Marvel cosmology revision (Update and merging J.M. DeMatteis and main one)

[Dreamer23421]

but what i don't agree with Nexus scaling above Hoi or Toaa which does not make any sense

 

[Xearesay]

This applies for both Marvel and DC.
Assuming something without strong, consistent and clear evidence, especially with levels.

I didn’t make an assumption, and I have evidence for everything I’ve said.

@Xearesay

I understand it’s a marvel thread, but the person I replied to specifically tried to use DC as an example of Dematteis not caring to keep the versus he works within cosmologically consistent even though DC is not an example of that. So in this context, there’s no real way to address his point about Marvel without addressing DC. If that’s still going off topic, then he should have been called out before me since he brought up DC first.

 

[KaramcaS]

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

I understand it’s a marvel thread, but the person I replied to specifically tried to use DC as an example of Dematteis not caring to keep the versus he works within cosmologically consistent even though DC is not an example of that. So in this context, there’s no real way to address his point about Marvel without addressing DC. If that’s still going off topic, then he should have been called out before me since he brought up DC first.

How did Dematteis ignore the Sphere of Gods when we literally see Darkseid, the Lords of Order/Chaos, Apokolips, New Genesis, the Silver City, and various other godly realms throughout his stories?

The hierarchy of realer dreams within Dematteis and what’s on the map are literally the same thing. It’s the same framework it chain of being towards the absolute, just looked at differently. For example, the first ascension into these dreams beyond the baseline dream was represented as reaching the Silver City which is in the Sphere of Gods. And the progression of deeper dreams was depicted as a descent into the Collective Unconscious, which aligns with the mainstream cosmology since the Collective Unconscious is beyond the Sphere of Gods and responsible for emanating it.

And while Dematteis doesn’t explicitly explore the Monitor Sphere, his framework leaves room for it as a realm beyond the collective unconscious, which shouldn’t be surprising since he’s literally using the same cosmological framework as Morrison, Snyder, and all the other DC writers.

First of all, I’m not a ‘he.’ Respect my pronouns, I put them on my profile for a reason.

Second, I’m not going to debate with you whether DeMatteis’s cosmology in DC has a direct connection with the others in this thread, because at no point in this whole thread have I tried to imply that both cosmologies can’t be unified. The point I was trying to convey (which you didn’t understand in the slightest) is that to unify cosmologies you have to use the most recent information, because an absolutist statement about one plane can later be retconned by adding things beyond that plane.

In DeMatteis’s case, he wrote his stories following his Hindu cosmological model of the infinite hierarchy of dreams, ignoring the rest above it (there’s literally direct empirical evidence of him not knowing basic concepts from Morrison’s Multiversity map), and after he wrote his stories, other writers added more things, so there was, for all practical purposes, a retcon.

It’s something everyone here understood except you.

 

[Xearesay]

Second, I’m not going to debate with you whether DeMatteis’s cosmology in DC has a direct connection with the others in this thread, because at no point in this whole thread have I tried to imply that both cosmologies can’t be unified. The point I was trying to convey (which you didn’t understand in the slightest) is that to unify cosmologies you have to use the most recent information, because an absolutist statement about one plane can later be retconned by adding things beyond that plane.

First of all, that’s not what your point was. Your point was that there was cosmological inconsistencies due to retcons, and you tried to use the way Dematteis wrote in DC(a different verse) as an example for what our point. And so I replied addressing the exact problem I had with your point, being that the cosmological elements from Dematteis’s DC stories were not retconned and do not cause inconsistencies within DC’s cosmology. However, if that’s not what you were saying(it was but I’ll entertain this), than there’s unfortunately still a problem, being that without the example and comparison to how Dematteis wrote in DC, your argument becomes entirely circular.

And what I mean is, I have to first accept the assertion that DC or Marvel’s canon is incoherent and uninterpretable on the cosmic scale for literally everything else that follows in your argument to make sense. The moment I don’t accept your assertion, your point becomes nonsense. If I don’t view DC or Marvel’s cosmos as structurally inconsistent, then I wouldn’t need to abide by the standard that newer comics are all that can meet usability, because older comics wouldn’t be retconned to me in the first place.


ADVERTISEMENT









ADVERTISEMENT




ADVERTISEMENT

In DeMatteis’s case, he wrote his stories following his Hindu cosmological model of the infinite hierarchy of dreams, ignoring the rest above it (there’s literally direct empirical evidence of him not knowing basic concepts from Morrison’s Multiversity map), and after he wrote his stories, other writers added more things, so there was, for all practical purposes, a retcon.

