-
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.
When should creator entities gain all of their creations' abilities?
- Thread starter DontTalkDT
- Start date
-
- Tags
- creation
- Status
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Username OnlyVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 2,883
- 3,358
Bump.
- 165,220
- 72,249
@ImmortalDread @Bobsican
Would you be willing to write a draft page based on what was decided above please?
Would you be willing to write a draft page based on what was decided above please?
- 18,393
- 14,311
Well; @LordGriffin1000 Do you allow me to have your sample for my sandbox, or you prefer me to rephrase it in my own. Since I do have a great idea on how the site should look like.
- 165,220
- 72,249
- 18,393
- 14,311
My sandbox looks like this; I am waiting for someone to send me a picture of a deity who is stated to be omnipotent.
vsbattles.fandom.com
But also, this is not done yet. We as VSBW also needs to explain the reasons and not simply outright say "it is not allowed".
ImmortalDread/Omnipotent Guidelines
vsbattles.fandom.com
But also, this is not done yet. We as VSBW also needs to explain the reasons and not simply outright say "it is not allowed".
- 165,220
- 72,249
Thank you for helping out.My sandbox looks like this; I am waiting for someone to send me a picture of a deity who is stated to be omnipotent.
ImmortalDread/Omnipotent Guidelines
But also, this is not done yet. We as VSBW also needs to explain the reasons and not simply outright say "it is not allowed".
@DarkDragonMedeus @LordGriffin1000 @Zaratthustra @GyroNutz @Everything12 @Damage3245 @Qawsedf234 @Duedate8898 @Moritzva @DemonGodMitchAubin @Agnaa @Planck69 @Theglassman12
- 18,393
- 14,311
As for the sandbox or the title? Since you are one that agreed with it.
Sandbox one is irrelevant; This one matters which will be any better positioned once the page is official.
- 14,915
- 12,434
The title which you gave for the sandbox, which makes it seem like it'd be the title of the page.
I never agreed with that title.
Also, what changes did you make? I, and many others, already approved LordGriffin's draft, so what alterations did you deem necessary?
- 18,393
- 14,311
The title looks like this
- 18,393
- 14,311
For starters; why would the first line be likely “hyperbole”. It's a bit redundant. When we analyze this stuff, the first thing we should make (this is a regular setting in the process) is to check if it is not metaphorical or hyperbole.
- 165,220
- 72,249
Yes, that title seems fine to me as well.
- 14,915
- 12,434
You kept that in your draft....
Until you give an actual, justified change, I will stick with LordGriffin's draft.
- 18,393
- 14,311
I kept it since I simply copied his idea and will now do some changes but as I said; I still think reasons should be given.
Either way, the sandbox is not done yet. I will keep you updated.
Either way, the sandbox is not done yet. I will keep you updated.
- 18,393
- 14,311
It is not finished, yet. I still need to link it and make it understandable. Altho, I am still in request to have a picture for an overview.
As for Agnaa's message; I may grasp the notion of the reasons.
As for Agnaa's message; I may grasp the notion of the reasons.
- 18,393
- 14,311
I am actually thinking of adding “omnipotent beings” examples of those who qualify.
- Arceus is an example which is accepted as well.
- 14,915
- 12,434
That seems like a very bad idea. Any "omnipotent beings" who happen to qualify qualify for other reasons, so emphasizing their omnipotent nature over the stuff that actually was accepted is misleading.
And, fwiw, I don't care at all about the presence/abence of a picture.
- 18,393
- 14,311
Tho I do care respectfully and without any offense. A representative picture is fine to be added.
As for the post above; I held another viewpoint. I think pointing out which characters may qualify is a good approach for members (and specially visitors) to see.
We do this all the time.
We did this for R>F transcendence page. We do this in many plenty pages (if you want me to reference them each of it, I don't mind)
- 30,087
- 31,393
I agree with Agnaa yes.
- 18,393
- 14,311
Regarding this; I removed everything you have asked; Mr. Admin.
- 18,393
- 14,311
The draft is ready, I suppose. It can be an official page at anytime.
- 14,915
- 12,434
Introduction seems bad, I'd replace it entirely with something like
The rest of it (which is just LordGriffin's draft with a few tweaks) is fine.
In accordance, it shouldn't have its own header.
Pointless sentence. We don't need a brief summary of what the standards will be 2 sentences before they start.
This isn't true, we never agreed on this, and so it should be removed.
