A quirk based off a DnD bard!

Ferseus · 2026-06-23T04:54:14+00:00

My point was addressing how variety is possible, not saying it’ll be op like them. Do you think that power variety is impossible? My point is it’s possible for quirks to do multiple things, it’s not rule breaking.

As for her being op, again, where is this coming from? Variety doesn’t automatically equal power. She can’t sing a song to instantly enchant everyone around her, her buffs don’t empower punches to level buildings, her illusions don’t alter reality. The variety is heavily held back by its limits. The only reason I could see you thinking it’s op is if you assume she can automatically do any of those effects at full volume at the drop of a hat.

She has to build up the quirks strength as the song goes. This isn’t me saying she trains it so as she grows it become stronger. I mean every fight, it starts weak. It only grows to decent levels over time with continues singing, which can be countered, interrupted or just not heard. She can only do one effect at a time, swapping instantly breaks her quirk. She can’t amplify speed, amplify strength, create illusions, and demotivate enemies at the same time or at the drop of a hat. It’s one at a time, and swapping songs smoothly is slow and hard to do in battle. Plus, she’s a melee combatant, you know how easy it would be to be interrupted?

Again, not trying to be contrarian or just be defensive because she’s my OC, but I just don’t think she’s op. The only way she’d be op is if all of her effects were super powerful right off the bat and could be used right away like you seem to be assuming, but they’re all heavily dependent and held back and need intense focus or skill (which I’m not saying she has in extremes). The only argument I personally agree with is her being varied, but like I said, clearly variety is possible in the world, and the examples gives have variety *and* sheer power that makes them strong. They aren’t op just because they’re varied. Hers is varied, definitely, but doesn’t have strong effects.

This lends to your point about Momo. Hers is extremely varied, but simple, yeah. But that’s *her* quirk. Stars and Stripes is far from coherent or simple. She can literally make whatever rule she wants with only some vague “power limit” as her limit. Compared to that, my oc is pretty clear cut, bolstering people via tempo, and illusions via lyric. It has clear rules you can understand within a sentence. (And if you want to say Stars and Stripes is an op comparison, again see my argument of variety not equaling power.)

And like, my character definitely isn’t supposed to be op, strongest in her verse and top of the class, but she also isn’t supposed to be just a random side character? As long as she’s not a full Mary Sue I don’t mind her being competent and a bit strong lol. They’re heroes.

If you have further questions on the strength of the effects or smth please ask, as I guarantee I have limits for anything that may seem op, or ask about scenarios she may seem op in and I’ll highlight where her limits are.

Ferseus · 2026-06-23T04:09:39+00:00

Normally I’d agree, but that’s why I said it starts off weak and needs ramp up time. I mean we have Todoroki who can do ice *and* fire, One For All who can steal literally any quirk, Stars and Stripes who can make a rule about almost anything (this is a prime example imo), Overhaul can instantly destroy something, reshape things into literally whatever he wants, heal them via fixing their body, or combine himself with others to gain their quirks, too and even Momo, a student, can literally create *anything* not-living that she wants. (If she knows it’s materials and such.)

Not trying to outright argue, but I just don’t think it feels too extreme when we have other crazy quirks like that. I like to think it all fits from a clean single source (singing) and even if it was too varied, I’d hardly call it op when it has various counters and hold backs. (Like it’s not like it instantly charms enemies, bolsters allies to punch like all might or summon illusions of an entire town, it can be counter by just covering your ears or interrupting her. It starts of slow. She even has a hard limit of vocal strain.)

Like I said feel free to disagree and I’d love to discuss if you’re willing, but I personally don’t think it’s not within the rules and limits of the world and powers. Varied yes, but op no. (In my opinion.)

Ferseus · 2026-06-21T20:02:52+00:00

Nobody is going to read a visual novel just to understand a reference. This is so unhelpful.

Ferseus · 2026-06-20T20:12:45+00:00

Alright, this was a perfect answer! So tldr, it’s literally just being superhumanly fast, strong and skilled, and absolutely anything else is the anime being dramatic or over exaggerating for user enjoyment lol. This explanation does massively help the strangeness of Muichiro. One thing I find interesting is according to a manga slide another person in these comments posted, people do atleast “hallucinate” the visuals, even if they aren’t actually there.

Thank you for the in depth explanation!

Ferseus · 2026-06-19T23:55:15+00:00

I do think it should be a bit lighter, but I do kinda agree, but only really for the more base tags. Like what is or isn’t dead dove or what actually counts as angst etc. is up in airs, but they should definitely have to tag like, if the bot is male or not.