Here we go again… Dematteis used various elements towards the cosmology just like every other writer. In some instances he uses very clear elements from neoplatonism, in others he uses Carl Jung. For Grant Morrison sometimes he uses Buddhism, sometimes he blatantly refers to Neoplatonism, and in other times he uses Kabbalah. None of these writers have absolutely shoehorned their representations of the cosmology into the tiny boxes some power scalers might like to think. If anything, they’ve all been playing with the same elements for decades now. And that’s because, whether the ascent towards God is depicted as dreams, shadows, or stories within stories, in the end it’s all the some variant of emanationism so the editors and writers couldn’t care less.

Even the title of the non-dual absolute is largely irrelevant. Whether it’s called a Smile, God, The Source, the Unknowable, the Overvoid, Perfection, Monitor, all of these can work as various titles given to one character because it doesn’t truly have a name. This is why that Twitter statement about Dematteis not knowing the Overvoid is a bad form of evidence, because Dematteis does know the character, he just knows it by a different title. And the user he was replying to provided practically no context and just assumed Dematteis was staying up to date with whatever Morrison was writing while nagging him on about literal battle boarding questions.

So yeah, I’ll disagree on there being any retcons. And Marvel should be treated the same way, as the whole cosmology hints towards the same framework that being a non-dual God consciousness at the top, with the mystery being the path towards God, which is a classic trope from Gnosticism. This is why in defenders beyond, the mystery(which is what the One Above All represents) is said to be infinite despite the fact that it appears as a Kabbalah tree which by illustration only shows a finite amount of spheres. If you disagree with this logic, then you might as well disagree with every single verse that draws from classical cosmological mappings, like World of Darkness for example which also uses a Kabbalah tree.



ADVERTISEMENT

 

[Progrev228]

People in west really care about pronouns?

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

You point was that there was cosmological inconsistencies due to retcons, and tried to use how Dematteis wrote in DC(a different verse) as an example for what you were talking about.

Yeah, there are cosmological inconsistencies, because no matter how much coping you apply or how much you think DC Comics is an infallible miracle machine that had absolutely everything planned since the dawn of the universe, the cosmology expands and changes over time, incorporating more perspectives.

My point was to show how things evolve and change over time, which you should know yourself since you consume DC.

You’re trying to paint my contributions in the thread as if I don’t want the union to happen because of inconsistencies, when I’ve said MANY times that I’m in favor of this idea but that more recent evidence should be prioritized over the old.

This wall of text was totally unnecessary.

And so I replied addressing exactly the problem, being that the cosmological elements from Dematteis’s DC stories were not retconned and do not cause inconsistencies within DC’s cosmology.

Yeah, sure, bro, when DeMatteis wrote his stories back in the dinosaur era, he had already planned for his worldview to be consistent with absolutely everything the company would do in the future. Saying there are no retcons from an extra-diegetic perspective is totally delusional.

However, if that’s not what you were saying(it was but I’ll entertain this), than there’s unfortunately still a problem, being that without the example and comparison to how Dematteis wrote in DC, your argument becomes entirely circular.

And what I mean is, I have to first accept the assertion that DC or Marvel’s canon is incoherent and uninterpretable on the cosmic scale for literally everything else that follows in your comment to make sense. And that assertion is something I obviously don’t accept, because why would I need to abide by the standard that newer comics are all that can meet usability, when I don’t view older comics as retconned in the first place?

See? Here’s proof that you understood absolutely nothing of what I said, or that you just came here to stir things up over something relatively minor.

To understand my argument and accept it, you don’t have to agree that the canon of both publishers is irreconcilable or impossible to interpret. I myself favor a common interpretation for everything; I’m only advocating that we prefer current statements over ones from 20 years ago.

Here we go again. Dematteis used various elements towards the cosmology just like every other writer. In some instances he uses very clear elements from neoplatonism, in others he uses Carl Jung. For Grant Morrison sometimes he uses Buddhism, sometimes he blatantly refers to Neoplatonism, and in other times he uses Kabbalah. None of these writers have absolutely shoehorned their representations of the cosmology into the little boxes a lot of power scalers might like to think. If anything, they’ve all been playing with the same elements for decades now. Whether the ascent towards God is depicted as dreams, shadows, or stories within stories, in the end it’s all the some variant of emanationism so the editors and writers couldn’t care less.

That's awesome bro because I've never said nor implied the opposite

Literally, I myself have said before that the Divine Creator is TOAA; it’s just that the structure of the cosmology has changed, and the Nexus of All Realities is inferior to the planes outside the collective unconscious.