This should not be included. It's likely to be misleading, and such a case wouldn't fall under these standards anyway. Who the hell is going to say a character shouldn't get all 3 abilities a verse has if they've demonstrated those abilities themselves?
This isn't true, we never agreed on this, and so it should be removed. More specifically, because we'd expect characters like this to be able to manifest such things arbitrarily.
This should not be worded anything nearly like this; just use LordGriffin's original wording. This has absolutely nothing to do with universal energy systems, so they should not be mentioned.
For grammar, I'd change "can" to "able".
The rest of it (which is just LordGriffin's draft with a few tweaks) is fine.
- 18,393
- 14,311
@Bobsican did the later changes, so he may comment for his own modifications. Altho, if the totality of the alternation is simply rejected, you can undo the changed to back.
Here is the link for undo-ing it: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:ImmortalDread/Omnipotent_Guidelines?diff=8081668
I have unfollowed the thread after completing my part as requested.
If you need anything else, feel free to reach out to me.
Here is the link for undo-ing it: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:ImmortalDread/Omnipotent_Guidelines?diff=8081668
I have unfollowed the thread after completing my part as requested.
If you need anything else, feel free to reach out to me.
Last edited:
Bobsican
He/Him- 21,198
- 6,097
Fine by me.
I think it'd be better to discuss if this fits our standards over inherently declining it by not being discussed per-say so far, we are making the standards right now, after all.
Yeah, this is unecessary, I'd be fine with that being removed
I think it'd be better to state somewhere in the page that we'd expect characters from being able to use them arbitrarily, maybe like the note we have on Creation regarding implied powers, or just link there for more information on this sort of stuff.
Sure.
Also fine by me.
- 14,915
- 12,434
I think it'd be better to discuss if this fits our standards over inherently declining it by not being discussed per-say so far, we are making the standards right now, after all.
I think it'd be better to bring up proposed changes in this thread itself, instead of sneaking it into a draft and saying "Yep, ready to be posted" without any notification of those changes.
But on that topic itself, I just don't think it's true. We require logical reasons to believe that all abilities are usable, I don't see why those logical reasons would stop applying when they gain 40 abilities from it instead of just 10.
I think it'd be better to state somewhere in the page that we'd expect characters from being able to use them arbitrarily, maybe like the note we have on Creation regarding implied powers, or just link there for more information on this sort of stuff.
Meh, actually, rereading it now that it's not almost midnight, maybe that addition's right, idk. It depends on what we mean by "embodiment of all existence". Whether that just means they are literally all of existence (i.e. a living universe), or a separate smaller entity that embodies all of existence. I don't really think the former should be able to have it in any case, but I can't tell whether that's what LordGriffin meant or not.
I think it'd be better to bring up proposed changes in this thread itself, instead of sneaking it into a draft and saying "Yep, ready to be posted" without any notification of those changes.
But on that topic itself, I just don't think it's true. We require logical reasons to believe that all abilities are usable, I don't see why those logical reasons would stop applying when they gain 40 abilities from it instead of just 10.
I think it'd be better to state somewhere in the page that we'd expect characters from being able to use them arbitrarily, maybe like the note we have on Creation regarding implied powers, or just link there for more information on this sort of stuff.
Meh, actually, rereading it now that it's not almost midnight, maybe that addition's right, idk. It depends on what we mean by "embodiment of all existence". Whether that just means they are literally all of existence (i.e. a living universe), or a separate smaller entity that embodies all of existence. I don't really think the former should be able to have it in any case, but I can't tell whether that's what LordGriffin meant or not.
Get input on Bob's proposed additions, since he seems to want to keep them. We could either wait for staff to see these newer posts naturally, or mention them.
Bobsican
He/Him- 21,198
- 6,097
I thought Dread said it was ready in the sense of ready for evaluation, rather than straight up publishing, sorry for the misunderstanding.
Anyways...
I went ahead and updated the proposal to be in line with the concluded feedback so far.
Anyways...
Hmmm... fine.
I think it'd be best to wait for further staff input on this section then.
I went ahead and updated the proposal to be in line with the concluded feedback so far.
- 18,393
- 14,311
Bob;
You told me this in DMs – "Okay, updated the sandbox over Power Inheritance Standards. Overall it was rewritten quite a bit"
So I did not bother looking at sandbox, because I thought you are simply correcting stuff, and not completely adding new modifications. And you suggested something, but I did not know you were adding it to the sandbox.
So I thought it was actually ready to be posted, not that I was helping to sneak those changes without any notifications.
- Status
Similar threads
