Minor Durability Revision Page Change.

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Durability_Negation

Currently the wiki's page for Durability Negation defines the ability as "The ability that allows users to damage the target, regardless of its durability."

And it has been brought to my attention that people use this as a shield to justify extremely unrealistic interpretations of Durability Negation abilities in fiction, acting like a Tier 6 - 5s Durability Negation technique could kill any 3D character because "It's not based on durability".

Obviously this is a severe NLF. Not all Durability Bypassing abilities are created equal. They can vary wildly on mechanics, executions, scopes and limitations. Some are simply space-warping or death-inducing attacks which only go so far. Others work on a conceptual level and truly ignore all durability. Some are really just attacking the enemies' body on a very concentrated scale. But as always, the most important thing is feats.

Without feats, you can't say that a Durability Bypassing attack will affect all characters with the same dimensional level as them. And the resistances of the enemy vs the level of the attack need to be taken into account on both sides. A character who resisted Existence Erasure from a 3-C should have no business dying to a similar Existence Erasure attack from a 7-A, unless the later has better feats of erasure than the former.

So basically just rewrite that one sentence on the page to avoid this type of No-Limit Fallacy from being brought up in threads in the future.

Understood, dude. This is a good point. I've seen it abused so many times (even by myself) that it's not even funny.

Obviously resistances should be taken into account, but to be frank hax doesn't care about tier. If a 7-A and 3-C both use Existence Erasue with the same functionality, the 7-As is not weaker because he/she is 7-A vs a 3-C. Until you dimension hop, hax is hax. Of course if someone EEs a character that has shown to be resistant to EE, that one who erased such a character has hax above the baseline, but tier matters a whopping zero in that case.

The same goes for mental or even physical attacks if they are explained. For physical attacks, something that bypasses durability by cutting through material "regardless of density or strength" would do exactly that: cut through material regardless of physical and molecular composition. If a High Templar uses Psionic Storm on Goku, you better believe Goku is dying, since he has never resisted his mind being torn apart or his atoms peeled from each other by direct matter manipulation.

NLF doesn't really apply here as long as the functionality of the attack is explained.

That's the thing Assalt, people are so willing to use the "It's hax" idea to ignore the resistances of the opponent and the shown limitations of the attack.

I don't know who is saying that a hax attack kills even if the target is resistant to the functionality of the attack, but that is obviously wrong. However, when it comes to physical resistances and durability the attack doesn't need to have feats of it bypassing durability. If someone obliterates the target's mind, it doesn't matter if the target is a 10-A or a High 3-A; the functionality avoids durability.

Physical durability isn't an argument so long as the attack has an explaination as to why it ignores durability.

The main thing that should be noted is that it needs a known mechanic.

Sans is a good example in that regard.

He has soul hax, which of course bypasses durability independently from how strong the opponent is.

He has another type of durability negation, with unknown mechanics, allowing him to kill soulless 7-Cs.

The mechanic of the former is known, so it isn't blocked by durability, but soul resistance.

The mechanic of the latter isn't, so it works up to the level shown.

My only request is just doing minor editing on the page to change the "damage the target, regardless of durability" to "damage targets with higher durability". And clarify that Resistances and Mechanisms should be known and taken into account.

Well, if it is truly durability negation, it would work independently from durability (not counting dimensions and stuff).

If it is the case with the unknown mechanic, it wouldn't truly negate durability altogether, as much as it would bypass it up to X level

I agree with Kal

What about things like Fire Emblems Luna that doesn't have a known mechanism but bypasses half?

Works up to the highest dura it bypassed in canon

Ok then. I'm still on the fence but I'll wait for more things to be said.