Addition to pralaya profile.

[Teezar]

You can be non existent without having the power of void manipulation.

Haven't seen such.

She never displayed anything akin to void manipulation in all of her appearances.

True but I will re-read this comics again.

 

[Ogbunabali]

Nonexistent Physiology

Nonexistent Physiology refers to the ability to lack certain aspects of one's existence, to paradoxically 'exist,' yet lack certain identifiable traits of existence or exist outside of a particular scope of 'existence.' While true nonexistence in the philosophical sense is impossible to prove...

vsbattles.fandom.com

This is wiki explaination of NEP which I think she qualifies for.

She doesn't. As I said before, she's just said to be non existence. You need more context than that. Primarily the first sentence of type 2, "The lack of absolutely everything to a state of nonexistence at a conceptual level". Which is never displayed/stated.

Haven't seen such.

Here's a couple.

Monika

Monika may refer to: The character from Doki Doki Literature Club! The character from Mad Father The character from Fujitakaverse

vsbattles.fandom.com

Mundus (Devil May Cry)

Mundus (Lat: "world" or "universe") is the primary antagonist of the first Devil May Cry. According to legend, Mundus was a demon prince who consumed the fruit of the sacred tree Qliphoth in ancient times, gained divine powers and killed the god of demonkind, becoming the ruler of the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[ByAsura]

I'm with Ogbunabali here. Existing as or converting something to nothingness is very different from outright controlling it.

We'd need an actual demonstration, which I'll also try to find in JLD.

 

[Teezar]

The lack of absolutely everything to a state of nonexistence at a conceptual level".

It has to be stated on a conceptual level? No problem then.

 

[ByAsura]

Looking at the comic, there's a ton of evidence for Void Manipulation. I'll post it later.

 

[ByAsura]

The "Gremlins" Pralaya creates, which are mere extensions of her own mind, are made of the same nothingness as her projections (it is explicitly stated to be non-existence and a void), and return to non-existence once destroyed.

As for some of the arguments in this thread, they're highly out of context. The cosmos returned because Zatanna infected Pralaya with some of the World Tree's seeds (WT is strongly implied to embody creation in a way comparable to how Pralaya embodies nothingness) contained in Swamp Thing. It was returned to the exact moment before Pralaya consumed creation. Swamp Thing himself only survived because there was some greenery left in the House of Mystery.

She is outright stated to be the embodiment of void and non-existence, sharing the same nature as the non-existent void from which all creation spawned, but I'm not sure if that's enough proof for conceptual existence.

 

[Teezar]

You did it better than me boss,I appreciate your work. As for the conceptual part I still see pralaya as a conceptual being.

 

[Ogbunabali]

A lot of stretches being made here.

which are mere extensions of her own mind

Which doesn't mean much. Being extensions of her mind doesn't amount to much.

are made of the same nothingness

They're made of the "darkness" sure. But they don't act like anything more than just minions, kind of empty statements without feats.

her projections (it is explicitly stated to be non-existence and a void)

Again, they being projections is irrelevant.

return to non-existence once destroyed.

They return to the the nothingness from where Pralaya is, sure. But that doesn't have to make them being non existent themselves. Especially since they don't have any feats for that.

As Pralaya herself says, she's just a projection in the same vein the gremlins are. She's explicitly not her true form, there's nothing implying the projections themselves are non existent, just that they come from a non existent place. That's an extremely important distinction there.

 

[ByAsura]

It means she creates and controls them.

I don't get this logic. Why would we need feats if they're made of nothingness like her? Also, Swamp Thing doesn't just say darkness, he says it's a substance beyond eternity beyond concepts like life, good and evil, which harkens back to the explanation of her void.

Again, they're made of nothing. She controls and manipulates them.

That's because you've removed the context of my statements. Her projection form is also void/nothingness, and her minions are the same.

 

[Ogbunabali]

It means she creates and controls them.

Sure, but that is only relevant if they are non existent.

I don't get this logic. Why would we need feats if they're made of nothingness like her.

Because statements without feats and with anti feats are meaningless?

Again, they're made of nothing. She controls and manipulates them.

Never explicitly stated. The closest thing is that Swamp Thing mentions they're made from the same substance of the "darkness". Which would've been fine if they didn't act like they were normal physical minions, and that it could also just be that he was referring to the fact that they come from beyond. That doesn't have to make the projections themselves non existent.

That's because you've removed the context of my statements. Her projection form is void/nothingness, and her minions are the same.

I explicitly didn't. Not only did I post scans myself, I literally quoted everything I was replying to. This is highly disingenuous of you.

