Why do we award abilities to feats with no supporting evidence?

[RisingIons]

Why do we accept one-time events that lack clarity as feats? If a character is hinted to have possibly done something through an ability, but they've never redone the feat anywhere else, and it isn't stated anywhere in the verse that they have the capacity to perform X feat, why do we award abilities with such a lack of evidence, just because we see it done?

There are several examples, but hopefully people can contribute their own examples so we have a bigger selection of verses where this is an issue.

 

[Purgy]

If you listed some of these several examples, perhaps people could tell you why they have those abilities.

 

[RisingIons]

If you listed some of these several examples, perhaps people could tell you why they have those abilities.

I know why people think some abilities should be had, but what they think and reality are different.

For one, Cole's MHS speed. This is the reference video. For one, this is textbook aim dodging. But what's better than that, play the whole video and not the part that it links to. Cole gets hit by a shockwave and the same lightning attack that he's claimed to have dodged. Another thing, this attack has such a massive build-up before it releases that it would be impossible not to dodge even for someone who hasn't replayed this fight several times. The other supporting feats for MHS are.... dodging bullets, grenade explosions, and RPGs, mostly subsonic feats with the exception of bullet dodging, which requires reference.

Another example being used is Kessler dodging cole's attacks, except if you watch the health bar deplete when Kessler teleports, you can clearly see he's using fast movement as he gets hit.

For two, Vegeta's absolute zero resistance. He gets hit by an absolute zero attack from Hyssop and his arm is encased in (Assumingly) absolute zero ice, which he busts going super saiyan. This makes about as much sense as Hakai energy losing existence erasure effects based on the size of the strength gap or the wielder holding back, or said attack being able to explode like your average grenade. Vegeta "resists" absolute zero even though it in fact did work on him, encasing his arm in ice, yet absolute zero is so cold your atoms literally don't have energy anymore and they can't move. But he can go Super Saiyan and not blow his arm off in the process (note: it was stated to chill to the bone in an instant). Does them charging up give them limited matter manipulation by allowing them to super-excite their atoms?

Corvo's blink ability: High-Speed Movement (Bends space to rapidly move himself to another location distances nearly instantaneously, even stopping time when using the ability without already moving. However, he still physically interacts with objects during this process and can't teleport through solid objects)

This ability is described as bending space and teleporting in the same description. Nowhere in the ability file that is linked is it stated to be either. It's stated to move rapidly from place to place without being noticed, and time is stopped if you stop aiming while using the move. Personally, this sounds like the physics understanding of moving at near-light speeds, but that's irrelevant.

Naruto has limited regeneration negation (Up to Low-Godly; Kabuto stated that it would take time for Muu to regenerate from Naruto's attack due to the new power he acquired) It's vague and never expanded upon what this "new power" is. It isn't strength because people far stronger than him haven't affected edo tensei like that. He does this through planetary rasengan in KCM mode, a technique he never uses again until he fights Toneri where it has no feats to note, and no databooks mention anything about this. This jutsu is also not as powerful as rasenshuriken which is stated to attack cells with precision so several flags are raised.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Corvo's blink ability: High-Speed Movement (Bends space to rapidly move himself to another location distances nearly instantaneously, even stopping time when using the ability without already moving. However, he still physically interacts with objects during this process and can't teleport through solid objects)

This ability is described as bending space and teleporting in the same description. Nowhere in the ability file that is linked is it stated to be either. It's stated to move rapidly from place to place without being noticed, and time is stopped if you stop aiming while using the move. Personally, this sounds like the physics understanding of moving at near-light speeds, but that's irrelevant.

Th ****? Who changed that back? that was agreed to be teleportation multiple times

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Fixd

 

[RisingIons]

Th ****? Who changed that back? that was agreed to be teleportation multiple times

Why's that?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

There were like three CRTs for dishonored where it was brought up and agreed to be teleportation over speed

 

[RisingIons]

That doesn't answer my question though. Especially when the game calls it high-speed movement, idk the lore.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

The lore calls it teleportation multiple times and even in-game it functions as teleportation, not speed

 

[RisingIons]

So then "higher" speeds with blink should be removed as well then.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Correct

 

[PrinceofPein]

Naruto has limited regeneration negation (Up to Low-Godly; Kabuto stated that it would take time for Muu to regenerate from Naruto's attack due to the new power he acquired) It's vague and never expanded upon what this "new power" is. It isn't strength because people far stronger than him haven't affected edo tensei like that. He does this through planetary rasengan in KCM mode, a technique he never uses again until he fights Toneri where it has no feats to note, and no databooks mention anything about this. This jutsu is also not as powerful as rasenshuriken which is stated to attack cells with precision so several flags are

you made a CRT about this and you were debunked many times and nobody agreed with you, i t hink it is time to lay this to rest. whatever it is Naruto negated Muu regeneratioin for a while, whether thats with KCM or raw power does not matter, all that matters is he did

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

I might not agree with Pain most of the time....but they are correct here.