Even the title of the non-dual absolute is largely irrelevant. Whether it’s called a Smile, God, The Source, the Unknowable, the Overvoid, Perfection, Monitor, all of these are just can work as various titles given to it because it doesn’t truly have a name. This is why that Twitter statement about him not knowing the Overvoid is a bad form of evidence, because Dematteis does know the character, he just knows it by a different title. And the user he was replying to literally provided no context and just assumed Dematteis was staying up to date with whatever Morrison was writing while nagging him about literal battle boarding questions.

Okay....? So????

And Marvel should be treated the same way, as the whole cosmology hints towards the same framework that being a non-dual God consciousness at the top, with the mystery being the path towards God, which is a classic trope from Gnosticism. This is why in defenders beyond, the mystery(which is what the One Above All represents) is revealed to be infinite and never end despite the fact that it appears as a Kabbalah tree which by illustration only shows a finite amount of spheres.

Cool so you agree with me. That's awesome Xearesay, thank you for your contribution to the thread.

 

[Antvasima]

So what do you think that we should do here/how we should specifically handle this, Excelsis?

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

So what do you think that we should do here/how we should specifically handle this, Excelsis?

I’m going to be completely honest. In my opinion, this merge should be put on hold until the more experienced, Marvel-savvy supporters can harmoniously integrate both cosmologies, taking into account the current more updated cosmological model the franchise uses.

As I’ve shown in my messages so far, the reasoning behind the placement of some cosmological structures doesn’t make sense and is based on connections the work itself neither establishes nor states (explicitly or implicitly). On top of that, the OP occasionally mixes scans from separate cosmological sections as if they belonged to a single structure.

I think it’s better to leave things as they are until a better proposal with a stronger explanation is made, rather than causing unnecessary damage to the very good work Ultima did with the current cosmology blog.

I’m not against things like TOAA (Mystery) being Tier 0 or Oblivion being High 1-A+ in general due to being God’s unconscious, but I don’t think this is the time or the way to do it.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Should I create a private Marvel Comics cosmology revisions thread with you included in it, to attempt to figure out how we should handle this properly?

 

[Xearesay]

Yeah, there are cosmological inconsistencies, because no matter how much coping you apply or how much you think DC Comics is an infallible miracle machine that had absolutely everything planned since the dawn of the universe, the cosmology expands and changes over time, incorporating more perspectives.

My point was to show how things evolve and change over time, which you should know yourself since you consume DC.

You’re trying to paint my contributions in the thread as if I don’t want the union to happen because of inconsistencies, when I’ve said MANY times that I’m in favor of this idea but that more recent evidence should be prioritized over the old.

This wall of text was totally unnecessary.

Insulting my argument isn’t going to make your arguments better.

Nothing about DC’s cosmos changed. It’s literally been the same framework since like the 80s. Monad > chain of being > Earth. And Marvel is like literally the same thing lol. That’s why Defenders Beyond had the whole notion of a Kabbalah tree with a final guiding hand that is the emanator or source of all things. When these writers change the cosmos, they’re usually messing with things on the low end, like how many earths exist or something. They’re not coming up with whole new metaphysical frameworks to map the cosmos.

https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v1/event/won?ctx=0199524f-1867-7e9f-bb1c-8ebae68f9e1c


ADVERTISEMENT

https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v3/event/serve?ctx=0199524f-1867-7e9f-bb1c-8ebae68f9e1c

Yeah, sure, bro, when DeMatteis wrote his stories back in the dinosaur era, he had already planned for his worldview to be consistent with absolutely everything the company would do in the future. Saying there are no retcons from an extra-diegetic perspective is totally delusional.

ADVERTISEMENT
It’s not his job to do that, both of these companies have an editorial department for a reason. Every comic these writers work on goes through an editorial mandate, and those editors are the ones with the ultimate say in what gets published. And these editors have a certain vision of how things should look or fit into continuity. I’m not saying there aren’t retcons, just that they primarily exist on the smaller scale. The metaphysical framework of the cosmos, and its structures is largely the same with DC and Marvel which make sense since it’s not something they dabble in enough to make an actual mess of.
https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v1/event/won?ctx=019952a9-8b7f-76cd-9526-0eecfd7071d3


ADVERTISEMENT



https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v3/event/serve?ctx=019952a9-8b7f-76cd-9526-0eecfd7071d3

And this is evident through the fact that stories like Swamp Thing #75 and Animal Man, and even some older pre crisis stories already showcased the framework I mentioned above before Dematteis even wrote the Hal Jordan Spectre series or Dr. Fate. It’s always, Monad > chain of being > earths/universe.