It all boils down to. There's no feats to imply they are non existent, in fact there are anti feats instead seeing as they act like normal physical minions. There is only one statement, that doesn't even come from Pralaya herself, that doesn't even have to mean they are even taken at face value. Pralaya mentions also the projection isn't the real deal, she did say her true form would break their minds, but it does put a wrench into the projections being the direct void themselves regardless.

 

[ByAsura]

Never explicitly stated. The closest thing is that Swamp Thing mentions they're made from the same substance of the "darkness". Which would've been fine if they didn't act like they were normal physical minions, and that it could also just be that he was referring to the fact that they come from beyond. That doesn't have to make the projections themselves non existent.

I explicitly didn't. Not only did I post scans myself, I literally quoted everything I was replying to. This is highly disingenuous of you.

In real life, darkness is not even a physical thing, nor is non-existence. In fact, to our knowledge, there's no evidence of a literal being who is actually made of nothing, or even an embodiment of death. This is fiction where that kind of stuff not only exists, but is extremely commonplace.

I said you removed the context of my statements, unintentionally or not. Here's, again, what I said.

her projections (it is explicitly stated to be non-existence and a void)

are made of the same nothingness

You just waved it off as "Again, they being projections is irrelevant." The point was that even the projection was a void of nothingness, but you addressed each point out of context as if they didn't relate to each other.

 

[Teezar]

Seems am not up to you guys level of intelligence....I will just have to spectate and learn.

 

[ByAsura]

I just looked at her profile and she already has Void Manipulation, it's just linked as "Nothingness/Non-Existence Manipulation". We can probably close this thread.

 

[Ogbunabali]

In real life, darkness is not even a physical thing, nor is non-existence. In fact, to our knowledge, there's no evidence of a literal being who is actually made of nothing, or even an embodiment of death. This is fiction where that kind of stuff not only exists, but is extremely commonplace.

I agree. But if fiction breaks the rules of physics, it breaks the rules of physics. If they make a darkness being a physical entity, it's a physical entity.

It was showcased multiple times that the minions have physical properties and are not non existent themselves. If fictions breaks the rules in real life we confront to it, not the other way around.

I said you removed the context of my statements, unintentionally or not. Here's, again, what I said.

And I addressed those.

First scan Pralaya herself literally states that her projection isn't the true form. It doesn't state a single time that the projection is non existent, quite the opposite.

Second scan she says that Swamp Thing is "consigned" to non existence. Which is consistent with the other statement just a page or two before, where she was going to explicitly "drag" them to the void, aka it's more akin to BFR than void manip or something.

Third scan is what I already said that it's the statement that holds water for this.

 

[ByAsura]

• I agree. But if fiction breaks the rules of physics, it breaks the rules of physics. If they make a darkness being a physical entity, it's a physical entity.
• It was showcased multiple times that the minions have physical properties and are not non existent themselves. If fictions breaks the rules in real life we confront to it, not the other way around.

That's just so completely wrong. Nothingness does not actually have to be literal empty space in fiction. Many forms of fiction and even mythology have deities that were non-existent voids and can fight. The Empty from Supernatural is a very good example of this.

No we don't, or at least not in every single case. Fiction has established rules. Plot holes, for example, are based on the universe's rules, not our own. Who says that non-existence cannot be turned into something in fiction?

• And I addressed those.
• First scan Pralaya herself literally states that her projection isn't the true form. It doesn't state a single time that the projection is non existent, quite the opposite.
• Second scan she says that Swamp Thing is "consigned" to non existence. Which is consistent with the other statement just a page or two before, where she was going to explicitly "drag" them to the void, aka it's more akin to BFR than void manip or something.
• Third scan is what I already said that it's the statement that holds water for this.

And you've still addressed them quite poorly.

The first scan was just to prove that her minions are made of the same stuff. Being a projection has nothing to do with this.

That's because you cut out the first half of the sentence. What she says is "then send the idiot swamp creature into the void of my being. All you've done is consigned the creature to non-existence!" She is literally saying that by placing Swamp Thing in her body, he is in non-existence.

Your drag scan is meaningless because the House of Mystery didn't disappear like all universes around it explicitly had. They were already in the infinite void, just not a part of it. She is effectively saying that they, too, will become nothing, or she will literally drag them.

The third scan does nothing to support your point, at all. Granted it is not proof, but I only ever portrayed it as supporting evidence. Also, Swamp Thing doesn't even say they're made of darkness, he says it's "like" they're made of a darkness deeper than eternity. Again, this harkens back to the Sea of Brahma.

But, there's no point in continuing. Pralaya already has void manipulation.