 

[RisingIons]

you made a CRT about this and you were debunked many times and nobody agreed with you, i t hink it is time to lay this to rest. whatever it is Naruto negated Muu regeneratioin for a while, whether thats with KCM or raw power does not matter, all that matters is he did

Doesn't change the fact that you support giving a character an ability that is 1. not explained 2. not replicated 3. not mentioned in any official work 4. only done once.

Saying "its an ability because it happened" is actual wank, there's a reason we have guidelines. Light Fang has actual evidence and it was rejected for use for speed in the verse, same with Haku and several other "light speed" feats in the verse. But this thread isn't about Naruto so don't derail it with that.

Its also weird how all these people suddenly come out of nowhere to support Naruto but don't read the rest of the thread. You're part of the problem. You don't care if it doesn't affect your bias.

 

[Confluctor]

I honestly don't see the point of this thread... A character doesn't need to replicate their feats a million times in order for us to list it. As long as they can do it, it gets listed. Also, not every ability needs in depth explaination in the story, it works for some, but not all.

Some abilities are situation based. Some abilities aren't. Try taking context into account.

Plus some stories are wayyy too short to show every ability five times just so someone can list it on a battle boarding wiki.

If we only consider abilities they use often, then most of these pages will be empty af, and by extension, very wrong and poorly made.

 

[RisingIons]

How about you try looking at the other points besides the Naruto one which is obviously everyone's focus? I've already proven one verse wrong so far.

Also not every ability gets added immediately just because it exists. The process for adding fire manipulation to someone who can control flames is going to be far easier than the process for giving somebody high-tier conceptual manipulation for example. Outliers, context and surrounding feats are also considered.

 

[Confluctor]

I wasn't talking about Naruto only tho...

In any case, some of the abilities you mentioned are as low tier as it gets. So again, it's not a problem.

Also, I have seen powers like space manip and stuff like that get accepted after one showing. If the evidence is clear, it will get added. If the evidence is shaky, then yeah, it either won't or take too long.

 

[Planck69]

This thread is a multiverse sized sack of nothing.

As long as it's made clear what the ability is then it can be listed, whether it's used once in the story or every 3 seconds.

The rest just seems to be either personal gripes with how some feats are handled or pages due a revision which is just...OK, I guess?

 

[Bernkastelll]

Doesn't change the fact that you support giving a character an ability that is 1. not explained 2. not replicated 3. not mentioned in any official work 4. only done once.

It doesnt need to be ''well explained'', he could make Mu regeneration way slower, it doenst need to be replicated, wdym in any oficial work? it was made in the manga, doenst even matter if he did it once, as it was a Edo thing

Saying "its an ability because it happened" is actual wank

Its not, it happend lol, and you already was debunked when u tried to make a thread about it

Light Fang has actual evidence and it was rejected for use for speed in the verse, same with Haku and several other "light speed" feats in the verse. But this thread isn't about Naruto so don't derail it with that.

Actually, Haku thing currently is accepted, yeah, I dont got ur point here

Its also weird how all these people suddenly come out of nowhere to support Naruto but don't read the rest of the thread. You're part of the problem. You don't care if it doesn't affect your bias.

Are you claiming people as ''biased''? Thats not really an argument, and what is the problem if people appeared to support the verse?

 

[Bernkastelll]

Also, what even is the ''not well explained'' argument? doesnt even matter, Naruto could make the regeneration slower, so yeah, limited regen neg, if the argument of ''not well explained how it works'' was relevant, characters like Saitama wouldnt be allowed, as the way that he could break the limiter is literally unknown currently, so yeah

 

[Antvasima]

This thread is a multiverse sized sack of nothing.

As long as it's made clear what the ability is then it can be listed, whether it's used once in the story or every 3 seconds.

The rest just seems to be either personal gripes with how some feats are handled or pages due a revision which is just...OK, I guess?

Well, it might be a good idea to write a rule about that explanations, evidence, and/or references should always be provided for abilities that are not self-evident, if we do not have one already.

 

[Arceus0x]

wouldn't this literally be the basis of outliers? I mean what's the difference between a one-off feat that is way superior to anythng shown previously and an outlier? They're kinda the same thing. It all depends on how you end up treating it.

