• 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.

Yeet type 5 Acausality or change it again

Status
Not open for further replies.
ImmortalDread

ImmortalDread

Call me Dread
He/Him
VS Battles
Retired
18,393
14,323

The current new standards on Acc type 5:​

Type 5: Causality Transcendence: Characters with this type of Acausality are completely independent of cause and effect, existing outside causality. Characters of this nature require evidence of being unable to be changed by any effect that relies on a system of causality, meaning that interacting with them normally is impossible.

Though the character is completely Independent of causality to the point of being unaffected by any outside change, this only extends to as far as evidence shows and not to things beyond its feats.

Note: Being completely independent of time or laws; or similar forces does not make you completely independent of causality without the relationship between these forces and causality being clarified, with it only being considered as evidence for an irregular relationship with causality otherwise.
Click to expand...
The thread link for new standards: https://vsbattles.com/threads/type-5-acausality-rewording.139477/

The issues that have been contributed to the new standards:​


After a long process, the nature of type 5 acausality is nigh-unachievable, just like the idea of omnipotence in the past.
No characters have accausality type 5, including higher tiers that are absolutely transcendent in their verse (including the causality system) because lack of shreds of evidence for interaction statements which should be associated with being acausal.

Two things end up happening if they are uninteractable if you read the thread which reviewed characters that currently have Type 5 Acausality Type 5 listed with a reasonably well-explained justification:
  1. They have some other ability that gives them an uninteractable state, such as Transduality, NEP, HDE, AE Type 1, etc., which explains their uninteractablness, so it's not a result of Type 5 Accausality or
  2. Too many anti-feats in general. Which this is pretty much all verses, and everything from knowing the character exists to interactions with them for the sake of the plot.
Anti-feat-wise, even knowing a character exists is simply an anti-feat to Type 5 Accausality.

The only characters that could even remotely come close to qualifying are those who are avatars, and their true form lies elsewhere. Still, if they have some other ability, that makes them uninteractable. Then that ability, for some reason, takes more priority over Type 5 Accausality depending on context.

It appeared when this new type was created; it took no consideration for “plot” and “Universal Energy Systems.”

📈 The plot of a story is needed for the sake of progression. This was actually brought up in the original Type 5 Accauslaity thread, but it appears to have been mostly ignored and not well discussed.

A Universal Energy System that has shown feats of NPI on Type 5 Accausal beings should be self-explanatory. This didn't seem to be brought up at all.

Secondly, There appears to be a large gap between Type 4 Accausality and Type 5 accausality.

Type 4 Acausality can go as high as any tier it scales too. Thus, it is possible to have something like 6D Type 4 Accausality that scales to a verse's cosmology with context. They are still bound by a system of causality, where a 3D 5-B Type 5 Accausal character who should be beyond all systems of causality is infinitely weaker to the Type 4 Accausal character.”

There are suggestions for this significant issue:
  • Removing type 5 as there are no characters that qualify for this(require at least ten characters, btw), and Type 4 can be used in its place instead. From henceforth, we look more closely at why a character is uninteractable as it could be from various abilities if someone is proposing they have them all.
  • We need more than 1 staff member willing to evaluate any Type 5 Acausality potential characters as it appears the 1 staff member who is being very helpful in reviewing the current Type 5 Accausals is overwhelmed with not just the thread but other ongoing things in their life as they take time to respond but then a long pause usually between post. This makes the process take longer and is unfair to him. Also, having 1 staff member doing it makes other wiki members feel a sense of pain. Some members can't help but feel a bit of neglect and feel he's been given a lot of power here or feels they're not knowledgeable. (not claiming anyone is feeling that way or accusing anyone, but from some comments I read, it was just a vague feeling that's what they were implying)
  • Or we go back to old standards with a better rewording and examples while being stricter on why they are uninteractable as it can be some other ability. In addition to allowing Plot Manipulation to affect type 5 Accausals. Have type 1 and 2 concepts scale above Laws. So a character transcends all systems of causality that are type 1 Concepts is > Type 2 Concepts that transcends all causal systems > Laws (all systems of causalities). This allows different levels of type 5 acausals to be altered in various ways as it makes sense. Also, we need to consider Universal Energy Systems granting a form of interaction with Type 5 Acausals.
Plot manipulation should be able to influence almost any type 5 acausal as they're still bound by the plot of the story unless a verse treats plot manipulation differently, such as the random example here, treating Type 1 Concepts as being more significant than the plot, or causality is the plot itself.