I just looked at her profile and she already has Void Manipulation, it's just linked as "Nothingness/Non-Existence Manipulation". We can probably close this thread.

 

[Ogbunabali]

That's just so completely wrong. Nothingness does not actually have to be literal empty space in fiction. Many forms of fiction and even mythology have deities that were non-existent voids and can fight. The Empty from Supernatural is a very good example of this.

Don't know the Empty.

But this is an insane backwards logic. Something it can be called nothingness, but if it doesn't fit our definition of it, it doesn't matter what it's called wont't be non existent by our standards.

This is like saying "this verse said it's outerversal make them tier 0".... just no.

No we don't, or at least not in every single case. Fiction has established rules. Plot holes, for example, are based on the universe's rules, not our own. Who says that non-existence cannot be turned into something in fiction?

And the rules established here is that they are not acting in the way that non existence is required to act in order to fit our standards for whether it qualifies for it.

The first scan was just to prove that her minions are made of the same stuff. Being a projection has nothing to do with this.

Being a projection has very much something to do with it. A projection isn't the real thing, it's in the word itself. And you're conveniently ignoring that Pralaya herself states that it's not the true self.

That's because you cut out the first half of the sentence. What she says is "then send the idiot swamp creature into the void of my being. All you've done is consigned the creature to non-existence!" She is literally saying that by placing Swamp Thing in her body, he is in non-existence.

Or her true form, which is literally supported by the fact that she was going to drag them back into it instead.

Your drag scan is meaningless because the House of Mystery had yet to disappear like all of creation around it explicitly had. She is effectively saying that they, too, will become nothing.

It very much isn't meaningless, because it completely debunks this notion that she is non existent or that she can erase by command. Otherwise she wouldn't have to resort to dragging it into her void, if she herself was one.

And you've still addressed them quite poorly.

Right back at you I guess?

But, there's no point in continuing. Pralaya already has void manipulation.

Doesn't matter. I'm contesting it right now.

A scanless low effort profile having it is irrelevant.

 

[ByAsura]

Don't know the Empty.

It's the void of non-existence in Supernatural that existed for all of eternity before anyone. It can also manifest non-existence with physical properties and has some kind of presence.

But this is an insane backwards logic. Something it can be called nothingness, but if it doesn't fit our definition of it, it doesn't matter what it's called wont't be non existent by our standards.

This is like saying "this verse said it's outerversal make them tier 0".... just no.

And the rules established here is that they are not acting in the way that non existence is required to act in order to fit our standards for whether it qualifies for it.

You're right here, I badly misspoke. I didn't mean to say that emptiness/non-existence don't have to be non-physical, what I meant to say is that the ability for characters to give shape and form to it should be considered. We don't refuse to give the Crystal Gems light manipulation or Jackie Estacado darkness manipulation just because they can add weight and physical presence to light/a lack thereof.

Also, in-universe logic is just as important as the standards we can apply to them. Literal voids in DC and Marvel have both been shown taking physical roles, with Death and Oblivion both manipulating them. Yet they're still manipulating/are forms of non-existence.

Being a projection has very much something to do with it. A projection isn't the real thing, it's in the word itself. And you're conveniently ignoring that Pralaya herself states that it's not the true self.

I ignored nothing, and it's weird that you're claiming I did because I was the one who brought up the fact that her form in JLD was a projection in the first place.

I said that it's not relevant to the argument that I'm trying to make. For the billionth time, the point is that her minions are made of the same substance as her projection, which was also stated to be non-existent. It's fine if you want to actually contest her avatar being non-existent, but quit tacking on this part about being a projection when it's irrelevant to the argument.

The statement itself does not prove or disprove that she isn't non-existent on its own without context, it just proves that it's not her main body.

Or her true form, which is literally supported by the fact that she was going to drag them back into it instead.

It very much isn't meaningless, because it completely debunks this notion that she is non existent or that she can erase by command. Otherwise she wouldn't have to resort to dragging it into her void, if she herself was one.

First of all, she couldn't erase them because the House was protected. The fact that she erased all of existence after gaining a foothold also goes to disprove your point. Second, they were already in the Brahma Sleep, aka the non-existent void she's talking about. She then goes onto state that she'll drag them into the depths of the void. So, once again, she's not actually taking them to the void, she's actually talking about erasing them from existence or physically dragging them.

Right back at you I guess?

And you still continue to do a hilariously bad job.

Doesn't matter. I'm contesting it right now.

A scanless low effort profile having it is irrelevant.

Whatever, I'm done arguing.

