Avatar image for xzone
Posted by xZone (9670 posts) 1 month, 14 days ago

Poll: How do you judge a character’s durability? (19 votes)

If they haven’t survived this type of attack (be it energy/piercing) then they get one shot 58%
If they haven’t survived this type of attack before (be it energy/piercing) they tank it 42%

I’ve always been of the opinion that they are one-shot because they lack sufficient feats, but what do you think? I’ve seen one debater in particular argue against this, so let me know what you think

Avatar image for hyiena
#1 Posted by hyiena (5157 posts) - - Show Bio

You kind of have to see what can hurt them before you can judge their durability well.

Avatar image for geeman2
#2 Posted by geeman2 (1820 posts) - - Show Bio

@hyiena said:

You kind of have to see what can hurt them before you can judge their durability well.

This.

But you also can't judge durability in the ways you provided in the poll, it's simple logic IMO. If one character can tank a nuke, it can be inferred they can take a blunt hit of a similar DC and energy of a similar DC. Piercing is tricky though. Generally in most fiction characters have much weaker piercing than blunt durability.

Avatar image for mister_surreal
#3 Posted by Mister_Surreal (6395 posts) - - Show Bio

@geeman2 said:

@hyiena said:

You kind of have to see what can hurt them before you can judge their durability well.

This.

But you also can't judge durability in the ways you provided in the poll, it's simple logic IMO. If one character can tank a nuke, it can be inferred they can take a blunt hit of a similar DC and energy of a similar DC. Piercing is tricky though. Generally in most fiction characters have much weaker piercing than blunt durability.

While it depends on the character and what they are being attacked with. However, the typical rule of thumb if they have no feats or any information that suggests resistance to those kinds of things, then we have to assume that they are vulnerable to them.

Avatar image for kevd4wg
#4 Posted by Kevd4wg (11825 posts) - - Show Bio

Just ignore Aka

Avatar image for kidolio
#5 Posted by Kidolio (613 posts) - - Show Bio

@geeman2: Piercing was always weird because it was just an object with a small surface area moving at high speeds or enough speeds but my fist if moving at a fast enough speeds become piercing damage so how do people judge that.

Avatar image for stormking1221
#6 Posted by StormKing1221 (1672 posts) - - Show Bio

If a character has generally good durability but no piercing durability feats, I generally assume that their piercing durability should match up with their overall durability.

While I know that goes against the site's “feats first” mentality, I see no reason to subscribe to split durability for all characters until proven otherwise just because a writer for another character irrelevant to the discussion doesn't understand physics.

Avatar image for kidolio
#7 Posted by Kidolio (613 posts) - - Show Bio

@stormking1221: I know right piercing and blunt attacks are the same thing, if a giant brought a sword it would look like blunt damage to us even though it’s piercing damage to him.

Avatar image for pipxeroth
#8 Posted by Pipxeroth (8981 posts) - - Show Bio

If a character has generally good durability but no piercing durability feats, I generally assume that their piercing durability should match up with their overall durability.

While I know that goes against the site's “feats first” mentality, I see no reason to subscribe to split durability for all characters until proven otherwise just because a writer for another character irrelevant to the discussion doesn't understand physics.

+1

Avatar image for mimisalome
#9 Posted by mimisalome (5341 posts) - - Show Bio

Mass and density approximation.

Potential for microstructure damage vs potential to cause macroscopinc turning moment.

differentiating chemical and ionization damage (direct interaction with structural bonding) vs macroscopic EM repulsion (blunt physical action).

Consideration for unconventional mechanism (eg: Magic, Chi, Aura, Soul rip, etc) which should be ideally well define.

Extrapolation consideration based on performance and hyped (for example: I would rate Saitama's durability way much higher than his demonstrated feats because i have never seen him in any case where he seemingly reached a potential ceiling limit).

Avatar image for xzone
#10 Posted by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio

@kevd4wg said:

Just ignore Aka

Yeah, but how did you know..

X

Online
Avatar image for supermanforever
#11 Posted by Supermanforever (7520 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone:

Reasonable way to judge the durability is if X character has tanked some kind of damage.

If a character has never tanked let say a nuke, then it would get one shotted by nuke level attack.

So for me durability itself is limited to the feat shown. Then there is ofc scaling, context etc.

Avatar image for xzone
#12 Posted by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio
Online
Avatar image for drpepperman
#13 Posted by DrPepperMan (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

Depends.

If a character no sells a mountain buster I'm not going to say they'll die to an island buster. But if a person is damaged by a building buster I won't say woth full confidence they'll stay conscious after a city block buster.

Avatar image for mrmonster
#14 Posted by mrmonster (13662 posts) - - Show Bio

If they haven't taken the attack, I assume they'd get one shot until proven otherwise.

Avatar image for xzone
#15 Posted by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio

Depends.

If a character no sells a mountain buster I'm not going to say they'll die to an island buster. But if a person is damaged by a building buster I won't say woth full confidence they'll stay conscious after a city block buster.

