What to rank name based manipulations as? (Mostly Clash of Hexennacht, mentions Bleach and Medaka Box as precedence cases)

[DontTalkDT]

So, Clash of Hexennacht has a few users with the ability to mess with names. Specifically, they currently list the following:

Conceptual Manipulation (Witches are capable of controlling names, names are the definition of things in themselves, and things exist because of names. Witches can control their opponents if they know their names)

Now, the obvious problem is that this concept manipulation should have a type. However, there also is the question whether concept manipulation is even the right ability to give here.
Let me post some quotes as for what kind of things names are in the work:

“…Did you ‘open’ them by using the name of that block of Devices!?”

“I needed the ether. Dikaiosyne and Akerindou each seem to need as much ether as a bit more than 3 of your mass-produced models.”

“Your crafting is more wasteful than you might think, so I believe the actual amount is more like 2.7.”

The person more familiar with the girl made a correction.

But as the Devices scattered in the sky, a voice cried out beyond the trees surrounding the courtyard and the other Devices moved to fill the newly created hole and retain the overall balance.

They would not panic and make themselves look bad.

But the situation was still quite out of the ordinary.

…She broke down the Devices starting from the “name”?

The concept of a “true name” required caution among witches.

Names were the definition of the thing itself. All things physically “existed”, but they also received a name to “exist” as something with meaning.

Give a name to an animal and it became a pet. The name given to a building could turn it into anything from a rundown shack to a frontline base.

Also, the namer became the parent of the named and they gained the right to control it.

From a magic perspective, the name of the magic user could be a difficult issue. If you knew your opponent’s name, the ether could better reach your opponent and produce greater power against them. But if your opponent knew your name, they could control your spells via your name instead of via the spell itself.

Of course, any higher Ranker would have protections applied to their name to ensure it was grounded. But…

“The internal structure of the Devices was supposed to have multiple names for the various parts to increase their defenses.”

“In other words, you used multiple passwords.”

“They were linked together, so controlling just one part shouldn’t have been able to stop the whole.”

“I did not stop them. I opened them, Lisbeth.” Kagami shrugged. “I mean, there was no need to stop them. I wanted the ether as a material, not to control your devices. So…”

So…

“I saw it when you were fighting Fleur near the main gate. When Fleur’s attack destroyed the blade, the individual parts had spells built in to direct the explosions inwards and thus avoid damaging their surroundings. From there, I only had to read the text written on the spell circles.”

“So you found the name and ‘opened’ them?”

“Precisely, Lisbeth! You catch on quickly!”

Beyond Kagami, Horinouchi placed a finger next to her head and spun it in a large circle.

…Um, yes, that’s about right…

The threat here was not a difference in skill or quality as it had been when Lisbeth had taken on Cerisier and Mitsuyo.

…She used the name as a hook to “open” it?

What Kagami had done could simply be described as follows:

“You discovered the ‘name’ of something that isn’t even a door, but you still used the control provided by that ‘name’ to use it like a door, didn’t you?”

Using that, she could also “open” people, weapons, the sea, or the sky like a door.

This one's pretty long, so I highlighted some of the more interesting parts
That is from Clash of Hexennacht Volume 4. On a Godless Planet (same verse) also extends on names:

“In Shinto, a name represents the very essence of a being…so I think I would have an easier time telling you when we’re both stronger.”
“You mean…?”
“Even a god like me has powers. And those powers can be borrowed or stolen through my name. If I told you now and someone overheard, it could hinder us both later on. So if I am to reveal my name, I want it to be after we’re strong enough to prevent someone from stealing my powers even if they overhear.”

From Volume 1.

So... yeah, what to rank that as? And why?

To look at some comparisons, Ichibe from Bleach can also manipulate the names of things and achieve quite similar effects as what was described above. He is given Concept Manipulation Type 2 for that, although I am not quite sure why that is either. From what I recall the explanations Bleach has regarding names are even less clear than that of Hexennacht.

For a third example one could look at Style users from Medaka Box like Sui Kanaino for instance. She can take the Kanji describing things and reassemble them to form new words and by that change things correspondingly. That's somewhat similar to the othe two. She gets Reality Warping and the nieche ability Text Manipulation for that. (I forgot that we even have that...)

Soooo... yeah, anyone got opinions on this?