 

[Gohanblanco217]

Why do we accept one-time events that lack clarity as feats? If a character is hinted to have possibly done something through an ability, but they've never redone the feat anywhere else, and it isn't stated anywhere in the verse that they have the capacity to perform X feat, why do we award abilities with such a lack of evidence, just because we see it done?

Because...... It doesn't chnage the fact that those characters still demonstrated said ability? it doesn't really need to be backed up by anything as long as you demonstrated an ability then you do have it even if you only used it once

 

[Planck69]

wouldn't this literally be the basis of outliers? I mean what's the difference between a one-off feat that is way superior to anythng shown previously and an outlier? They're kinda the same thing. It all depends on how you end up treating it.

Context is a thing and this isn't just about feats but powers as well. The latter can't really be contradicted as easily if showcased anyway.

 

[Planck69]

Well, it might be a good idea to write a rule about that explanations, evidence, and/or references should always be provided for abilities that are not self-evident, if we do not have one already.

I'd be floored if this wasn't already a rule.

 

[Antvasima]

I'd be floored if this wasn't already a rule.

Yes. Would somebody be willing to check through our rules to verify that we have this written down already please?

 

[Rez]

Yes. Would somebody be willing to check through our rules to verify that we have this written down already please?

This is from discussion rules
To reiterate, when creating content revision threads, it is best to keep your suggestions as structured and simple to understand as possible, so the staff will have an easier time evaluating the text. Avoid writing upgrade threads mainly based on assumptions from a limited amount of information, with no additional context or evidence to support them.

Content Revision Threads need to be supported by scans, quotes, video clips, accepted calculations, or any other direct proof that claimed events actually happened in the source material. In the absence of this evidence, CRTs may be closed without notice.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you, but that is about discussion threads, whereas I intended to refer to powers and abilities sections within character profile pages.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Doesn't change the fact that you support giving a character an ability that is 1. not explained

"it was stated to be as a result of his new gained power (KCM), so yes it was definitely explained, same way tbb he gained was as a result of his new gained power (KCM).

2. not replicated

when did that start to matter? so i showed i can manipulate memories but it should be rejected cause i used it once? common bro

3. not mentioned in any official wor

manga is not an official work?

k 4. only done once.

this is same thing as ur second point and my reply is still the same, as long as i show i can do that thats that.
oh please let me know who else naruto could have used such ability for? Obito? Madara? Kaguya? or who else did he fight? or got the oppurtunity for that to happen?

Saying "its an ability because it happened" is actual wank,

Nope

there's a reason we have guidelines. Light Fang has actual evidence and it was rejected for use for speed in the verse

light fang is currently accepted

, same with Haku and several other "light speed" feats in the verse.

haku is accepted, which other valid feat is not accepted?

But this thread isn't about Naruto so don't derail it with that.

sure

Its also weird how all these people suddenly come out of nowhere to support Naruto but don't read the rest of the thread. You're part of the problem. You don't care if it doesn't affect your bias.

Biased? sigh

 

[Rez]

Not replicated that's the worst argument ever by that logic characters like Accelerator that have only used an ability a single time should lose it in accelerator's case his law and soul manipulation because he only used it once

 

[Arceus0x]

Saying "its an ability because it happened" is actual wank

i shot you with a glock. Apparently saying that i know how to operate a glock is wank

 

[RisingIons]

i shot you with a glock. Apparently saying that i know how to operate a glock is wank

this makes no sense at all.

And y’all are so focused on the Naruto example it’s painful. Like that’s the only example in this thread. I’m just gonna ignore any Naruto reference from now on, you guys can talk to yourself on that.

 

[Arceus0x]

i was talking about your example. Using your statement, if i shoot someone once then that means i shouldn't be capable of doing that in battle unless i've been shown to shoot someone twice in the same, let's say, video.

 

[RisingIons]

Shooting somebody isn’t an ability though. I’m suggesting the burden of proof for high tier abilities be higher than that of a basic ability. Like how we have so many qualifications for proving something is actual light or actual lightning.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Shooting somebody isn’t an ability though. I’m suggesting the burden of proof for high tier abilities be higher than that of a basic ability. Like how we have so many qualifications for proving something is actual light or actual lightning.

all you need to get an abiity is to show u can do it, or even a statement from a trustworthy source is enough

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody summarise the arguments for each side here please?

 

[RisingIons]

Can somebody summarise the arguments for each side here please?

There isn’t really any arguments just clarifying some stuff. However my infamous point is definitely a scaling issue

 

[Antvasima]

Well, a summary of the discussion here so far would be appreciated in any case.