ADVERTISEMENT

See? Here’s proof that you understood absolutely nothing of what I said, or that you just came here to stir things up over something relatively minor.

To understand my argument and accept it, you don’t have to agree that the canon of both publishers is irreconcilable or impossible to interpret. I myself favor a common interpretation for everything; I’m only advocating that we prefer current statements over ones from 20 years ago.

https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v1/event/won?ctx=01995268-50bf-73f5-8b91-1e87c3119766


ADVERTISEMENT



https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v3/event/serve?ctx=01995268-50bf-73f5-8b91-1e87c3119766
Can you relax? You’ve been coming off as hurt this whole conversation when I don’t even know who you are and have no beef with you.

I digress, I don’t think it’s necessary to only accept the most recent information if there isn’t any large retconning to the cosmic framework to begin with. A large problem with cosmology splitting is that it starts with a literal assumption that it doesn’t even attempt to prove, and then uses that assumption to justify all of its conclusions. And this is essentially what you’re doing right now.
https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v1/event/won?ctx=01995296-2c28-7bbe-9d62-e80bcac9bb82


ADVERTISEMENT

https://kraken.prod.*********/api/v3/event/serve?ctx=01995296-2c28-7bbe-9d62-e80bcac9bb82

Okay....? So????

What do you mean so? You said verbatim that “there’s literally direct empirical evidence of him not knowing basic concepts from Morrison’s Multiversity map” and I replied showcasing that Dematteis saying he doesn’t know what the Overvoid is on Twitter, is not solid proof that he was operating in a “different cosmology.”

Also seriously? Trying to pretend like you’re confused when I’m literally just replying to the very arguments you made isn’t going to work.

Cool so you agree with me. That's awesome Xearesay, thank you for your contribution to the thread.

Yeah no, I don’t. You can do as much emotionally charged backtracking and petty response flinging as you want, I promise, it’ll get you nowhere in a debate against me. If you don’t want to address my arguments(because you can’t) that’s fine, I’ll just take it as a concession.

 

[Progrev228]

As I’ve shown in my messages so far, the reasoning behind the placement of some cosmological structures doesn’t make sense and is based on connections the work itself neither establishes nor states (explicitly or implicitly). On top of that, the OP occasionally mixes scans from separate cosmological sections as if they belonged to a single structure.

Will somebody comment hierarchies and other stuff?

I think it’s better to leave things as they are until a better proposal with a stronger explanation is made, rather than causing unnecessary damage to the very good work Ultima did with the current cosmology blog.

Other Marvel supporters suggested to continue goofy thread. I wrote what I can make cosmology revision since my view on cosmology was different from goofy. No one write anything against it.
And Ultima blog uses scans from Dematteis cosmology

 

[MrKerf]

Okay. Should I create a private Marvel Comics cosmology revisions thread with you included in it, to attempt to figure out how we should handle this properly?

If I may, Seed expressed his desire to participate, so how about we put it on hold temporarily for both Progrev and Seed to collab and make an actual blog post, addressing both the evidence and inconsistencies.

 

[Antvasima]

I am not sure. Seed seems to have a tendency to go for as ridiculously exaggerated statistics as possible, regardless if it makes coherent sense or not.

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

Insulting my argument isn’t going to make your arguments better.

I challenge you to show where I’m insulting your argument lol.

Nothing about DC’s cosmos changed. It’s literally been the same framework since like the 80s. Monad > chain of being > Earth.

Never said that the common framework between cosmologies changed.

What you’re doing is distorting my point to make it seem like I’m saying the common baseline across all cosmologies is different, when it’s blatantly obvious I’m talking about particulars within the system. My point isn’t, for example, that all cosmologies don’t have a nondual supreme being, but that X plane below the supreme being is no longer the highest because more things were introduced over time.

That’s made explicit in the very message you’re replying:

Yeah, there are cosmological inconsistencies, because no matter how much coping you apply or how much you think DC Comics is an infallible miracle machine that had absolutely everything planned since the dawn of the universe, the cosmology expands and changes over time, incorporating more perspectives.

My point was to show how things evolve and change over time, which you should know yourself since you consume DC.

There aren’t the same number of planes today as there were in the ’90s, because more things get added over time.

Using Marvel as the example (which, I remind you, is the central topic of this thread) in the ’90s Ewing’s structural hierarchy that runs from the Omniverse to the House of Ideas didn’t exist, so the ‘highest plane’ before reaching God was a different one. What should we prioritize when unifying both cosmologies? Obviously the most recent information.

You’re basically like Don Quixote fighting imaginary enemies.