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

Following since I have a similar problam with another verse

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

About Ichibe if he erases name it will erased from complete Timeline. I don't know if this answers your questions

 

[DontTalkDT]

About Ichibe if he erases name it will erased from complete Timeline. I don't know if this answers your questions

Not really, no. That would fundamentally just mean that he has whatever ability we give this throughout time.

 

[Deceived3596]

I believe this is still just Conceptual Manipulation since names within themselves are inherently abstract, manipulating/destroying/removing "names" would be the same as manipulating/destroying/removing other abstractions tbh.

The type of Conceptual Manipulation is definitely the contentious part of this debate though, i believe most "name" manipulation would be Type 3/2 depending on the context but things like Yamato from Devil May Cry would be Type 1. (DMC goons could explain this more in-depth than i ever could)

 

[Vietthai96]

CM Type 3 imo, we have type 3 for a reason

 

[Everything12]

I believe it would be Type 3 Concept Manipulation without further explanation.

3. Lesser Fundamental Concepts: Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon. Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples, and they are likely not going to meet the same standards for abilities such as High-Godly regeneration that other concepts may. Conceptual manipulation of this type can be resisted by those who resist sufficiently similar abilities, even if the exact mechanics may differ.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I believe it would be Type 3 Concept Manipulation without further explanation.

Type 3 does sound more likely than Type 2. Would that go for all three cases?

 

[Everything12]

Type 3 does sound more likely than Type 2. Would that go for all three cases?

I believe so.

 

[Deceived3596]

I don't know about the other 2 examples above but for Bleach that might be Type 2 instead of Type 3, will definitely have to re-look at the evidence again though.

 

[Arcker123]

I'm of the opinion that this should be judged in a case by case manner, but I want to explain why Ichibe's name manipulation is rated as tyoe 2.

Spoiler: Type 2 Defo For Clarity

2. Dependent Concepts:

Spoiler: Type 2 Defo For Clarity

Such concepts are abstract and govern all reality within their area of influence. These concepts shape everything, and changing them would either require the alteration of every object of the concept or, if manipulated directly, change all objects of the concept alongside the concept itself. These concepts, however, exist simultaneously with and are bound by the object of the concept. In this way, an abstract dependent concept can be destroyed by destroying all objects of the concept, restored by re-making an object of a previously existent concept, or changed by changing all objects of the concept across reality. This, however, does not qualify for this form of conceptual manipulation, and is rather treated as a by-product of another action akin to a "domino effect". This type of conceptual manipulation can only be obtained if the abstract concept itself is changed directly, and not by indirect methods. For example, destroying humanity and thus "ending the concept of humanity" would not qualify, while directly "ending the concept of humanity" and thus destroying humanity would qualify.

Basically, Ichibe and Names in Bleach meet a bunch of the standards for type 2 concepts and imma explain why:

Such concepts are abstract and govern all reality within their area of influence

Well names are inherently abstract as Deceived argued so we don't have to dwell much on that

Names in Bleach grant meaning and power to what they are attached to, as shown by Ichibe naming everything in the world. In fact, all powers dwell within names. This is further proven by Ichibe being able to null people's powers by simply removing their name. In conclusion, there is plenty of proof names "govern" what they're attached to in Bleach, proving them to be type 2 concepts.

These concepts shape everything, and changing them would either require the alteration of every object of the concept or, if manipulated directly, change all objects of the concept alongside the concept itself

Ichibe meets this perfectly. His Bankai functions by directly changing the name/concept of a given thing, then that thing is fundamentally altered and changed into whatever Ichibe names you into. For example, Ichibe changed Base Yhwach's name into "Blank Ant" and Yhwach was altered into a Black Ant. So, in Bleach, if you manipulate the name of something, you will directly change all the objects of that name, aloong with the name itself. Perfect evidence of names being type 2 concepts.

In conclusion, Ichibe has type 2 concept hax because he directly alters names themselves, which have been proven to qualify for being type 2 concepts. They meet a lot of the definition of the ability, and they have no anti feats . Hope this helps. Here's another good post about it.

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

I also have this issue because Shigaraki from MHA can bypass name based attacks, such as that from Star and Stripe, which need a name for them to work, such as “air” or “light”, but I’m not sure if that’s Concept Manip resistance

Tomura Shigaraki is his name but at the same time it isn’t; same with All For One, Tenko, and etc. Attacks that are reliant on his name or any of his names simply don’t work

 

[DontTalkDT]

I'm of the opinion that this should be judged in a case by case manner, but I want to explain why Ichibe's name manipulation is rated as tyoe 2.