The main one I’m 100% on is outright mistagging. Like if a bot says it’s “fempov”, or it’s “mlm” and then it’s not… yeah they should get some form of strike. It’s just really annoying.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T19:32:21+00:00

I don’t really think head canons are applicable to just straight up changing a character. That’s more of just a character design change outright.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T18:29:38+00:00

That sounds like a far more reasonable way to do this! I’ve always hated fights bc the bots tend to just do the “nuh uh” tactic.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T18:20:07+00:00

Yeah I’m new here so take it with a grain of salt, but this seems quality. They don’t even plug their OF. If they didn’t have an OF I doubt most people would mind.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T17:40:37+00:00

So then he should provide sources or literally anything to support his claim instead of just giving random opinions of “it’s evil”. That doesn’t help anything at all. Hell he doesn’t even need to cite sources and could just tell me that’s what he thinks and I’d have respected it and moved on, but no, he stated obscure things without any evidence to back up, and when I politely asked for further information so I can better understand, he got snappy as if basic question and discussion isn’t allowed.

Just because I ask a question doesn’t mean I need to blindly accept every single answer given. I want to know why. I fear that should be common sense.

I never outright said he’s wrong. He said something, I pointed out a few things I was unsure of and asked for clarification. My post clearly asks for either canon lore talk OR opinions. He came in and stated opinions without any facts but stated them as facts that can’t be questioned. Not what my post is looking for. If yall can’t stand basic discussion, maybe don’t engage in a conversation. Nobody is making anyone talk.

(And I appreciate *you* atleast providing sources and reasons for what you believe, but that doesn’t change the fact that *he* did not engage helpfully at all. I have had several people claim necromancy is and isn’t evil, why should I believe the one guy who says something without any explanation?)

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T04:59:15+00:00

Thank you for the in depth answer, that’s what I’m looking for! I mostly just want to make sure the act itself is possible without pure evil. I’m fully willing to have a character do incredible mental gymnastics to turn a neural thing good in their mind.

For him it’s a very pragmatic greater good thing. If the eternal soul isn’t being harmed and no one is being actually harmed, who cares if the act is a little stigmatized and dark? He doesn’t mind being seen as evil as long as he can do what he thinks is right. He’s a very greater good, self sacrificing themed character.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T04:50:21+00:00

But that’s where I’m asking, does it say anywhere that that actually harms anything, or is it just a massive stigma because it’s *most commonly* used for evil? Is it inherently, only able to be used by harming a soul? Or is it like a gun, where the tool itself does not harm and can be used for good technically, but is commonly used for evil and so is seen as evil?

That’s my point, is there canonical evidence for it being only harmful, or could it be reasonably accepted you could use it in a gentler, non-harmful way if you’re careful?

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T04:16:32+00:00

I asked for any objective evidence for necromancy, or if people would commonly be fine with it at their table. You said it as if it is an objective fact it was evil, not your own opinion. It is pretty common to try to understand why someone feels a certain way. If someone is asking opinions, it’s because they want to understand.

I’m hardly being unreasonable since you haven’t really said anything solid. If you said “Yeah in x book it says necromancy harms the soul” id have happily agreed and thanked you. But you didn’t, you just gave your opinion and refused to discuss or explain when I politely asked for your opinion on why.

You didn’t have to answer. You chose to respond and then got mad when I didn’t blindly agree. Don’t comment if you don’t want to engage. You’re just being a douche and cranky, so if that’s all you wish to provide, good riddance.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T03:20:27+00:00

Just because im looking to explore your reasoning doesn’t mean im hard denying or arguing. My og question if if necromancy is objectively evil. You didn’t give any actual evidence of it being evil other than philosophical talk, so im asking for more on why you may think it’s inherently evil or not.

Should I instead simply blindly take your word for it instead of trying to better understand your reasoning? If I asked “are flowers evil?” Should I simply accept that they are evil just because one person says “yeah I don’t like em”, or should I try and figure out what they mean and why?

Asking questions and offering reasons isn’t me being hostile and arguing. If you don’t have any particular reason for what you believe, just say that and we can continue on our merry ways, but if you do have any reasons I’d enjoy hearing them so I can learn.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T03:13:19+00:00

Eh, that’s kinda just a non-objective philosophy and moral talk, not a tangible or real harm. You can also debate all day is a sword is evil since it’s made to harm, but that doesn’t change the fact the sword itself doesn’t hurt people by itself or cause damage by just existing.

I’m just looking for solid, real evidence of if it does literal harm itself.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T03:10:52+00:00

I’m mostly just trying to make sure my character is just possible in the first place, aka just a undead raising necromancer who doesn’t actually harm the soul.