 

[Fastestthingalive50]

I agree with this. (I'm not very familiar with the series though)

 

[Ogbunabali]

Also, in-universe logic is just as important as the standards we can apply to them. Literal voids in DC and Marvel have both been shown taking physical roles, with Death and Oblivion both manipulating them. Yet they're still manipulating/are forms of non-existence.

Yes, but again, this is only relevant if they are non existent in the first place, not if they're not.

I ignored nothing, and it's weird that you're claiming I did because I was the one who brought up the fact that her form in JLD was a projection in the first place.

Not only is it irrelevant who brought it up "first", that's not a point in your favour. If we go by this route, I posted that scan first so I win? Is that how it works? What's the point of this?

I said that it's not relevant to the argument that I'm trying to make. For the billionth time, the point is that her minions are made of the same substance as her projection, which was also stated to be non-existent. It's fine if you want to actually contest her avatar being non-existent, but quit tacking on this part about being a projection when it's irrelevant to the argument.

The projection is literally never stated it's non existent. The closest thing to that is the Swamp Thing statement, which I acknowledged. But it doesn't even say they're non existent, just that "it's like" they're formed from a darkness. It's not even a direct statement from an omniscient source.

Let alone all the anti feats you keep ignoring.

First of all, she couldn't erase them because the House was protected

For someone that's trying to call "out of context" so quick, you sure seem to keep doing it yourself.

She was literally dragging them before they protected the house......

The fact that she erased all of existence after gaining a foothold also goes to disprove your point.

She didn't?

Second, they were already in the Brahma Sleep, aka the non-existent void she's talking about.

Yes, BFR, as I said. You're just proving my point.

She then goes onto state that she'll drag them into the depths of the void.

You continue to prove it's BFR again. You're just debunking yourself now.

And you still continue to do a hilariously bad job.

Petty snide remarks from a sysop is seriously unsightly.

 

[ByAsura]

I've decided to respond again because you really took me out of context here.

Yes, but again, this is only relevant if they are non existent in the first place, not if they're not.

And lo and behold that's what I'm trying to prove.

Not only is it irrelevant who brought it up "first", that's not a point in your favour. If we go by this route, I posted that scan first so I win? Is that how it works? What's the point of this?

You said I ignored that fact. I'm saying I didn't. I'm not going by the logic of who's first, I'm saying I didn't do something you're claiming I did.

The projection is literally never stated it's non existent. The closest thing to that is the Swamp Thing statement, which I acknowledged. But it doesn't even say they're non existent, just that "it's like" they're formed from a darkness. It's not even a direct statement from an omniscient source.

Again, that isn't the actual point.

Let alone all the anti feats you keep ignoring.

I'm not ignoring them, I'm addressing them. A being of non-existence being physical in a fictional work is not an anti-feat, there are tons of those.

For someone that's trying to call "out of context" so quick, you sure seem to keep doing it yourself.

She was literally dragging them before they protected the house......

And they repelled her before she could do any real damage. The House itself is an enormously powerful mystical stronghold, which the World Tree itself was using as a failsafe, so it makes perfect sense that she doesn't erase it instantly.

She didn't?

She did. Albeit the universe was severely damaged.

Yes, BFR, as I said. You're just proving my point.

You continue to prove it's BFR again. You're just debunking yourself now.

What? I literally showed you that they were already inside the void of non-existence, and your only comment is that I'm debunking myself with my own scans.

No, the fact is that you're only giving half the necessary scans and context available.

Petty snide remarks from a sysop is seriously unsightly.

Honestly, the only reason I saw this response is because I was going to remove that. Sheerly due to the BFR comment, I think it's justified.

Edit: Yeah. I'm being extremely petty. Sorry, I just have a headache, as bad of an excuse as that is.

Now I truly am done because I want to focus on this Gunbuster RT.

 

[Teezar]

I agree with this. (I'm not very familiar with the series though)

Thank you.

 

[Antvasima]

I also think that NEP and VM seem justified here. She is supposed to be DC's version of Oblivion, and both of them are J.M. DeMatteis creations if I remember correctly.

 

[Ogbunabali]

You said I ignored that fact. I'm saying I didn't. I'm not going by the logic of who's first, I'm saying I didn't do something you're claiming I did.

I didn't say you ignored the fact it's a projection. I said you ignored the part where she said it wasn't the real thing. She being a projection, just because it has a non existent source, does not equal that the projection is non existent itself. Especially when the source itself says it.

Again, that isn't the actual point.

If it isn't the point, than this argument has no leg to stand on.

I'm not ignoring them, I'm addressing them. A being of non-existence being physical in a fictional work is not an anti-feat, there are tons of those.

It very much is an anti-feat. It's the literal definition of what an anti feat is. And no, you didn't address them. You only mentioned them one time with the whole "it's called nothingness so it is nothingness" argument, and I really don't wanna go through why that is a terrible argument again.