Spoiler: Type 2 Defo For Clarity

2. Dependent Concepts:

Spoiler: Type 2 Defo For Clarity

Such concepts are abstract and govern all reality within their area of influence. These concepts shape everything, and changing them would either require the alteration of every object of the concept or, if manipulated directly, change all objects of the concept alongside the concept itself. These concepts, however, exist simultaneously with and are bound by the object of the concept. In this way, an abstract dependent concept can be destroyed by destroying all objects of the concept, restored by re-making an object of a previously existent concept, or changed by changing all objects of the concept across reality. This, however, does not qualify for this form of conceptual manipulation, and is rather treated as a by-product of another action akin to a "domino effect". This type of conceptual manipulation can only be obtained if the abstract concept itself is changed directly, and not by indirect methods. For example, destroying humanity and thus "ending the concept of humanity" would not qualify, while directly "ending the concept of humanity" and thus destroying humanity would qualify.

Basically, Ichibe and Names in Bleach meet a bunch of the standards for type 2 concepts and imma explain why:

Well names are inherently abstract as Deceived argued so we don't have to dwell much on that

Names in Bleach grant meaning and power to what they are attached to, as shown by Ichibe naming everything in the world. In fact, all powers dwell within names. This is further proven by Ichibe being able to null people's powers by simply removing their name. In conclusion, there is plenty of proof names "govern" what they're attached to in Bleach, proving them to be type 2 concepts.

Ichibe meets this perfectly. His Bankai functions by directly changing the name/concept of a given thing, then that thing is fundamentally altered and changed into whatever Ichibe names you into. For example, Ichibe changed Base Yhwach's name into "Blank Ant" and Yhwach was altered into a Black Ant. So, in Bleach, if you manipulate the name of something, you will directly change all the objects of that name, aloong with the name itself. Perfect evidence of names being type 2 concepts.

In conclusion, Ichibe has type 2 concept hax because he directly alters names themselves, which have been proven to qualify for being type 2 concepts. They meet a lot of the definition of the ability, and they have no anti feats . Hope this helps. Here's another good post about it.

Thing is, all of this could also apply for type 3. Type 2 is more for concepts that aren't just abstractions of a single thing and more for concepts that grant a property to reality at large (like "circleness" making all circles round.) Ichibe seems to deal more with individual names of people.
Like, changing the name Yhwach probably affected nobody else that was named Yhwach besides his target.

I also have this issue because Shigaraki from MHA can bypass name based attacks, such as that from Star and Stripe, which need a name for them to work, such as “air” or “light”, but I’m not sure if that’s Concept Manip resistance

Tomura Shigaraki is his name but at the same time it isn’t; same with All For One, Tenko, and etc. Attacks that are reliant on his name or any of his names simply don’t work

I think Stars and Stripes is law manipulation and knowledge of a name is more a prerequisite to use it, rather than that the name in itself is manipulated.
At least from what I spontanously remember from the manga scenes.

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

I think Stars and Stripes is law manipulation and knowledge of a name is more a prerequisite to use it, rather than that the name in itself is manipulated.
At least from what I spontanously remember from the manga scenes.

The knowledge of the name is necessary to use it, but the issue with it is that Tomura Shigaraki’s name IS the name that Star said. It’s just that it doesn’t work. I don’t think it’s Law Manip resistance, it’s just resistance to name-based attacks

 

[Deceived3596]

Like, changing the name Yhwach probably affected nobody else that was named Yhwach besides his target.

It would also affect everyone's memory of the name Yhwach as well, since the name doesn't exist anymore, and had been changed to "Black Ant", similar how no one remembered Ikomikidomoe's true name until he removed Ichibe's Conceptual Manipulation from himself or how not even Yhwach remembered his own Sword's name after it was erased by Ichibe.

That's seem like Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2) to me at least.

 

[Arcker123]

Thing is, all of this could also apply for type 3. Type 2 is more for concepts that aren't just abstractions of a single thing and more for concepts that grant a property to reality at large (like "circleness" making all circles round.) Ichibe seems to deal more with individual names of people.
Like, changing the name Yhwach probably affected nobody else that was named Yhwach besides his target.

