• 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.

Gems Soulessness removal

Ricsi-viragosi

Ricsi-viragosi

VS Battles
Retired
26,160
3,653
Title. Immunity to soul manip should be removed. Mostly this thread, a tl;dr of it is that being biological or not doesn't mstter fir souls. Unless there is a no soul statement, whenever they have a soul will depend on who they fight. (Against riordan verse, they would have it. For soul eater, no.)

And for the love of god, don't make Sans vs Garnet. She still slaps with precog regardless.
 
These aren't official sources or anything but these are two people from the Steven Universe wiki's opinion on this subject.

"Neither humans nor Gems have souls, as I believe that is a woo-woo concept without any real basis in realtiy - it is wishful thinking on our part, brought on by our fear of death. However, it is clear that unlike human beings who cease all cognitive and mental functions upon death of the body, Gem consciousness is a bit more "persistent" as even the shards of a shattered Gem contains broken slivers of the once-living Gem's consciousness (as evident by the fact that individual shard still try to reform).


If you want to consider that the "soul" of a Gem, sure go ahead. Me, not so much." -Strong In The Real Way (A person, not the song.)

"What ever ones view on souls is both humans and gems are the same, either they both have them or both don't, and for that matter all other sentient things in the univers would likewise be the same. Humans have meat with is used to think, gems have a solid crystal, these are both material objects and the soul is immaterial, if one belives in immortal souls then no material vessel is nessary for them at all so the type of vessel is irrelivent." -ImpalerWrG

They seem to make alot of sense to me, a soul is irrelevant to a gem, and they thus wouldn't have them.
 
I mean, author intent is nice and all, but most characters wouldn't have souls if you asked the author.

During battles we don't assume they have a soul in-canon, it's simply verse equal saying they have a soul. After all, the same nihilistic logic used in what you qouted would lead to them not having a metaphysical mind and being immune to non-biological mindhax (Which they resist because the "solid rock" deal)

It not being an in-verse statement also makes that less usable.
 
I don't really know if that would be fair in a debate though, giving an opponent an ability that wouldn't normally work on them seems unfair to the gems, as it gives them a weakness they don't normally have. For example, characters in SU have weapons that are effective against gems, but not as much against other beings. By that same logic, these weapons could be verse equalized to affect someone who normally wouldn't be affected by them, and that wouldn't be fair to the opponent for the same reason.
 
That is a false equivalency there.

The SU weapons would not be effective on them by either verse's standard.

Soul Manipulation would be effective by one verses standard, and is not contradicted by the other. The authors might not think that they have souls, but this also extends to mindhax and... no one's gonna agree to them being immune to that as well, despite not having a mind unrelated to their physical body.
 
The difference is the gems DO have a mind, Steven literally enters their minds during Reunited. It's literally called the mindscape, and while he's there he can interact with and affect their minds. Another non-gem example from SU is the Watermelon Steven's, who are literally walking watermelons, but Steven can affect their minds as well.

And why wouldn't the SU weapons be affected by verse equalization?
 
If they are never stated to have souls, I agree.

Whether soul Manipulation would affect them, it's up to verse equalization.

There are some verses in which souls are present only in living beings.

In others, even robots and golems do.

In even different ones, anything can have a soul.
 
CinnabarManx421 said:
And why wouldn't the SU weapons be affected by verse equalization?
Click to expand...
This first. Because there is nothing to equate them to. Even in verse their specific advantages are against gems. So unless they are fighting a rip-off with enemies that have the same mechanics as Gems, there is nothing to equate there. In verses where anything that has a sentience has a soul, the gems would be equatable.

The difference is the gems DO have a mind, Steven literally enters their minds during Reunited. It's literally called the mindscape, and while he's there he can interact with and affect their minds. Another non-gem example from SU is the Watermelon Steven's, who are literally walking watermelons, but Steven can affect their minds as well.
You are missing the point... by a lot. I linked above where this same discussion has taken place. Please read through that, and if you disagree, comment it there. Because as of now that was agreed on. You could substitute the mindhax with nearly any other, like plot hax, for exemple.
 