Not the question. The reason I asked this in particular was because it was argued Kryptonians tank Thor's lightning until proven it would hurt them, and I disagreed because they have no energy durability feats. Basically, does the absence of durability feats mean they tank an attack or get one shot? I've always believed they get one shot because they have not proven they can resist it

X

Online
Avatar image for drpepperman
#16 Posted by DrPepperMan (6145 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone: in that case, no, if you don't have the durability feats to tank something you can't tank it. I don't have the feats to tank Deadpool's hits, that doesn't mean jack.

Avatar image for kidolio
#17 Edited by Kidolio (613 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone: The person that said the kryptonian will survive has to prove it not you what was his argument because from what has been shown he probably didn’t show the durability of that kryptonian since the lightning Thor hit Superman with its gonna hurt a lot.

Avatar image for mimisalome
#18 Posted by mimisalome (5341 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone said:
@drpepperman said:

Depends.

If a character no sells a mountain buster I'm not going to say they'll die to an island buster. But if a person is damaged by a building buster I won't say woth full confidence they'll stay conscious after a city block buster.

Not the question. The reason I asked this in particular was because it was argued Kryptonians tank Thor's lightning until proven it would hurt them, and I disagreed because they have no energy durability feats. Basically, does the absence of durability feats mean they tank an attack or get one shot? I've always believed they get one shot because they have not proven they can resist it

X

Heat resistance could typically translate to electrical non-conductivity because heat is usually demonstrated as electron excitation while electricity is electron "flow" both are some kind of kinetic phenomena related to electron energy level.

So if a Kryptonian can tank extremely high temperatures (nuclear explosion) it wouldn't be wrong to assume that it can resist high potential electron flow (electricity/lightning).

The only question now is the nature of Thor's lightning itself, since Thor is describe as a mythical being and his power is often associated with mystica; nature or of magical properties

And we know in Superman's case (a kryptonian) that attack of magical natural are very potent and effective.

So that mechanics could play in the consideration.

Avatar image for seran_seran
#19 Edited by seran_seran (11 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for ourmanuel
#20 Edited by ourmanuel (8400 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone: ahh the old “Kryptonians would be fodderised by thor’s 🌩”

A better way would be this:

What’s the most durable thing his lightning has busted(not his hammer, just his lightning)?

What’s the durability for the Kryptonian?

Is thor’s Lightning consistently that powerful?

Once all these questions are answered, the decision can be made. It’s not fair to just say “well Kryptonians have no energy durability so they get oneshotted by any energy attack”

That’s how I see it.

Online
Avatar image for xzone
#21 Posted by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio

@ourmanuel: Personally, id have to disagree, and so would many others, but ty for the input

X

Online
Avatar image for darkpsychiclord_prime
#22 Posted by DarkPsychicLord_Prime (3801 posts) - - Show Bio

Piercing durability is much more reacted to blunt force durability than energy durability, as it works the same way, only on a much smaller scale with less surface.

If a character can tank a blow that completely destroys a building, i wouldn't assume he can survive a heat/electricity attack (lightning ie) that can do the same, as they are different categories of durability.

Avatar image for thetruebarryallen
#23 Posted by TheTrueBarryAllen (12453 posts) - - Show Bio

I try to avoid assuming a character is 'one shot' by something unless there's absolutely no proof (meaning no feats of a similar caliber) to back up why they'd survive.

Avatar image for xzone
#24 Edited by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio

@thetruebarryallen: So you agree with me, right? If someone had absolutely no energy durability feats, they should be one shot by lightning or heat vision, yeah?

X

Online
Avatar image for thetruebarryallen
#25 Edited by TheTrueBarryAllen (12453 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone said:

@thetruebarryallen: So you agree with me, right? If someone had absolutely no energy durability feats, they should be one shot by lightning or heat vision, yeah?

X

It's kind of a situation on situation basis and I don't really know if I'd want to apply such a general rule to all characters, because I'm sure with enough digging a loophole could be found.

But typically if a character hasn't resisted anything similar or of the same caliber then I don't see why they'd be able to survive certain attacks.

EDIT: Also, what ourmanuel said. If the attack hasn't proven it can one-shot or hasn't proven it can damage a target of that tier, then that's a moot point. Some characters are intended to be incredibly powerful but may not have all of the specific showings, so a god-like character may not have any energy resistance showings but if they were intended to be resistant to energy then you need to take that into account. It's a thin line and there's no right or wrong answer, it depends on the characters, the people debating, and how they present their evidence.

Avatar image for xzone
#26 Edited by xZone (9670 posts) - - Show Bio

@thetruebarryallen: I’ll explain the scenario I made this poll in mind of. MCU Thor uses lightning. I was debating someone who claimed that due to WODC Kryptonians (faora and Nam) not having energy durability feats they tank the lightning. I believe that is flawed and that in reality they would be one shot due to lack of feats

X

Online
Avatar image for arthurcurry89
#27 Posted by ArthurCurry89 (1665 posts) - - Show Bio

@xzone: If u judge character after waiting when he gets one shoted so by this logic CW Arrow is city lvl in durability because he got shoted with city busting mystic blast of Horus staff and Ollie was resisting it through 2 seconds while being closest to this explosion.

Tanking sth is more impressive.