- 1,154
- 659
After seeing this many times as well, it's exactly how it looks like, really.
-
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.
We need to talk about Universal Energy Systems
- Thread starter Hellbeast
- Start date
- Status
- 32,811
- 38,012
Okay, I just wanna confirm one more thing.
Suppose the person creates something by breathing or flexing their muscles using a universal energy source without exhausting themselves at all, and then they use the same energy source to create attacks on the same level or more, without any direct statements stating that the same amount of mana is used for both the attack and creation.
Being uber-casual about this feat would definitely serve as a supporting evidence that the creation feat and attack feat are at the very least on similar levels without requiring too much know-how, wouldn't it? Obviously people would be very careful about the scaling and the stamina issues would come into play, that's how people have been quantifying these feats after all. Ultimate Attacks are a thing as well, where they are the strongest attacks and don't scale to the character's general physicals unless they are shown to have physically harmed someone who tanked said ultimate attack.
I actually do remember DDM bringing this up on one of the Creation Feats question answers threads.
EDIT: Yep, he did
- 14,915
- 12,434
The issue with the example you bring up there, is that it sounds like both the creation feat and the attacks are extremely casual, so we can't tell which requires more energy than the other. Using 2 mana or using 10 mana doesn't matter much when you have 10^10 mana and regenerate 10,000 mana per second.
Although I will say that I generally have pretty strict requirements on when feats become usable, so it's probably best not to use me as the sole arbiter of what specific bundles of evidence would satisfy that requirement. It could very well be that 98% of staff would accept your hypothetical.
EDIT: For instance, I'd disagree with DDM's post there that an artifact performing a creation feat means that those who are empowered by the artifact scale. As we don't know how much exertion it puts on the artifact to do each of those things.
Although I will say that I generally have pretty strict requirements on when feats become usable, so it's probably best not to use me as the sole arbiter of what specific bundles of evidence would satisfy that requirement. It could very well be that 98% of staff would accept your hypothetical.
EDIT: For instance, I'd disagree with DDM's post there that an artifact performing a creation feat means that those who are empowered by the artifact scale. As we don't know how much exertion it puts on the artifact to do each of those things.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Once more, how are we exactly ganging up on him for disagreeing with our views when he is the one who refuses to accept how we scale such feats?
This'll be the last time I discuss this matter.
- 32,811
- 38,012
That seems kinda nitpicky for the sake of being nitpicky TBH. Even without that, it's common sense that a punch and kicking are gonna be more energetic than merely flexing or breathing.
Understandable.
- 14,915
- 12,434
That seems kinda nitpicky for the purpose of being nitpicky TBH.
It's nitpicky for the purpose of only solidly indexing what we can prove to be true. imo less than that would need to go under a likely or possibly. Really, I'd be okay with the situation you described of both creation feats and attack feats being casual going under possibly with an explanation.
It's nitpicky for the purpose of only solidly indexing what we can prove to be true. imo less than that would need to go under a likely or possibly. Really, I'd be okay with the situation you described of both creation feats and attack feats being casual going under possibly with an explanation.
- 1,154
- 659
It'll be better for it to be the last time as to not derail further yes. But let's say that some of the issues are reflected in how that is worded in the first place.
- 30,087
- 31,392
That was back then actually, but actually I wouldn't say being amped by an artifact that is capable of creation has them be as powerful as the artifact by default. But if a character uses said artifact like a battery; creating things doesn't deplete much of it, but an epic battle using said artifact to amp physicals basically exerting said artifact would most definitely scale.
- 32,811
- 38,012
This I wholeheartedly agree with.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Basically supports my point that the creation-feats being casual and the physical attacks being more intense would most likely be qualifying evidence that the character's creation-based abilities scale to their physicals without the need of any outside statements or evidence that they're using the same amount of energy.
Last edited:
- 32,811
- 38,012
I can guarantee you that this can and will happen more often than not especially with verses where physical fights are intense and common and such an energy source is stated to exist.
But I've already asked DT regarding clarifications on qualifying for scaling by being uberly-casual about said feats.
That being said however, I still think my refinements to Hellbeast's draft would work great in unison with this and I would not suggest to remove Hellbeast's draft from the equation entirely.
- 14,915
- 12,434
I agree that that's more likely to happen, but we shouldn't forget the underlying principal (destruction feats/amps need to take more energy than creation feats to scale) that we equalize circumstances like "They casually created this, but were tired after creating a fireball" to.
Although, I do wonder whether we should allow stuff like that in cases where there isn't a universal energy system. With characters who just have superpowers/abilities that inexplicably do things. I would be more willing to allow it in those cases where the difference in fatigue-level comes from feats done with the same ability, and less willing to allow it in cases where a character can copy other characters' abilities, and gets more tired using one than they do using some creation ability.
But I don't feel particularly strongly about whichever way those sorts of situations resolve.
