• 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.

Type 5 immortality

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wokistan

Wokistan

Bioluminescent African American Working At The CIA
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
16,919
7,368
So a bit of a question has come up with this immortality recently, stemming from SCP-001 (S. D. Locke's Proposal). It currently has this because it's just a star. Since stars aren't alive, they can't exactly die. A star can run out of fuel but that is not the same thing as death.

The question is, would this result in type 5 being given to all robots or inanimate objects? Firstly, please note that this obviously doesn't include robots shown to have life forces or whatever, as they are the exception. By default robots aren't really considered alive either.
 
Not sure what my stance on this is yet but I'm interested in the outcome.
 
This is interesting, but i actually agree. You can't really kill something that doesn't even have life in the first place, you would just destroy it.
 
Yeah, it's important to remember that type 5 doesn't preclude destroying whatever has it, it's more akin to a souped up type 2 that also provides resistances to things like basic death manipulation and such. A person with type 5 could still be blown to pieces with a bomb and those pieces wouldn't be able to do anything even if they we're "alive".
 
Suggesting things don't die when killed when they don't have life to kill out of them seems legit
 
We seem to be lacking a few types of immortality for the site that would make the job considerably easier for us.
 
"5: Deathless Immortality: Characters who exist unbound by conventional life or death, or do not exist at all, and thus cannot be traditionally killed. Typically, abilities such as Existence Erasure are needed to destroy them."

I definitely do not think that we should start to automatically assign this type of immortality to any inanimate object without life or consciousness.
 
Things like that aren't exactly bound by conventional life and death though, since the state of being "alive" doesn't apply in the first place. Should it be reworded?
 
Something like this?

"5: Deathless Immortality: Characters who exist unbound by conventional life or death, or do not exist at all, and thus cannot be traditionally killed. Typically, abilities such as Existence Erasure are needed to destroy them. Note that you should not assign this ability to conventional inanimate objects."
 
As of right now, we don't give Type 5 Immortality to things that aren't technically alive.

Besides, Type 5 usually has a lot to do with being resilient:

A robot, if he gets atomized, it's not something I'd still consider "alive" or sentient, for that matter.

Someone who has no concept of that may very well be still alive.

If anything, "Non-Biological Immortality" is closer to type 7.
 
What kind of immortality would Under the Moo have? Its just an inanimate painting that mindlessly tries to kill everything that comes near it and to stop it, you need to destroy the paint the painting is made out of. Breaking the painting is easy but its effect doesn't stop until the ink is gone.
 
Is Under the Moon the painting or reliant on the painting to live?

If it's the former, none. If it's the latter, type 8.
 
It is the painting but to truly stop it, you need to destroy the ink too. Its not something that is alive btw. More like a cursed painting.
 
If the ink is simply just part of the painting, then none really.

As I previously said, being non-living being isn't considered a type of immortality at the moment.

I suggest contacting someone knowledgeable on Immortality as a whole, or just who added the current definition of type 5 to the page.
 
Okay, say some organic thing has type 5. That wouldn't stop it from being atomized, it just wouldn't technically be dead. To stop being atomized it's durability/resistance.
 
Certainly not. Non-biological immortality is Type 7, or it is "amortality" (cannot die because it is was never alive to begin with).
 
Type 7 seems to just be for zombies and stuff though.

What would type 5 even be then? What else would be unbound by conventional life and death?
 
In verses with an afterlife, type 5 would be the ability to simply go out of said afterlife if you got sent there, for example.
 
Isn't that just resurrection?
 
A very good example of type 5 is Sun Wukong from Journey to the West. He literally erases his name from the Book of Life and Death.
 
Not necessarily. For example, if a deity of a verse created the afterlife of his verse and it's above it, even if someone tried to kill him, they wouldn't be able to do it because the guy is above death itself. Type 5 immortality is more being "above death", if that makes sense.
 
Inanimate objects don't exactly have a concept of death either, but I think I kinda see what you're getting at?

Should type 7 be expanded to encompass things that just aren't alive?
 
The concept of death includes things like being permanently rendered inactive, which most robots qualify under. They lack conventional death but can still be destroyed regularly, requiring total destruction at times. Type 5 is for those that require something like EE to destroy. EE on an average robot is overkill.
 
Would it maybe be worth to have something like "Object Physiology" (or whatever you wanna call it) as a powers and abilities page?

There seem to be multiple special considerations for characters which aren't technically alive/undead, but just objects instead. Since they aren't all that uncommon either, summarizing them like that might be worthwhile.
 
But what stops me from rendering Tiamat incapped by grinding her into dust or something, given she has no regen?

@DT Maybe inorganic physiology?
 
Stars technically 'die' through heat death.

I dont agree, I think this is mostly an issue with semantics.

Really up to interpretation.
 
DontTalkDT said:
Would it maybe be worth to have something like "Object Physiology" (or whatever you wanna call it) as a powers and abilities page?

There seem to be multiple special considerations for characters which aren't technically alive/undead, but just objects instead. Since they aren't all that uncommon either, summarizing them like that might be worthwhile.
Click to expand...
Good idea.
 
Wokistan said:
But what stops me from rendering Tiamat incapped by grinding her into dust or something, given she has no regen?
Click to expand...
She has Type 8 as well. And she should have Type 3, some reason her regen isn't listed but she has at the very least Mid-Low (possibly higher).
 
Yeah but those aren't really tied to the type 5. If some robot had those abilities I don';t think the outcome would be any different.
 
Well, robots can be destroyed which is equivocal to death. In Tiamat's case she was only able to be killed due to King Hassan imposing the concept of death on her. Robots still have mortality even if they aren't actually alive. Unalive in my opinion should be the same type as Undead, which is Type 7.
 
I mean someone can be reduced to atoms and "destroyed" even if they have type 5.

Type 5 is really just glorified type 2 with a resistance to death manip
 
@Ed

Atomizing a Type 5 would just incapacitate it. That's not death. A robot can be killed via literal destruction. Robots usually have something that gives it "life". For example, my phone (not a robot but still works for the discussion) can be killed if I removed the battery. Old phones can die by being dropped in water. You can kill phones even though they aren't alive. Type 5 would be if I removed the battery and the phone remains powered on. If it's resistant to water, if even after I smashed it into numerous pieces it would still be powered on technically.

It's just not the same thing as ordinary bots that clearly can be killed but just through means unconventional to a living creature.
 
Wokistan said:
Type 7 seems to just be for zombies and stuff though.

What would type 5 even be then? What else would be unbound by conventional life and death?
Click to expand...
Characters that don't exist.
 
But yes, Type 5 is basically Type 2 + immunity to death hax.
 
It seems like this sort of "technically unbound by life but missing the point" thing we got going on will end up being solved with Inorganic physiology. Someone can remove from Locke in preparation for the other one, if you want to participate there feel free but I'm gonna close this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LightSoul8
Dreamworks Death Downgrade
Replies
2
Views
400
Thelastmlg
Thelastmlg
DaReaperMan
Hazbin Hotel: The Reckoning of Immortality type 5
2 3 4
Replies
142
Views
7K
Phsccarvalho
Phsccarvalho
Eikichi_Sensei
  • Locked
Immortality Negation Type 4 and 8 for Slime Boy
Replies
31
Views
4K
Tempestdragon6
Tempestdragon6
LuffyRuffy46307
Type 9 Immortality
Replies
8
Views
2K
SheevShezarrine
SheevShezarrine
Pepsimanslover_69
  • Locked
God of war | Kratos's immortality Negation section.
3 4 5
Replies
179
Views
11K
Deagonx
Deagonx
Back
Top