Fine if you're going to be like that, gems do not have souls as they are not even biologically alive, they have nothing that would be the equivalent of a soul, and unless you're trying to use a religious view that everything has souls including rocks, which gems are, they do not have anything remotely analogous to a soul
 
>as they are not even biologically alive

Didn't even bother to read the OP... Or what DMB wrote... Or what I linked... Nice.

>and unless you're trying to use a religious view that everything has souls including rocks

I made what I am saying clear dude. "whenever they have a soul will depend on who they fight. (Against riordan verse, they would have it. For soul eater, no.)"

Plus, read what DMB wrote.
 
Actually, the religious view is that only humans has souls.

But yes, the standard is that only organic creatures with "sapient intelligence" or superior has soul; Human-like creatures or superior = soul, organic beings = life force, inorganic beings = lifeless.
 
Antoniofer said:
Actually, the religious view is that only humans has souls.
But yes, the standard is that only organic creatures with "sapient intelligence" or superior has soul; Human-like creatures or superior = soul, organic beings = life force, inorganic beings = lifeless.
Click to expand...
Dude, litirally linked a thread saying otherwise.

It depends on who they are fighting. In Riordan's work anything with a shadow has a soul of a kind. In soul eater even rudementary AI's like golems don't.

It depends on what the verse they are fighting against takes as standard.
 
You cannot verse equalize o give soulless beings souls, that would be the same as verse equalizing people's physiology so gem tech works on them
 
So your really not bothering on reading what I linked, eh?

Go and discuss that there, people accepted and agreed with what I said already. Bring up waht you disagree with there, and actually counter points beyond saying "you can't".

And why would assuming a human has a soul be more sensible then for the gems when the verse fightng them gives souls to actual rocks?
 
Antoniofer said:
Actually, the religious view is that only humans has souls.

But yes, the standard is that only organic creatures with "sapient intelligence" or superior has soul; Human-like creatures or superior = soul, organic beings = life force, inorganic beings = lifeless.
Click to expand...
So by this logic, all Non-Corporeal characters don't have souls because they have no organic form.
 
@Ricsi Because the verse didn't give gems souls, you're making making a massive and wild assumption that it did
 
The rest of the requeriments says "sapient intelligence" or superior (originally, if it becomes mindless due an event wouldn't make it souless unless in-universe explaination); although, so be fair, that would be my personal interpretation of beings with soul, so a better definition can be argued.

Also, I think that the main issue comes from giving a character soul manipulation by "soulhaxing" the "soul" of a soulessness being, when another power could have been better fitting.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
@Ricsi Because the verse didn't give gems souls, you're making making a massive and wild assumption that it did
Click to expand...
Go. To. The. Thread.

That was agreed on by most.Go there argue that before it's get closed. If it does, you'll need to make another discussion to refute what has been agreed on.
 
Why should I have to go to an unrelated Medaka box thread to tell you why you're wrong about steven universe?
 
WeeklyBattles said:
Why should I have to go to an unrelated Medaka box thread to tell you why you're wrong about steven universe?
Click to expand...
Because it is also about souls all around the wiki, and the same argument you are trying to use has been refuted by me, and agreed in a meme worthy way by cal and co.
 
CinnabarManx421 said:
These aren't official sources or anything but these are two people from the Steven Universe wiki's opinion on this subject.
"Neither humans nor Gems have souls, as I believe that is a woo-woo concept without any real basis in realtiy - it is wishful thinking on our part, brought on by our fear of death........ *snip*
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

In fact, just saying "it doesn't come from official sources" already disqualifies the whole argument, otherwise I could post in some wikia out there that I think X character is Omnipotent based on an statement, coupled with whatever thoughts of mine about IRL something and it probably would be agreed upon.

Also if we went with the "Without real basis in reality" thing, a crapton of verses would get immunity/resistance to a ridiculous ammount of powers via lack of information/these things having no scientifical confirmation, which would be a nonsensical/contradictory approach.
 