Ichibe can affect all instances of when a name appears. As shown by Ikomikidomoe, Yhwachs sword, Zangetsu, etc. it’s very blatant.

Looking at the page, I also don’t understand how you can say this can apply to type 3, when the defo of type 3 says they aren’t type 2 or 1. I still posted the definition and had arguments as to why they met it and you didn’t respond.

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

Why do u guys have the same profile pic

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

Because they are in love

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Why do u guys have the same profile pic

Why do you ask so many questions?

 

[Arcker123]

Why do u guys have the same profile pic

This PFP is the sign of a true Bleach goon

 

[Purgy]

Wouldn't Ichibe creating the names "Zanpakuto", "Shikai" and "Bankai" apply for Type 2 or am I misunderstanding? Names like "Shikai" and "Bankai", don't just apply to a singular Zanpakuto, but every Zanpakuto in existence.

Spoiler

Also, I don't think it makes sense to group these two verses together, names in Bleach are pretty unique so it should be case-by-case.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Wouldn't Ichibe creating the names "Zanpakuto", "Shikai" and "Bankai" apply for Type 2 or am I misunderstanding? Names like "Shikai" and "Bankai", don't just apply to a singular Zanpakuto, but every Zanpakuto in existence.

Spoiler

It would, and as Deceived brought up, Ichibe’s conceptual manipulation isn’t limited to just the target of the hax.

 

[DontTalkDT]

The knowledge of the name is necessary to use it, but the issue with it is that Tomura Shigaraki’s name IS the name that Star said. It’s just that it doesn’t work. I don’t think it’s Law Manip resistance, it’s just resistance to name-based attacks

Star and Stripe is classified as law manip though (and it did kinda work as well?). It's not really a technique that manipulates names and stuff, so I kinda don't see this one.

It would also affect everyone's memory of the name Yhwach as well, since the name doesn't exist anymore, and had been changed to "Black Ant", similar how no one remembered Ikomikidomoe's true name until he removed Ichibe's Conceptual Manipulation from himself or how not even Yhwach remembered his own Sword's name after it was erased by Ichibe.

That's seem like Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2) to me at least.

That's more so just removing a name from everyone's memory, though. Not really a showing of the nature of things with that name besides the target changing. (Reminds me of Shouko's Conceptual Erasure and that wasn't even accepted to be concept manip )

Wouldn't Ichibe creating the names "Zanpakuto", "Shikai" and "Bankai" apply for Type 2 or am I misunderstanding? Names like "Shikai" and "Bankai", don't just apply to a singular Zanpakuto, but every Zanpakuto in existence.

Spoiler

Also, I don't think it makes sense to group these two verses together, names in Bleach are pretty unique so it should be case-by-case.

He did indeed invent the names, but did he ever manipulate the names? Like, Ichibe needs to cover the thing which's name he wants to affect in his ink. I'm really sceptical that he could cover a random Zanpakuto and then change the name "Zankpakuto" to just disable all Shinigami swords in existence without having those other swords covered in ink.

Names in Clash of Hexennacht have more/clearer statements for their fundamental nature than names in Bleach (as far as I am aware). Although Bleach has more feats of names being used for manipulation. I think doing a comparison and looking for similarities is justified. Given, if there are differences that justify different ratings that's fine too. Like, if Ichibe does have a solid showing of a name change having consequences for the nature of all things of that name in reality that would indeed be a solid reason for a distinction.

Why do u guys have the same profile pic

We should all use that picture. Individuality is overrated.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

but did he ever manipulate the names?

Yes

 

[Arcker123]

We should all use that picture. Individuality is overrated.

Rare DontTalk W

 

[Deceived3596]

That's more so just removing a name from everyone's memory, though. Not really a showing of the nature of things with that name besides the target changing. (Reminds me of Shouko's Conceptual Erasure and that wasn't even accepted to be concept manip )

No? not necessarily, what my comment is trying to show is that when Ichibe "blacks" out a name with his Ink, it causes the existence of that name to be removed from reality, even people's perception/memory of that name become non-existent.

This clearly shows Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2) instead of Type 3 since removing a personal concept from existence wouldn't inherently cause everyone to forgot about said concept, while removing a concept which governs all reality within a specific sphere of influence would, like removing the personal concept of "pain" from someone wouldn't cause everyone in that sphere of influence to lose the concept of "pain" or completely forget about the concept of "pain".