By transcending the concept of all causality at type 1 Conceptual level, they're much more resistant to anything short of smurf abilities. They should be given one layer of Type 1 CM Resistance. However, plot manipulation could affect them if it has enough context, in addition to layered Type 1 CM.

By transcending the concept of all systems of causality at the type 2 conceptual level. They can be affected by smurf abilities, Type 1 concepts, layered Type 2 CM, and plot manipulation with enough PM context; in addition, they should gain one layer of Type 2 CM resistance.

By transcending the law which governs all systems of causality (law of causality), They should be impacted by Layered Law Manipulation, Smurf abilities, Types 1 & 2 CM, and plot manipulation with enough context. They should also gain one layer of law manipulation resistance.

At the very baseline, if a character is stated to transcend “all systems of causality/causality” with no elaboration on whether it's conceptual or law based. Then all of the above is superior to it. They can be impacted by things such as Law Manipulation, Plot Manipulation, Types 1 & 2 CM, and smurf abilities.

This allows for smurf's abilities to affect them and elaborates on the difference between transcending the different types of concepts of causality vs transcending the law of causality vs transcending the ordinary system of causality.

In addition, it should be essential to know how the Acausality scales. Using modoka as an easy example, if her Acausality type 5 were to stay. It would be something like above baseline 2-A type 5 Acausality.

Using the above would make it distinctively different from Type 4 Acausality.

Results​

Note: Bold = Staff Opinion

Deletion of Acc type 5 entirely​

Changing current type 5 standards​

Neutral: 2 (1:1) @The_Axiom_of_Virgo, @DontTalkDT

​

Conclusion: ​

Due to the confusion of many members, including knowledgeable ones, there is another suggestion of removing “outside of causality” because it is nigh-achievable for a character to be presented with such a feat.
Characters with this type of Acausality are independent of a system of cause and effect, existing outside causality. Characters of this nature require evidence of being unable to be changed by any effect that relies on the system(s) of causality they're independent from, meaning that interacting with them normally is impossible.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yeah the bar is set so insanely high it doesn't even make sense. Like why would you need to prove you have incorporeality from Acausal type 5 when it's supposed to give you that by default?

Just lower the bar or delete it entirely.
 
Sir_Ovens said:
Yeah the bar is set so insanely high it doesn't even make sense. Like why would you need to prove you have incorporeality from Acausal type 5 when it's supposed to give you that by default?

Just lower the bar or delete it entirely.
Click to expand...
Alright. I will add your vote to agree
 
Sir_Ovens said:
Yeah the bar is set so insanely high it doesn't even make sense. Like why would you need to prove you have incorporeality from Acausal type 5 when it's supposed to give you that by default?

Just lower the bar or delete it entirely.
Click to expand...
Agreed. At this point only suggsverse or those random web novel verses would qualify for the new type 5 acausality
 
Like i says in aca thread. I think we not have to delete it, just make it more possible to get. Just dont be too strict

Fixxed said:
I think no character will qualify for type 5 then

I mean bruh. Author can write the causality just exist in some plane of reality(higher D) or the some level of abstraction, and then the plane/abstraction outside that, is beyond the causality. That not need to make some reason the character is not interacable because he is higher D or because he is abstrack because in fact the higher D or the abstraction is already beyond the causality, so the character will have both that make him unable to interact with
Click to expand...
Fixxed said:
For me, the explanation in page is good. But the qualify is not good

Yes, the character must uninteractable. But this is must back to verse it self, we must see how author describe the "beyond causality". I mean if author says some abstraction is beyond causality, we dont need says the character with that abstraction is uninteractable because just he is abstract, it will againts what the author want
Click to expand...
 