Although, I do wonder whether we should allow stuff like that in cases where there isn't a universal energy system. With characters who just have superpowers/abilities that inexplicably do things. I would be more willing to allow it in those cases where the difference in fatigue-level comes from feats done with the same ability, and less willing to allow it in cases where a character can copy other characters' abilities, and gets more tired using one than they do using some creation ability.
But I don't feel particularly strongly about whichever way those sorts of situations resolve.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Yeah but at the bare minimum the creation-based feat and the attack feat need to require equal amounts of energy bare minimum without suffering from exhaustion, an attack requiring more energy but still not exhausting the person would be a plus, and one surefire way of proving this would be to see if the feats are on done casually/with ease (Whichever you prefer). But of course, Ultimate Attacks do exist where it visibly exhausts them or leaves them out of commission, but it'd generally be treated as their strongest attack and wouldn't have ground to scale until they can physically fisticuff someone who tanked said Ultimate Attack.
As for verses without universal energy sources, I suppose I could concede to the fact that a fatigue-level could serve as a reasonable compromise but again, this is a slippery slope without a UES in play like I mentioned in my response to Hellbeast's draft, since there can be stuff where people have special powers on their own that don't come from a universal energy source, like Quirks in MHA for example.
Last edited:
- 32,811
- 38,012
OK so I have one last question.
Suppose the line you used from the Creation Feats page: " For example, it can be reasoned that a mage which expends mana from its energy pool to make a city and then channels a similar or greater amount of mana into another attack can scale to its creation feat." is expanded upon with the "One way to prove this is to see if the character performed said feat with considerable ease without suffering from exhaustion and has shown to be able to use attacks with greater effort" (Sorry for the effort thing, I suck at wording stuff) based on what we've discussed:
How do we accomodate for that in the second line with the similar "pool of energy" stuff?
"Examples include on screen demonstrations, examples of destruction, or information that the same pool of energy used to create said dimension can translate to the same amount of energy being used for other abilities including but not limited to physical strikes."
Granted it's in the 4-A section but it makes no mention of asking for evidence that the Creation Feat and Attack feat use the same amount of energy / the Attack uses more energy than the Creation feat.
Suppose the line you used from the Creation Feats page: " For example, it can be reasoned that a mage which expends mana from its energy pool to make a city and then channels a similar or greater amount of mana into another attack can scale to its creation feat." is expanded upon with the "One way to prove this is to see if the character performed said feat with considerable ease without suffering from exhaustion and has shown to be able to use attacks with greater effort" (Sorry for the effort thing, I suck at wording stuff) based on what we've discussed:
How do we accomodate for that in the second line with the similar "pool of energy" stuff?
"Examples include on screen demonstrations, examples of destruction, or information that the same pool of energy used to create said dimension can translate to the same amount of energy being used for other abilities including but not limited to physical strikes."
Granted it's in the 4-A section but it makes no mention of asking for evidence that the Creation Feat and Attack feat use the same amount of energy / the Attack uses more energy than the Creation feat.
Last edited:
- 32,811
- 38,012
I was more or less talking about how the "uber-casualness" aspect could fit into that.
- 1,154
- 659
Isn't it answered there? Or are you referring to something else
Edit : oops got ninja'd by the
- 32,811
- 38,012
Sounds fair.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Well we're considering adding the "exhausted" requirement we just debated here to the Creation Feats pages (Not necessarily a Creation Feats topic but strictly more so a UES based topic) after which we're going overdrive with the refinements to the standards pages. Just waiting for DT's thought on the matter.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Actually, about this
Me and Hellbeast are considering adding this to the Universal Energy System guideline.
Should we do so, or should we just wait for DT's approval and give it to the Creation Feats page?
If we tackle this separately on the UES thread we might have to remove the requirement from the Creation Feats page and keep it exclusively on the UES page. Which I wouldn't mind but then people would have issues regarding the requirements of Creation-based feats.
Last edited:
- 9,961
- 1,999
Must say, just cuz a character uses the same supply of energy to perform its abilities does not means all are equally as powerful. Is possible for few spells to stronger/more harmful than others (requiring more magic supply), even if they may be related to the energy supply of its user; is also possible that non-harmful spells, like transportation ones or hax in general, to require more energy thannharmful spells; in this matter, a character may combine a harmful effect with additional effects of hax, such npi or durability negation, increasing the cost of in mana of the spell without actually increasing its AP.
These are magic examples, but it can apply tonother forms of energy, such ki, where creating gigantic fire sphere that takes a considerable amount of time would most likely be way stronger than the average energetic blast.
Few of these examples may appear pretty specific and one hardly will witness a verse that eleborates, and at the end it will be reduced to conventional scaling.
These are magic examples, but it can apply tonother forms of energy, such ki, where creating gigantic fire sphere that takes a considerable amount of time would most likely be way stronger than the average energetic blast.
Few of these examples may appear pretty specific and one hardly will witness a verse that eleborates, and at the end it will be reduced to conventional scaling.
- 14,915
- 12,434
Antoniofer makes a very good point. It may be a good idea to only scale more exhausting destructive spells to less exhausting creation spells if the destructive spell in question is purely destructive, without any haxxy components.