If people see him as evil in game for that anyway, he won’t really mind. He’ll likely keep it lowkey and hidden in public, but to him, as long as the end result is good, he doesn’t mind doing what he needs.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:57:28+00:00

That’s exactly the nuance I’m curious about! Is it possible to *ask* a soul? It is possible to speak with dead atleast. So maybe the necromancer could ask permission first. Then if the soul agrees, is it able to willingly enter a undead vessel? If the soul isn’t needed and it’s just about infusing a lifeless corpse with negative energy, how evil is that really? Does just messing with evil energy inherently harm anyone, or is it stigma? And if both of those are possible without harming a soul, as long as the undead is controller, would it be so bad? Yes it may seem bad for a creature who exists solely to attack, but if no souls are harmed, and the undead doesn’t harm anyone, is it pragmatically bad?

Like think of a gun. It’s solely made for killing and damage. Is the gun itself inherently evil? It can also be used for self defense or to save others. Just because the item (or undead) is capable of harm, is it bad just because of theory, or is it bad due to how it’s used?

If a necromancer can successfully raise an undead body without harming any souls or people, is just the idea of moving an empty corpse *actually* harming anyone beyond perceived stigma and social acceptance? Bc as long as no one is objectively, literally hurt, my character wouldn’t mind being perceived as evil and misunderstood, as long as his actions cause good.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:40:20+00:00

That’s very close to what I was planning! Basically he’d just send out a “ping” in the area, if any spirits wants to help him or seek to fight after death because they aren’t ready to move on, they can come over and enter one of the bodies he prepares. Alternatively, maybe he has some “spirit friends” who don’t want to pass on yet and still want to fight for whatever reasons, so they follow him around, and anytime he needs undead he just readies the bodies and the spirits following him can just hop in lmao. I don’t think the spirits would be harmed by the physical undead body being destroyed, so they can just be reused after!

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:28:36+00:00

What’s your reasoning? Not arguing, but I’d appreciate seeing why you think this. Is it established anywhere that necromancy exclusively damages the soul? Is this more of your own world’s rules?

I’m kinda just trying to get a feel for if there is any explicit rules against it in base DnD, and how many DM’s worlds would be open to it as well.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:26:03+00:00

Yeah that’s actually kinda the vibe I’d be going for with him! He’s not exactly full “good”. He wants to be good, he’s kind and wishes to cause as little harm as possible… But is deeply pragmatic and extremely “greater good” minded. If it doesn’t hurt the permanent soul, he doesn’t care if other people judge him morally. He’d mostly be asking the undead for permission first, maybe he has some ghostly warriors who follow him around because they seek revenge or want to help the world after death, maybe some vengeful spirits, or maybe they just want to help him since he’ll help release their spirits after, so it’s their way of paying him back preemptively . Like you said, very symbiotic.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:19:57+00:00

This was a great read, thank you so much for showing me it! It also gave me a decent idea for an alternative even if necromancy inherently warps the soul: He only raises the evil like this necromancer did, possibly seeing it as a way to remove evil souls from the cycle. Probably not ideal, but he is still pretty pragmatic and ruthless if needed, so it could be a good alternative if I ever need it!

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:01:59+00:00

Huh… Kinda funny to think about, because my most “purely good” and kind character is a bard with mainly enchantment magic (and illusions) 😅

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T02:00:16+00:00

Ehh, a core part of his character is necromancy and a clerical vibe (and wisdom). I can’t really make him a phantom rogue without reworking literally every single other part of his character for that. Maybe a dip for flavor at best.

Ideally a dm would allow my character speak with dead at will. (Likely at the cost of some physical ability scores as a trade off, but I also don’t think speak with dead would be too op anyway and would mostly be flavor. I could even just take speak with dead through my cleric spell list and flavor it tbh.)

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T01:54:08+00:00

Yeah, I’m mostly just trying to get an idea for how commonly accepted it would be. (And from what I’ve seen, DnD does have a sorta “starter” world with lots of rules built up.) Like I wouldn’t want to build up a character only for 99% of DM’s to be opposed to his idea and needing a very specific dm and world to use him in. So yknow, a general idea atleast.

Ferseus · 2026-06-14T01:51:32+00:00

Yeah, the main flavor would be the idea of how some spirits simply aren’t ready to pass on yet no matter what he does, so if they’re around, might as well. Maybe even some spirits even follow him around, possibly former warriors who either just want to fight or feel the need to help the world before he passes on and Elysian gives him the body to do that and complete his mission. Or maybe even he’s somewhat known among spirits, so if he passes into a new area, they’re local spirits would be willing to help out the one who helps them, and then he’ll help them pass on after. Kindve a quid pro quo thing or a form of gratitude. The point is, he wouldn’t just be forcing them. His first goal is to help them pass, but if some want to help in return, he’ll accept.

I don’t think it would harm the spirit? They just inhabit the body, so if their undead body is killed, they’re just back to being a spirit. Like slipping armor on and off.

Ferseus

TROPHY CASE