1: Material Nonexistence: The lack of any conventional existence. Such a character will exist as something beyond the normal scope of the physical and metaphysical worlds, instead existing as an idea or other unconventional state. Such entities can be conceptualized by individuals, but do not exist in a physical or normal metaphysical form, such as a soul. In terms of binary, this would be a 0, where existence is 1 and nonexistence is 0.

Them being normal physical minions is a huge anti feat, especially since there isn't a single direct statement that they are non existent in the first place.

And they repelled her before she could do any real damage. The House itself is an enormously powerful mystical stronghold, which the World Tree itself was using as a failsafe, so it makes perfect sense that she doesn't erase it instantly.

Doesn't change the fact that she was going to drag it into the void instead of erasing it on the spot, which is the point. She needs to send them to the void, she doesn't use an ability that's void manipulation. This is reiterated multiple times in the comic.

She did. Albeit the universe was severely damaged.

She (the projection) didn't erase them, you said it yourself, she sent them to the void. Even states it so herself

It is the Source from which all things EMERGED -- and to which all things will, MUST, return...

What? I literally showed you that they were already inside the void of non-existence, and your only comment is that I'm debunking myself with my own scans.

No, the fact is that you're only giving half the necessary scans and context available.

Yes, they were in the void of non-existence, that's the void in the Source, that isn't the projection. You literally said all of this yourself.

I also think that NEP and VM seem justified here. She is supposed to be DC's version of Oblivion, and both of them are J.M. DeMatteis creations if I remember correctly.

Nobody is debating NEP. But she literally has no showings of void manipulation at all. The only argument for void manipulation is that her minions are non existent (which they aren't), but if we assume they are for no reason it will also give random characters like Frankenstein powers to erase non existent beings out of nowhere. So if you want to die on this hill, we're going to have to upgrade the cast of Justice League Dark with random powers.

And them sharing the same author is a terrible argument, if a character doesn't have any showings, they don't have any showings. Doesn't matter if they are supposed to be similar characters.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, if she is supposed to be the embodiment of the void, I think that it is extremely heavily implied that she has the ability at least. She likely just avoided using it out of plot convienience, since a nonexisting band of heroes wouldn't work for the story.

 

[Teezar]

Bump

 

[Teezar]

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

@Ogbunabali @ByAsura @Zensum @C2_of_Omegon @Eficiente @Qawsedf234 @SuperAPM @EmperorRorepme @Newendigo @Ehnkr2beboh @Deagonx @Elizio33 @LordTracer @Planck69 @Confluctor

Your input would be appreciated here.

 

[LordTracer]

NEP seems fine, but I’m neutral on Void Manip for now.

 

[Confluctor]

I can understand where others are coming from, but I still say we give her Void manip. I don't see why the very embodiment (or whatever word is more fitting) of Void would not be able to manipulate Void in any way. Its like saying the embodiment of time cannot manipulate time in any form or shape.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Confluctor. My apologies Ogbunabali.

 

[Ogbunabali]

I disagree that we should give powers to someone just because it feels like they should have it even though they haven't actually displayed any of them.

Fact of the matter is, Pralaya appears for 2 chapters in all of DC. Sure it feels intuitive that she should have the power, but we don't actually have a reason to give it to her.

 

[Antvasima]

Normally I would agree, but this is a special case, given that she is actually the embodiment of nonexistence.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Your input would be appreciated here.

NEP type 2 would be the embodiment of the Overvoid wouldn't it? Which she isn't, since the Montior Mind is the Overvoid and not her.

She already has void manipulation.

 

[Teezar]

NEP type 2 would be the embodiment of the Overvoid wouldn't it? Which she isn't, since the Montior Mind is the Overvoid and not her.

She already has void manipulation.

She's actually the embodiment of nothingness in DC.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Yeah, but she's not the embodiment of the Overvoid that is the null that existence is built on.

 

[Teezar]

Does a dc character needs to be the embodiment of the Overvoid to have NEP 2?

 

[Teezar]

Besides
Pralaya's is the embodiment of the darkness itself,the embodiment of The Void that precedes the whole creation and even creator itself and and can use that power to cosume and destroy everything that comes in contact with.

 

[Setsuna_tenma]

there can be multiple NEP 2 in a verse. Just because there is one doesn`t mean others can be NEP 2

 

[Antvasima]

@Agnaa @KLOL506

Do you think that Pralaya should get Nonexistent Physiology type 1 or 2 based on the above discussion?

 

[Xearesay]

I agree with nonexistent physiology type 2.