Not staff but I didn't know the standards have changed (yet again) and if I'm understanding correctly the new standard's have become so strict it essentially requires authors to copy-paste "our" standards into their work in order to achieve type 5 (I don't think I need to explain how absolutely contrived this is), it doesn't help acausality, transduality and NEP have all gotten muddled together with (old) type 5 acausality being a casualty of this plus it further doesn't help all three powers are highly subjective and many people both on and off the Wiki don't fully understand them (outside the basic versions of them such as type 1 acausal) overall they've become poorly defined imo.

I'm neutral on this discussion since these types of esoteric P&As kinda get too convoluted for my tastes however having a hard to obtain P&A isn't the problem, having the standards (that have changed twice this year iirc) to obtain a P&A be so obtuse that we can't even create a small list of profiles that meet the standards for having that P&A (as an example) is a MAJOR problem.

One last question, was the new standard's really implemented/pushed through by one staff member? (That doesn't sound quite right).
 
Added all counts
The_Axiom_of_Virgo said:
One last question, was the new standard's really implemented/pushed through by one staff member? (That doesn't sound quite right).
Click to expand...
Nope, the new standards are implemented with an agreement through other staff, but only staff is dealing with it at far. And also deciding whether it qualifies or not. All links are in OP. You can check them. Please, get permission from staff if you wish to send messages here.
 
Honestly deleting type 5 seems unnecessary. We can just change the standard to “As a result of transcending cause and effect, they lose a true physical form, rendering them very hard to interact”. That seems far more straightforward with the rules, makes it much easier just like with the NEP standards change.
 
Theglassman12 said:
Honestly deleting type 5 seems unnecessary. We can just change the standard to “As a result of transcending cause and effect, they lose a true physical form, rendering them very hard to interact”. That seems far more straightforward with the rules, makes it much easier just like with the NEP standards change.
Click to expand...
I will put you in disagreeing with deletion and agreeing with changing. Thank you for the input. Mind also telling Ant to ping the rest of the staff.
This seems to be a serious and significant topic.
 
Theglassman12 said:
Honestly deleting type 5 seems unnecessary. We can just change the standard to “As a result of transcending cause and effect, they lose a true physical form, rendering them very hard to interact”. That seems far more straightforward with the rules, makes it much easier just like with the NEP standards change.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it "a loss of a true physical form" but a "change of state of being."

But the issue is how plot treats the interactions. Currently every interactions feat is an anti-feat of Acausality type 5 including thoughts of the characters. Which is absurd
 
Honestly imho i'm neutral about this, but the fact that acc 5 lack of mathematical/logical expression like transduality make me concerned with acc 5 from the beginning. So yeah Neutral but leaning towards deleting acc5.
 
Kenshin_ said:
Agreed on changing AC5
Completely disagree with removing it
Click to expand...
Andika_CL_atmadja said:
Honestly imho i'm neutral about this, but the fact that acc 5 lack of mathematical/logical expression like transduality make me concerned with acc 5 from the beginning. So yeah Neutral but leaning towards deleting acc5.
Click to expand...
Added
Theglassman12 said:
@Dread Ant's on vacation right now so he's not gonna be available for some time.
Click to expand...
Oh, are there any solutions? This is a staff discussion, and we need to ping staff (especially those who agreed to it) to discuss it.
As far, no characters qualify for this, and this seems an issue.
 
Hello! I'm not staff, so, firstly, I apologise if I'm not allowed to comment here.

I just have a small question.

If the standarts for Ac type 5 change again.

A HD being would still be able to affect a lower one who posseses type 4 or 5 Aca, no?


Cheers.
 
Disagree with deleting it, agree with changing some of the standards.
Outrightly deleting it just leaves us with a bunch of characters who have varying levels of type 4.

Edit: sorry, don't have permission and didn't realize this was staff discussion
 
I don't really get how you want to rewrite it, aside from allowing a bunch of abilities to affect it. Let me add that we have no general hierarchy between plot, concepts, information etc. and shouldn't establish one as that is strictly verse-by-verse.

