When should creator entities gain all of their creations' abilities?

[Bobsican]

TBH I wouldn't oppose just making a subsection in the new page for Hax, then just do a redirect link to such section.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

@ImmortalDread @Bobsican

Would you be willing to write a draft page based on what was decided above please?

 

[ImmortalDread]

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.

 

[Antvasima]

@ImmortalDread @Bobsican

Would you be willing to write a draft page based on what was decided above please?

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.

@LordGriffin1000

 

[ImmortalDread]

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

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".

 

[Antvasima]

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

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".

Thank you for helping out.

@DarkDragonMedeus @LordGriffin1000 @Zaratthustra @GyroNutz @Everything12 @Damage3245 @Qawsedf234 @Duedate8898 @Moritzva @DemonGodMitchAubin @Agnaa @Planck69 @Theglassman12

 

[Agnaa]

That seems like a very very bad title for the page.

 

[ImmortalDread]

That seems like a very very bad title for the page.

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.

 

[Agnaa]

As for the sandbox or the title? Since you are one that agreed with it.

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?

 

[Antvasima]

Agreed. What would you suggest as a title instead?

 

[Agnaa]

As recommended before, Power Inheritance Standards seems fine, although Dread has now edited the page to display that, so that part's fine.

 

[ImmortalDread]

The title looks like this

 

[ImmortalDread]

Also, what changes did you make? I, and many others, already approved LordGriffin's draft, so what alterations did you deem necessary?

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.

 

[Antvasima]

As recommended before, Power Inheritance Standards seems fine, although Dread has now edited the page to display that, so that part's fine.

Yes, that title seems fine to me as well.

 

[Agnaa]

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.

You kept that in your draft....

Until you give an actual, justified change, I will stick with LordGriffin's draft.

 

[ImmortalDread]

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.

 

[Agnaa]

LordGriffin's draft already gives reasons.

If that's your only issue, I think you shouldn't bother, and we should just apply LordGriffin's draft.

 

[Antvasima]

LordGriffin's draft seems good to apply then.

 

[ImmortalDread]

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.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. No problem.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I am actually thinking of adding “omnipotent beings” examples of those who qualify.

• Arceus is an example which is accepted as well.

 

[Agnaa]

I am actually thinking of adding “omnipotent beings” examples of those who qualify.

• Arceus is an example which is accepted as well.

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.

 

[ImmortalDread]

And, fwiw, I don't care at all about the presence/abence of a picture.

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)

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with Agnaa yes.

 

[Reiner04]

Well, a character who has been stated to be omnipotent and everything,every weapon, every being in the verse and source and controller of all powers qualifies?

 

[ImmortalDread]

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.

Regarding this; I removed everything you have asked; Mr. Admin.

 

[Bobsican]

Sorry for being inactive, my PC burned up and I've sent it to be repaired.

Anyways, I'm helping Dread regarding the new page.

 

[ImmortalDread]

The draft is ready, I suppose. It can be an official page at anytime.

 

[Agnaa]

Introduction seems bad, I'd replace it entirely with something like

This page covers our standards for scaling entities to a wide variety of abilities in their settings, extending beyond those they've directly shown feats of using themselves.

In accordance, it shouldn't have its own header.

In general, proof to back up the claims of a character inheriting the powers, abilities and/or resistances is the main criteria

Pointless sentence. We don't need a brief summary of what the standards will be 2 sentences before they start.

the more content gained from other characters, the higher the required proof can be.

This isn't true, we never agreed on this, and so it should be removed.

The character in question has has directly shown with Feats all powers and abilities of the verse.

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?

Note that depending on the context, this can be limited to the chunks that technically make up the character inheriting the capabilities from others accordingly, for example, a dog has Enhanced Senses regarding smelling, that trait would be limited to the part of the existencially-wide character that makes up the dog. Because of this, this shouldn't be confused with mere Omnipresence, and may not be worth indexing directly in such cases, especially if the other characters are portrayed as having free will in relation to it.

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.

The character in question being the direct source of a Universal Energy System and having demonstrated to some extent of usage the powers of all the other characters within ther use of the given Universal Energy System.

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.

The character in question being stated to be “omnipotent” or “can do anything” is not sufficient evidence, as such cases are more likely than not hyperbole.

For grammar, I'd change "can" to "able".

The rest of it (which is just LordGriffin's draft with a few tweaks) is fine.

 

[ImmortalDread]

@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.

 

[Bobsican]

Introduction seems bad, I'd replace it entirely with something like

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.

Fine by me.

This isn't true, we never agreed on this, and so it should be removed.

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.

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?

Yeah, this is unecessary, I'd be fine with that being removed

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.

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.

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.

Sure.

For grammar, I'd change "can" to "able".

Also fine by me.

 

[Antvasima]

So what currently needs to be done here?

 

[Agnaa]

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.

So what currently needs to be done here?

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]

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 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.

Hmmm... fine.

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 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.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I thought Dread said it was ready in the sense of ready for evaluation, rather than straight up publishing, sorry for the misunderstanding.

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.

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.

 

[Bobsican]

What's done is done, I suppose.

Let's just wait for the mods to evaluate the current version.

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody write an explanation post with everything that our staff currently need to evaluate here please?

 

[Bobsican]

Just this

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, and what did you change there without it being previously accepted here?