battle_aura, aura, power tags and I Have the Power pool

battle_aura and aura

EDIT2: modified to reflect an on-going discussion. (alias/implication)

EDIT3: renamed title to include new terms involved.

post #968086
post #998411
post #998106
post #963490
post #961286
post #717050
post #904385
post #849179
post #839291
even post #930276 and post #887377 all tell me it should be an implication instead. Not all aura are battle aura; it's not good to destroy granularity for no reason.

Cleanup will be necessary, of course.

ok, thanks, edited i think implication sounds most reasonable.

however, aura says "The visible expulsion of inner energy. Usually associated with martial arts, the use of superpowers, or perhaps comedically, such as when expressing anger. Commonly seen when powering-up during a fight." and considering that this was aliased to ki as well which refers to energy beams, auras, or Dragon Ball-style power-up scenes. i think these are the very definition of a battle_aura.

not sure if post #968086 falls under def of aura. glowing perhaps? not sure if post #930276 is not eligible for battle aura too since it has no definition yet and a weapon is not a requirement. and she looks like having a killer intent might be good for battle as well.

same for the others. might need a cleaning up. but first, maybe a working definition for both to differentiate the other. and maybe after all is settled i could volunteer for cleaning. thanks.

A battle aura is usually violent, chaotic, and will tend to extend away from the body (most always upward), like a torch or in tendrils of visible power. It's often accompanied by explosive anger.

Fundamentally, I feel battle aura is even separate from killing intent, though I'm having difficulty expressing how to denote the visual difference. Maybe one could say it's smaller, sometimes smooth and more...sinister? Gouki has both, so let's look:
post #911405 Battle Aura
post #586192 Killing Intent
post #550419 Battle Aura (and energy_ball, too?)
post #310486 Killing Intent (He has a lot of that)

...maaaybe not the best example because his is very fiery. Contrast with post #859589 maybe; get too close and you will be summarily disposed of. That sort of thing; might not be possible to make the distinction, but it's a point to talk about, at least.

A battle aura is usually violent, chaotic, and will tend to extend away from the body (most always upward), like a torch or in tendrils of visible power

not sure if the power tag will help our discussion, but i feel the need to mention it just in case since it has no wiki definition yet like battle aura.

if we are going to use that definition as suggested, we need to revise perhaps the aura to make it appear more general and transfer the combative aspects / powering up scenes exclusively into battle aura instead.

general in terms that when somebody is glowing (post #968086); angry (with killing intent?) for comedic purposes (post #963490, post #919561) can be tagged and fit perfectly as aura not something of an accessory of the definition.

truthfully be told, i have nothing against your definition.

however we might want consider too the immediate effect on the surroundings (ground breaks up, flying debris, etc) if present; body part involved (hand, half-only, whole body); how about if the "glowing/radiating" is only a weapon not from the user/caster; the aura color perhaps (killer intent?); the percentage/coverage of 'this' aura in the image (screenful); facial expression (angry, smirking, taunting, shouting, expressionless); presence of an opponent; and some other factors that i missed maybe helpful or not.

regarding akuma, i maybe biased but surely he's not a saintly character, so i will have a hard time judging between battle aura and killer intent.

post #859589, i think falls in glowing. not sure of killer intent though. the glowing appears not to come from the person's whole body but i would guess it's from her tails. the "visible expulsion of inner energy" of aura too appears to apply.

but again, i think aura's "Usually associated with martial arts, the use of superpowers..." needs to move somewhere.

from the posts i think it will help if the shape of an aura is flowing smoothly or wave-like then it's likely an aura. if it's pointed, jagged, violent, and appears nasty it's likely battle aura. then maybe there's still a grey-area that needs ironing out.

and should we make use of power tag too? how much is much power?

The aura wiki is long overdue for a rewrite, mind you. As the one who wrote it, my wording was off, but I never intended for it to imply that aura should only apply to martial arts usage or whatever. It was always intended to be a much more general term, which is something I didn't get across.

not sure if post #968086 falls under def of aura. glowing perhaps?