But here, if your feeling lazy, the argumnent relevant to here. But I will not respond to argument done here. You go there to further argue it.

Ricsi-viragosi said:
Qawsedf234 said:
If there's no evidence of something existing why should it be assumed that they have it? We shouldn't assume a character has an aspect to themselves without some evidence backing it.
Click to expand...
Because this same logic can be applied to a metaphysical mind. 90% mindhax in fiction is not biological but instead affects the "mind" without even touching the brain.
Guess real world people are now immune to mindhax like that because they don't have a metaphysical mind, immune to soul manipulation due to the lack of a soul, immune to information manipulation because reality is not provably made out of information (let alone binaries like 99% of fiction makes it seem), most fate manipulation (see manipulation. Unless they showed to actually forced onto someone fateless), etc.

The amount of hax that would be nullified this way is so incredibly large that I could make a bigger wall of text than Kirby has.
Click to expand...
Qawsedf234 said:
> Because this same logic can be applied to a metaphysical mind.

A character having a single thought bubble or just showcasing the ability to think would prove they have a conscious that would be suseptable the most mental powers

> immune to soul manipulation due to the lack of a soul,

Yes

> information manipulation because reality is not provably made out of information

I thought blackholes and other stuff proved that information exists. But if its not proven, then yes

> fate manipulation (see manipulation. Unless they showed to actually forced onto someone fateless)

Isn't fate just a bunch of actions beyond any single person's control? I don't see why that would be effected
Click to expand...
Ricsi-viragosi said:
Not how it works. Someone's sentience comes from the cells contained within the brain. There is not metaphysical mind, which is what madara's eye based genjutsu directly affects for example. And again, this same logic can be applied to the soul as well:

(As I said above, what a soul is varies depending the verses included. For example, if you had a fight between soul eater character and something like dragon ball character, it's hard to say that the souls are equatable despite sharing name. [Least we equalize 2-A reality warping to fireballs because "it's magic"]). But say soul eater, the soul is what happens when someone has a mind and a body. If we can give a metaphysical mind, why not a soul?

Blackholes are hardly understood, but if there is a coding information behind reality it ain't binary for sure.

No. Fate manipulation is most often the absolute end of something, unchangeable in nature. An example would be plot manipulation, which is literally fate with a bit of fourth wall thrown in. Manipulating someones fate assumes that there is a predestined ending to them, instead of the world around them being a bunch of coincidences and butterfly effects created by their choices.

But seriously, the idea of someone automatically resisting hax because they haven't shown or been proved to be affected by such things is... bad. Here verse equal should just apply the normal way:

Verse A claims that anything that exists has a soul, from a rock to a human.

When fighting with Verse B, they will be assumed to have a soul unless they don't fit the criteria for verse A (Nonexistent physiology is the dirst thing that comes to mind) or if Verse B makes it clear that someone is souless.

Same applies for most haxes of this nature. If fate is undoubtedly proven to not exist for a verse, verse equal will not change that.
Click to expand...
 
If a verse's characters explicitly demonstrate that they do not have souls, you cannot argue that they do. By this logic you can soul hax Hatchworth despite it being flat out stated numerous times throughout the series that he and the other robots do not have souls.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
If a verse's characters explicitly demonstrate that they do not have souls, you cannot argue that they do. By this logic you can soul hax Hatchworth despite it being flat out stated numerous times throughout the series that he and the other robots do not have souls.
Click to expand...
When have they shown to not have a soul? The authors saying stuff outside of the fiction means little here as already said above, twice.
 
Have the gems actually been stated to not have souls?. They clearly are sentient and have basic intelligence.

Just because they aren't organic doesn't mean we should instantly assume they don't. My knowledge of Steven Universe is limited to the few episodes I watched. If they are classed as robots then sure they don't have souls but if they have life energy, then they should have souls.

So which is it, do they or do they not have life energy and are they classed as robots.
 