The fact other people were affected by Yhwach's name being "blacked" out and changed or Yhwach's own sword being "blacked" out, causing Yhwach to completely forget about its name shows us Ichibe's Conceptual Manipulation isn't affecting someone's personal concept (Type 3) since removing a personal concept wouldn't affect others around you, Ichibe's does, hence it should be Type 2 instead of Type 3.

It's pretty concrete that it's Type 2 instead of Type 3 imo.

 

[Purgy]

He did indeed invent the names, but did he ever manipulate the names? Like, Ichibe needs to cover the thing which's name he wants to affect in his ink. I'm really sceptical that he could cover a random Zanpakuto and then change the name "Zankpakuto" to just disable all Shinigami swords in existence without having those other swords covered in ink.

I'm not sure what you mean here, is creating the name not equivalent to manipulating it? The names "Shikai" and "Bankai" apply to all Zanpakuto except Ichibe's own in the case of Bankai, furthermore, we know that before Ichibe created the name "Bankai" it was called "Shinuchi", so the simple act of creating the name "Bankai" replaced "Shinuchi" for all Zanpakuto except his own as I mentioned.

I don't believe Ichibe needs to directly cover someone or something in ink to manipulate it's name, in the manga Ichibe is able to manipulate the name "Yhwach" so that Zangetsu can't reveal it to Ichigo even though Ichibe is in an entirely different dimension at this point and Ichigo is having this conversation with Zangetsu inside his inner world, there's literally zero feasible way that Ichibe could be covering Ichigo, Yhwach or Zangetsu in ink in order to manipulate the name and we see no ink on them.

Spoiler

The bottom left panel covered in black was revealed by Kubo to be Ichibe's doing

Q117:
Back when Old Man Zangetsu tried to tell his name to Ichigo inside his spiritual world, it was covered in black ink and couldn't be seen. Was that the doing of Ichibei Hyosube?
A117:
That is correct.
-Klub Outside

So it's clear that Ichibe doesn't actually need to directly cover a person or object in ink to manipulate their name

 

[Arcker123]

He did indeed invent the names, but did he ever manipulate the names? Like, Ichibe needs to cover the thing which's name he wants to affect in his ink. I'm really sceptical that he could cover a random Zanpakuto and then change the name "Zankpakuto" to just disable all Shinigami swords in existence without having those other swords covered in ink.

Ichibe meets this perfectly. His Bankai functions by directly changing the name/concept of a given thing

Also,



He never interacted with Zangetsu at all, Yet was able to erase Yhwach's name from him. Further proof Ichibe can affect all instances of a name.

 

[Purgy]

Also,



He never interacted with Zangetsu at all, Yet was able to erase Yhwach's name from him. Further proof Ichibe can affect all instances of a name.

Too slow

 

[Arcker123]

Too slow

 

[Setsuna_tenma]

this thread isn`t about bleach so why bring it up

 

[Purgy]

this thread isn`t about bleach so why bring it up

The OP involves Bleach...

 

[Deceived3596]

this thread isn`t about bleach so why bring it up

The OP literally involves Bleach

It's in the thread name bruh.

 

[Arcker123]

Also, isn't creating concepts enough for conceptual manip? Like, I remember many profiles have concept manip for making concepts, so Ichibe creating them should qualify.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Prooooobably best to continue debating Bleach in another thread (if someone feels like debating it), to not just turn this into a Bleach CRT.

But on the general level, what we have to this point would be:
Manipulating names as abstract things is either concept type 3 or 2. Per default it's 3, but if there is proof that the character can modify a name to not just modify the properties given by the name to one target, but all targets in some governed reality that share that name, it would be 2.

So Clash of Hexennacht would be Concept Type 3 then.

 

[Deceived3596]

Manipulating names as abstract things is either concept type 3 or 2. Per default it's 3

Depends on the mechanics of the verse tbh.

Definitely agree most of the time it would be Type 3, but it can also be Type 2 (Bleach) or even Type 1 (DMC).

It's entirely dependent on the mechanics/cosmology of the verse, and how it treats names within it.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Well, yeah, of course there can be exceptions if the verse basically provides information that would make it concept manip of some type completely independent of the name thing.

 

[Deceived3596]

Agree

 

[JustANormalPerson01]

Following since I have a similar problam with another verse

What verse is that from?

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

Mashle

The name of the manga is written on the first panel