I say yes. Auras don't have to be all that... let's say, dramatic, for it to be one. Glowing in this case would just be used as an additional descriptor.

My apologies if you're just using him as an example and not actually suggesting a tag., but if intended to reference Akuma, the problem with aura and killing intent is that "killing intent" is enforcing what we know about Akuma and applying that to the image. We have plenty of character and series specific tags, so if we ever wanted we could make a satsui no hadou tag if need be. However, killing intent, satsui no hadou, whatever, is still usually shown as an aura, and should still be tagged as such.

Now it's how to nail down a "killing intent", which is somewhat vague and could apply to everything from those Akuma pictures, to the aforementioned post #859589 to post #310543.

I also bring up post #310543 because someone made a dark aura tag.

Since the old discussion about this, I've thought about what my definition of auras are. I believed battle auras should be violent, jagged... wild, and chaotic, too. However, due to what others think a battle aura may be and since the term is just as vauge, I don't think it really matters that the above applies. If shown in battle or in fighting stance, that should then count, too, even if the aura isn't all that violent.

Finally, I don't believe there's a need to "transfer" or move anything, necessarily. The bottom line is, aura should be an umbrella term, which battle aura, dark aura (if that one is kept), and all future uses of the term should implicate.

i might have started using killer intent but im no way really advocating using it. there was an older evil aura that fell out of use. and i realized killer intent is so subjective as evil aura.

so im in favor of using dark aura for an aura (usually dark in appearance or in the shades of black) emanating from a person, animal, or object (in case it's a weapon). can be also used to express anger, depression, seriousness, or murderous intent.

besides, killer intent might really be hard to gauge if the target is absent in the screen or the user don't have murderous eyes or he/she has an expressionless face.

regarding aura's definition, i propose we use from thefreedictionary.com "a distinctive but intangible quality that seems to surround a person or thing". and add, "usually represented visually by a bright glowing or fiery energy". by this new definition, i guess, it's more general and doesn't appear exclusively for martial arts and fighting.

i support DschingisKhan's battle aura - usually violent, chaotic, and will tend to extend away from the body (most always upward), like a torch or in tendrils of visible power. It's often accompanied by explosive anger. i think this suits well since i assume no body opposes the implication of battle aura -> aura.

but i'm just curious if you're still considering using it as a possible placeholder for pool #3350 - I Have the Power as you suggested in another thread when another user asked for a "well-thought tag for 'radiating very much power of energy'"?

i've greatly considered Daniel's opinion and it seems the posts there share a distinct visual style. it seems the great majority there is engulfed in massive energy or overwhelming power, taking in consideration the user/caster, the energy, and the environment. and i think it's a taggable concept than being subjective. or maybe not?

then, since we are always using power in the battle aura's definition, how about making the former a subset of the latter perhaps? or cleanup the power tag and create a more specialized subset for this distinct battle aura variant?

Since the old discussion about this, I've thought about what my definition of auras are. I believed battle auras should be violent, jagged... wild, and chaotic, too. However, due to what others think a battle aura may be and since the term is just as vauge, I don't think it really matters that the above applies. If shown in battle or in fighting stance, that should then count, too, even if the aura isn't all that violent.

we can always tweak the battle aura. DschingisKhan and i were probably still thinking of pool #3350. but power tag came up, so we can use this instead for the mandatory violence, chaos, and "very much power". but i need others' opinion on this as well.

battle aura could be defined in the basic sense as visual representation of the fighting spirit of the personality involved. then we can add DschingisKhan's suggestion of "usually violent, chaotic..." if post #5755 and post #82417 qualify as battle aura then the first statement is already satisfied (because it's not really too violent).

I don't believe there's a need to "transfer" or move anything, necessarily.

sorry if i was misunderstood. what i mean there of "moving the combative aspects" of the aura definition was moving that clause into something more specific subset since battle aura has no definition yet. but since everyone agrees of battle aura -> aura implication no posts will be moved unless it's required for cleaning.

and yes, aura is the umbrella/parent term. battle aura and dark aura are children. and maybe (if necessary) power or a more appropriate term be a child for battle aura. the children will implicate the parent. thanks.