cross scaling is very iffy to begin with, which is why I dont believe it's a good criteria to use.

Why even mention it to begin with then? That's exactly what I was telling you.

Yeah, I am not gonna read all this. Also, I never mentioned Creation feats, but ED feats, but whatever, might as well respond anyways.

Then maybe it's better not to speak of it? Also ED follows the same principle as Creation Feats when it comes to scaling.

urgh . . . what? Assuming I am understanding this correctly, thats rly dumb. So your best feat (the creation feat) has to use less energy than your weaker feats to be valid for scaling? Am I understanding this right? Isn't that crazy counterintuitive? Wouldn't this be counterevidence if anything? If the highest energy consumption ever shown wasn't the creation feat, then why should we assume that the character in question can exert power far beyond that to match the creation? If anything this shows that the creation doesn't work like any of the other feats, even if it does use the same energy source.

Sorry but I'mma have to call BS on this, especially where we have god-tier bosses casually flexing universes into existence in the very end of video games to show their superiority where fodder demons have nothing against them. Arguing otherwise would be the real counterintuitive part here.

Also, it's a rule. If you disagree with it, make a CRT, but like I said, we have a rule against it.

Well, I don't have an issue with creation feats. I have an issue with UES existing to begin with, but like you have said, that's a completely different can of worms. Also, I literally have a thread for that.

And that's where you lost all of us. UES is not gonna stop existing just because you have issues with it. Also no, you only have a thread for Cooling and Clouds.

Well, that wasn't really my plan, but making rules against changing standards is kinda dumb, ngl. All it does is make things stagnant, even if better solutions are found.

Well then you should have posted your so-called "better solutions" when those threads were active, why are you complaining now?

You are advocating for an Argument from Ignorance. See, I can throw around fallacies as well. That's an issue in and of itself. The burden of proof shouldn't be on me, but on the people who want the feat to scale, which is one of the reasons why I dislike UES so much, as they are a lazy excuse to work around presenting evidence, forcing your opponent to prove a negative. (Having to prove that your false claim is in fact false, which is going to be rather hard as in most cases there will be an absence of evidence for that.)

Honestly though, I dont even know why you act as if an Argument from Incredulity is something necessarily bad. If I asked you whether there were any Elephants in your backyard today (assuming you have a backyard) and you said "no, duh", how would I look if I retorted that with a "Haha, that's an argument from Incredulity, you silly boy. Did you check for footprints? I think not!".

Having common sense isn't a bad thing, tho knowing this forum, I guess some people here might actually think it is.

Prove it then, like the man said. Also, once again, tone it down. You keep this up, we're gonna have to report you.

 

[RatherClueless]

I'd rather you toned it down a bit, calling people biased and all that.

He literally said that he disagrees with me under any circumstance, regardless of the accuracy, for as long as you have a different oppinion. That is not biased how?

 

[KLOL506]

He literally said that he disagrees with me under any circumstance, regardless of the accuracy, for as long as you have a different oppinion. That is not biased how?

Accuracy? With what, exactly? Your opinions which you claim to be based on accuracy yet you call yourself biased against?

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

urgh . . . what? Assuming I am understanding this correctly, thats rly dumb. So your best feat (the creation feat) has to use less energy than your weaker feats to be valid for scaling? Am I understanding this right? Isn't that crazy counterintuitive? Wouldn't this be counterevidence if anything? If the highest energy consumption ever shown wasn't the creation feat, then why should we assume that the character in question can exert power far beyond that to match the creation? If anything this shows that the creation doesn't work like any of the other feats, even if it does use the same energy source.

I have a problem with this logic.
How is this counterintuitive?

Also its internally inconsistent.
If the character has already shown greater consumption of power in his attacks compared to creation, then Attack>Creation.
If such a proof already exist, why would you assume otherwise??

 

[KLOL506]

I have a problem with this logic.
How is this counterintuitive?

Also its internally inconsistent.
If the character has already shown greater consumption of power in his attacks compared to creation, then Attack>Creation.
If such a proof already exist, why would you assume otherwise??

Especially with regards to performing said attacks uber-casually.

 

[Hasty12345]

That is not biased how?

I'm so sorry for this but I can't help myself

Biased requires UNFAIR prejudice, as per the "google" definition.