At the very baseline, if a character is stated to transcend “all systems of causality/causality” with no elaboration on whether it's conceptual or law based. Then all of the above is superior to it. They can be impacted by things such as Law Manipulation, Plot Manipulation, Types 1 & 2 CM, and smurf abilities.
Click to expand...
Without elaboration transcending all systems of causality should grant you nothing but causality manipulation resistance.
If you want to be unaffected by stuff, you need feats/statements of being unaffected by stuff.

So if you want to rewrite the ability to only demand feats/statements of being unaffected by physical stuff due to transcending causality, then the ability will do only that.
At that point what you are suggesting is that we reformulate it to a partial causality transcendence, though, in which some parts of causality are transcended and others not. Which is pretty weird, but probably ok in principle.

What evaluation of UES is concerned it depends. If it's just a questionably Type 5 character getting hit in the face, then it is debatable whether the character just might not be Type 5. The difference would come in whether the system has explanations about the system having such acausality bypassing attacks or not IMO.
 
@DontTalkDT do you oppose the proposal of changing type 5 acausality to the characters lacking a true physical form as a result of being beyond cause and effect, rendering them difficult to affect a la NEP's new requirements? Because as of now with the new standards, we cannot find anyone to use as an example for type 5 acausality, which is rendering type 5 almost irrelevant to have on the site when no one even gets it with the standards.
 
What does "lacking a true physical form as a result of being beyond cause and effect" mean exactly? In terms of requirements, nature and practical effects, I mean.
 
From my interpretation,

True Type 5, should be beings that are unchanging and cannot be affected by any external factors. These external factors could be but not limited to: other characters, environment, plot happenstance, etc.

So any character has been shown to be affected by anything external, should be disqualified from having Type 5. (Of course an exception should be that communicating with such a character should be considered a free action for sake of story telling).

There should be no ability that should be able to affect a Type 5, because that's just an oxymoron. It becomes a bit NLF, but that is the very nature of the ability.

It becomes a conundrum. Characters with it, technically shouldn't be able to be used in battles because they can't be affected by anything. Anything else you're claiming a character to be transcendent of cause and effect except for the times when they're affected that by something.
 
@DontTalkDT essentially, they transcend cause and effect to the point that they don't really have a physical form as a result, which ties to the whole point of them being hard to interact with. Merely having no physical form in of itself, or just being a concept or nonexistent being wouldn't be enough for type 5 if they don't elaborate on them being beyond cause and effect as a result.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
From my interpretation,

True Type 5, should be beings that are unchanging and cannot be affected by any external factors. These external factors could be but not limited to: other characters, environment, plot happenstance, etc.

So any character has been shown to be affected by anything external, should be disqualified from having Type 5. (Of course an exception should be that communicating with such a character should be considered a free action for sake of story telling).

There should be no ability that should be able to affect a Type 5, because that's just an oxymoron. It becomes a bit NLF, but that is the very nature of the ability.

It becomes a conundrum. Characters with it, technically shouldn't be able to be used in battles because they can't be affected by anything. Anything else you're claiming a character to be transcendent of cause and effect except for the times when they're affected that by something.
Click to expand...
Except upon reviewing characters that had T5A before the last revision. They all have anti-feats wuth this new standard. After dozens possibly hundreds of profiles with type 5 Acausality having been reviewed. All of them could not qualify with current standards. They all been interacted with on many various levels.

In other words, it's an impossible ability. No character can have it
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Except upon reviewing characters that had T5A before the last revision. They all have anti-feats wuth this new standard. After dozens possibly hundreds of profiles with type 5 Acausality having been reviewed. All of them could not qualify with current standards. They all been interacted with on many various levels.

In other words, it's an impossible ability. No character can have it
Click to expand...
Then I guess it should be nuked then.
 
Anti-feat-wise, even knowing a character exists is simply an anti-feat to Type 5 Accausality.

This isn't true.

Still, if they have some other ability, that makes them uninteractable. Then that ability, for some reason, takes more priority over Type 5 Accausality depending on context.