- 6,127
- 4,208
I mean we already do these scaling stuff in verse specific CRTs.
X attack requiring more power, skill and time...compared to Y which is inferior....while Z is completely hax based yet most draining.
Kakashi Hatake is best example of this.
Pretty common phenomenon in fictiom that every user sees.
X attack requiring more power, skill and time...compared to Y which is inferior....while Z is completely hax based yet most draining.
Kakashi Hatake is best example of this.
Pretty common phenomenon in fictiom that every user sees.
- 9,961
- 1,999
It does need to be necessary hax, is possible to enhance the spell o technique in other aspects. Let's go with an example: there this mage, with two known spells, light blast and fire annihilation, first spell consume less mana than the second one, and fire annihilation is way more destructive and harmful; one day the mage is hunting a target in a populated area, refuses to use the fire spell (as is going to kill innocents) and instead plans to use an altered light spell, spending additional mana to increase its speed and range, to being able to control it remotely and to share his sense with it, at the end, the new mana cost of that altered light blast will surpass the fire one. Does the damage of the light blasts increases even if is cost srpasses of the fire one?
- 6,127
- 4,208
Hmm well on surface...prolly no.
Depends if verse considers higher speeds as contributive to hitting strength.
But I get the spirit of your arguement.
Sometimes Versitility is only extra upgrade you get at cost of more mana not AP.
But it would be moreso an quirky attribute of that technique, than something I would use as rule.
- 9,961
- 1,999
As I say, little amount of verses with elaborate in how adding variable effects to a base spell will increase its mana cost, at the end, most of the time it will revolve around some guy survive the fire annihilation spell, then someone attack it with light blast and hurt the guy, so people will scale both spells to each other. But that is a scaling issue, completely independent of UES.
- 30,087
- 31,392
Saying, "Using more mana likely means it just has added durability negation aspects" still sounds like headcanon unless there's proof if it such as a poison inducement spell or an attack having spatial manipulation properties. But said things need evidence. But a ball of light or strong much using up more mana or MP than some earthquake spell; I really do not see it being anything beyond it being pure AP. Also, examples such as "It implies it depletes multiple megatons just to revive a KO'd ally or to heal wounds" aren't arguments against the universal energy system being valid or linear, but rather either a game mechanic or just a foot note weakness.
I mean, I wouldn't assume a status inducement spell has more AP than a creation or wind magic spell by default, but if it's another elemental spell or a physical strength amp spell, the most logical conclusion is to just mention the raw power aspect. But also, for other games, I wouldn't exclusively use in game stats to judge the canon potency, but common knowledge is that in Fire Emblem for example, the legendary one of a kind S rank tomes are leagues above some common C rank tomes. Though, that's more so lore scaling rather than game stat scaling. And other RPGs such as Final Fantasy follow similar guidelines with tomes being certain levels.
I mean, I wouldn't assume a status inducement spell has more AP than a creation or wind magic spell by default, but if it's another elemental spell or a physical strength amp spell, the most logical conclusion is to just mention the raw power aspect. But also, for other games, I wouldn't exclusively use in game stats to judge the canon potency, but common knowledge is that in Fire Emblem for example, the legendary one of a kind S rank tomes are leagues above some common C rank tomes. Though, that's more so lore scaling rather than game stat scaling. And other RPGs such as Final Fantasy follow similar guidelines with tomes being certain levels.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Anyway, should we add the whole "Exhaustion" schtick in the UES page or should it be reserved for the Creation Feats page?
- 9,961
- 1,999
My example was a possibility, and naturally one espect that kind of things to be elaborated in verse; but you also needs proof to say that a child sized fire blast would scale to to the damage of a cite booster sphere of annihilation, saying that they both are magical in energy and that they comes from the same user is not enough proof to scale one attack to the other.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Maybe the booster sphere of annihilation is a special attack not meant to scale to base statistics. We covered that part before tho. It's fine for unique special attacks to scale differently from base statistics especially when said ultimate attack usually serves as a trump card one can't afford to abuse.
- 9,961
- 1,999
Never said that the city boosting spell was an "special attack", and the caster could pretty much cast both spells with as much difficulty; it does not necessary means both consume as much mana and thus are equally strong, but rather than how much it costs to maga casting both either spell is negligible to his mana supply.
But if at the end one is going to scale magic due "it harmed that one guy that tanked x, and thus this power have x AP", then why even bother with UES?
But if at the end one is going to scale magic due "it harmed that one guy that tanked x, and thus this power have x AP", then why even bother with UES?
- 6,127
- 4,208
Out of curiosity, to what verse would this even remotely apply to that has UES?
- 9,961
- 1,999
To any? Not all character have an unlimited supply of mana or chi.
- 32,811
- 38,012
Why would having an unlimited amount of said energy even affect the potency of the attacks tho
- 6,127
- 4,208
What does reservoir of mana have to do with attack types?
Still no answer on verse, since we need some tangible comparison to make.
- Status
Similar threads