LordGriffin1000 said:
Have the gems actually been stated to not have souls?. They clearly are sentient and have basic intelligence.
Just because they aren't organic doesn't mean we should instantly assume they don't. My knowledge of Steven Universe is limited to the few episodes I watched. If they are classed as robots then sure they don't have souls but if they have life energy, then they should have souls.

So which is it, do they or do they not have life energy and are they classed as robots.
Click to expand...
This... also misses the point.

You should at least read what was sritten on this thread.

Whether soul Manipulation would affect them, it's up to verse equalization.

There are some verses in which souls are present only in living beings.

In others, even robots and golems do.

In even different ones, anything can have a soul.
 
Ricsi-viragosi said:
I mean, author intent is nice and all, but most characters wouldn't have souls if you asked the author.
Click to expand...
I don't know if the series has any so I remain neutral but the statements he quoted here definitely do not count as they weren't really from the author or any source. Rather, the views of one and another user in the SU wiki.
 
FateAlbane said:
Ricsi-viragosi said:
I mean, author intent is nice and all, but most characters wouldn't have souls if you asked the author.
Click to expand...
I don't know if the series has any so I remain neutral but the statements he quoted here definitely do not count as they weren't really from the author or any source. Rather, the views of one and another user in the SU wiki.
Click to expand...
I just gave some other people's opinions on the topic, that doesn't mean they "don't count."
 
It does, actually. They do not count in this debate at all.

They have no word over steven universe canon, and it doesn't remotly matter here.
 
@Ricsi

I'm only referring to Steven Universe. Which is why I asked the question. I already know different verses treat this differently, I don't need to read that thread as I'm only asking how are gems treated in Steven Universe.
 
@Cinnabar The problem is that these opinions aren't based on facts stablished in the series, but rather on the users personal views without much of a basis, other than their thoughts about IRL, which leads us back to that contradictory logic of giving characters resistances based on a lack of information.

That's another reason why it can't be used.

They're also not discussing it under the lens of how it would work with Verse Equalization/Vs Battles context, etc,etc. As is the case here.
 
LordGriffin1000 said:
@Ricsi
I'm only referring to Steven Universe. Which is why I asked the question. I already know different verses treat this differently, I don't need to read that thread.
Click to expand...
No, you seem to do, because you are misinterpreting the whole point again.

Unless it's confirmed that they don't have a soul, it hardly matters at all what the verse views the gems as.


Because in a fight, since SU doesn't care about soul lore, the other sides definition of a soul will be used. If Garnet fought a Soul Eater character, she would have no soul.

If she fought Sadie Kane, or any Riordanverse character, she would have.
 
A person being able to soul hax something that does not traditionally have a soul is a feat for that persons soul hax, it does not mean we should remove soul resistance via canonically not having a soul from every character because of it
 
Not quite AI, they do have emotions, consciousnes and subconsciousnes: although, don't think that alone makes them "alive", otherwise characters like the Iron Giant would also have a soul.

Is just me, but it sounds like Sadie Kane do not actually has Soul Manipulation if it soulhax the soulless.
 
@Ricsi

I do not half to read that thread as I'm not talking about vs debating. I'm simply asking how they are treated inverse!.

If they are treating as having no soul then we shouldn't assume they have one. Only if they are treated as such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
  • Locked
A Spirited Discussion on God of War's Soul Manipulation
Replies
31
Views
3K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
Deagonx
  • Locked
Removal of God of War's "Type 1 Concept Manipulation"
3 4 5
Replies
178
Views
20K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
Aseka
  • Locked
Beyond-Dimensional Existence and it's Resistances/Immunities
Replies
8
Views
3K
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
  • Locked
"Ares! Downgrade This Verse, and My Life is Yours!" ⌈GoW Downgrades, Part 1/???⌋
4 5 6
Replies
236
Views
23K
Emirp sumitpo
Emirp sumitpo
Rodri_"Dante"
Frisk and Flowey shouldn't be 8-B/8-A
Replies
11
Views
1K
Rodri_"Dante"
Rodri_"Dante"
Back
Top