It doesn't take priority, if we know that being outside of causality makes them difficult to interact with.

It appeared when this new type was created; it took no consideration for “plot” and “Universal Energy Systems.”

The plot of a story is needed for the sake of progression. This was actually brought up in the original Type 5 Accauslaity thread, but it appears to have been mostly ignored and not well discussed.

I have no clue what you mean by this.

A Universal Energy System that has shown feats of NPI on Type 5 Accausal beings should be self-explanatory. This didn't seem to be brought up at all.

I have no clue what you mean by this.

Type 4 Acausality can go as high as any tier it scales too. Thus, it is possible to have something like 6D Type 4 Accausality that scales to a verse's cosmology with context. They are still bound by a system of causality, where a 3D 5-B Type 5 Accausal character who should be beyond all systems of causality is infinitely weaker to the Type 4 Accausal character.”

What's the issue with this? NLF statements get rekt by feats.

Removing type 5 as there are no characters that qualify for this(require at least ten characters, btw), and Type 4 can be used in its place instead. From henceforth, we look more closely at why a character is uninteractable as it could be from various abilities if someone is proposing they have them all.

If absolutely 0 characters qualify, and they have all been thoroughly checked, and bad reasoning wasn't used to reject them, then sure. I have no idea why you said "require at least ten characters", we don't tend to do that for abilities.

We need more than 1 staff member willing to evaluate any Type 5 Acausality potential characters as it appears the 1 staff member who is being very helpful in reviewing the current Type 5 Accausals is overwhelmed with not just the thread but other ongoing things in their life as they take time to respond but then a long pause usually between post. This makes the process take longer and is unfair to him. Also, having 1 staff member doing it makes other wiki members feel a sense of pain. Some members can't help but feel a bit of neglect and feel he's been given a lot of power here or feels they're not knowledgeable. (not claiming anyone is feeling that way or accusing anyone, but from some comments I read, it was just a vague feeling that's what they were implying)

How does this resolve the issue of Type 5 Acausality having no characters???????

Or we go back to old standards with a better rewording and examples while being stricter on why they are uninteractable as it can be some other ability. In addition to allowing Plot Manipulation to affect type 5 Accausals. Have type 1 and 2 concepts scale above Laws. So a character transcends all systems of causality that are type 1 Concepts is > Type 2 Concepts that transcends all causal systems > Laws (all systems of causalities). This allows different levels of type 5 acausals to be altered in various ways as it makes sense. Also, we need to consider Universal Energy Systems granting a form of interaction with Type 5 Acausals.

No.

Plot manipulation should be able to influence almost any type 5 acausal as they're still bound by the plot of the story unless a verse treats plot manipulation differently, such as the random example here, treating Type 1 Concepts as being more significant than the plot, or causality is the plot itself.

We don't treat the plot of the story that we're aware of as a literal object of relevance in the story unless the story also does so, so we should not do this.

Also, these same sorts of arguments can be made for a ton of other abilities. "They should be affected by Logic Manipulation because definitions of relationships to causality follow logic", "They should be affected by Conceptual Manipulation because all particulars partake in them". I don't like that sorta stuff.

Yeah the bar is set so insanely high it doesn't even make sense. Like why would you need to prove you have incorporeality from Acausal type 5 when it's supposed to give you that by default?

It isn't supposed to give you that by default, it's a requirement for it.

"Why do you need to prove that you can regenerate from nonexistence if that's what Mid-Godly regen gives by default?"

if I'm understanding correctly the new standard's have become so strict it essentially requires authors to copy-paste "our" standards into their work in order to achieve type 5

You're not understanding correctly.

Honestly deleting type 5 seems unnecessary. We can just change the standard to “As a result of transcending cause and effect, they lose a true physical form, rendering them very hard to interact”. That seems far more straightforward with the rules, makes it much easier just like with the NEP standards change.

I don't see the logical throughline for this being more than Intangibility.

Currently every interactions feat is an anti-feat of Acausality type 5 including thoughts of the characters. Which is absurd

I was going to say that those things make sense as anti-feats, but then I realised a reason why they shouldn't. Acausality Type 5 no longer requires being above all causality. A potential Type 5 Acausal having changing thoughts should instead be taken to mean that their thoughts operate on a higher level of causality.

However, if they have thoughts as a result of actions under ordinary causality that'd still be an anti-feat. As actions within ordinary causality are able to affect them, making it so that they're not rendered beyond change.

Seriously, why would a character whose mind gets affected by ordinary reality be unaffected by Type 3 Madness Manip from characters in ordinary reality?
 
I don't think it needs to be removed, what is needed here is to change the type 5 acausality standard.
 
I don't agree with nuking Type 5, but some better clarification sounds in order.
 
My suggestion is we should change the Acausality type 5 into two sub types just like how we treat NEP states.

  • Type 1 - Old explanation
  • Type 2 - Current Acausality type 5 explanation.
Well just saying looking at the current Situation no one seems to be qualified for that.
 
DDM: I don't understand what making the rules clearer would solve.

The rules were changed to this since the old ones were rife with NLF and assumed powers.

If you want to go back to that, that's an opinion you can have, but it wouldn't be clarification.

Eldemade: That sounds completely pointless. Proponents of the new definition don't want the old one existing at all. Proponents of the old definition say that literally no-one qualifies for the new definition. Splitting it into two new types doesn't resolve either of those.
 
@Agnaa can you highlight which person exactly you're responding to? Makes it much easier to tell who you're talking to. Also Type 5 Acausality as a whole is broken intangibility as you can't be interactable easily, if you can provide any changes that can make the newer type 5 easier to understand with some examples on who gets it I'd love to see it, because as of now we don't know who remotely qualifies for it.
 
Glassman: if you can provide any changes that can make the newer type 5 easier to understand with some examples on who gets it I'd love to see it, because as of now we don't know who remotely qualifies for it.

I don't think any changes would be needed.

As I said in the last thread when people asked for examples, I don't know of any characters that qualify for Acausality Type 5 because I don't know many high-powered verses. Hell, I don't know a character that qualifies for any type of Acausality.

But, if you'll allow an invented example, I'd expect it to be something like God (Unsong). The first key is just a prime mover that never changes or takes any additional actions. The second key never does anything and is just described once:

“I have a question,” Zoe Farr said, finally. “If God is just the binary digit 1, and nothingness is the binary digit 0, and the both contain one bit of information – then isn’t neither one the simplest thing? Wouldn’t the simplest thing be zero bits, neither God nor nothingness?”

“That’s Atzmus and you’re not supposed to talk about it!” said Ana.
Click to expand...
Some statements related to being outside of causality, and thus being impossible to interact with, could theoretically be added to make it qualify.

"What would happen if Atzmus were to be changed?"

THESE LINES ARE NOT IN THE ACTUAL STORY

"That doesn't make sense on any level. By its very nature Atzmus can't be altered. Even God and Divine Nothingness lie outside our notions of causality. Beyond that, what would there even be to change in Atzmus? It has no information."
Click to expand...

Another way of something qualifying would be if it had enough feats/explanations of Type 5 Acausality to outweigh whatever few anti-feats it has by taking actions and changing.
 
Agnaa that doesn't really help the situation if we need to invent some random character that doesn't exist for type 5's current standards to work. The fact there's no one to use for an example on what qualifies for the new standard means we need to rework this, the fact no one thought this through just baffles me as we should have examples for any standard change on what qualifies for these feats.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Deagonx
  • Locked
Type 4 Acausality: Too Much For Too Little (2)
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Eseseso
  • Locked
Revisions for Acausality Types 1 & 4
Replies
29
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Elyartaker
Acausality Type 5
Replies
8
Views
2K
Grabbing_dragon
Grabbing_dragon
Grabbing_dragon
Acausality type 5 question
Replies
6
Views
1K
Grabbing_dragon
Grabbing_dragon
IdiosyncraticLawyer
  • Locked
Acausality (Type 1) Clarification
Replies
5
Views
1K
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Back
Top