And Marvel is like literally the same thing lol. That’s why Defenders Beyond had the whole notion of a Kabbalah tree with a final guiding hand that is the emanator or source of all things. When these writers change the cosmos, they’re using messing with things on the low end, like how many earths exist or something. They’re not coming up with whole new metaphysical frameworks to map the cosmos.

Another strawman for your collection, I suppose. Show me where I ever said that writers totally alter the ‘metaphysical framework’ (understood as the general idea of the cosmology). Spoiler: you won’t be able to.

Having planes beyond the Nexus of All Realities (which is what I’m arguing for in the thread) isn’t creating ‘a whole new metaphysical framework.’ It’s simply expanding the stretch that exists from that very plane up to God.

In fact, it’s funny. You say this:

Nothing about DC’s cosmos changed.

But later in the same sentence you say this:

When these writers change the cosmos, they’re using messing with things on the low end, like how many earths exist or something.

So you’re literally contradicting yourself in the same text. First you say that nothing (using a universal negation) in DC or Marvel cosmology has changed from the ’80s to today, but then you admit there are changes, only that they’re about ‘low-end’ things, or whatever that means.

You can’t even be consistent with what you write.

It’s not his job to do that, both of these companies have an editorial department for a reason. Every comic these writers work on goes through an editorial mandate, and those editors are the ones with the ultimate say in what gets published. And these editors have a certain vision of how things should look or fit into continuity.

Cool. The fact that the publisher tries to establish coherence among stories by multiple authors does not in the slightest mean there aren’t changes in the cosmology as time goes by. They’re quality control for what gets published, but they don’t cut off writers’ creative freedom unless it goes against some foundational principle of the company.

Saying otherwise is equivalent to claiming there are no cases of writers establishing new planes or cosmological sections that didn’t previously exist in their runs, which we both know is a view extremely far from reality.

Because yes, adding something new or expanding an idea is a change. I don’t know if you knew.

I’m not saying there aren’t retcons, just that they primarily exist on the smaller scale.

You did, lol. Anyway, thanks for at least conceding that there are changes, so at least I imagine you won’t repeat the same thing in your next reply (which I hope you don’t, because I can’t be bothered to keep this going).

The metaphysical framework of the cosmos, and its structures is largely the same with DC and Marvel which make sense since it’s not something they dabble in enough to make an actual mess of.

I never said otherwise once again. I agree that the base of the framework, understood as ‘the fundamental points of the cosmology,’ is almost always the same.

What I’ve been arguing throughout the whole thread is that the position of a realm within the cosmology changed over time, that’s all.

And this is evident through the fact that stories like Swamp Thing #75 and Animal Man, and even some older pre crisis stories already showcased the framework I mentioned above before Dematteis even wrote the Hal Jordan Spectre series or Dr. Fate. It’s always, Monad > chain of being > earths/universe.

Okay, once again, thanks for agreeing with my opinion. What are we even debating?

I get the impression you’re seriously tilting at windmills.

If I didn’t agree that the atomic structure of the system is ‘Monad > Chain of Being > Earths,’ then I wouldn’t agree with a unification either, lol.

If you think I ever disagreed with that, quote the parts of my argument where I say such a thing.

Can you relax? You’ve been coming off as hurt this whole conversation when I don’t even know who you are and have no beef with you.

Man, I don’t know what problem the users of this wiki have with presuming someone’s mood from pixels on a screen.

Is saying you didn’t understand anything I said ‘coming out as hurt’? I’m simply stating the objective truth of the facts.

Also, you came in from the start with an arrogant, cocky tone, so don’t expect me to be giving you little kisses on the forehead or anything like that.

I digress, I don’t think it’s necessary to only accept the most recent information if there isn’t any large retconning to the cosmic framework to begin with.

Well, it’s very interesting that you stick to that, because in this case there is one and I’ve been repeating it since the beginning of the thread. The Nexus of All Realities is no longer the highest plane of Assiah; that is literally my biggest disagreement with the thread as a whole, that the OP isn’t able to properly integrate the planes into the cosmology.

If you think otherwise and believe it still is to this day, then provide evidence. Defenders Beyond changed and defined the succession of planes leading up to the House of Ideas, so as of today we know the House of Ideas is the highest point ever directly shown in Marvel comics, with the other Kabbalistic worlds being the unknowable above the apex of understanding.

What do you mean so? You said verbatim that “there’s literally direct empirical evidence of him not knowing basic concepts from Morrison’s Multiversity map” and I replied showcasing that Dematteis saying he doesn’t know what the Overvoid is on Twitter, is not solid proof that he was operating in a “different cosmology.”

I never said he’s operating on a ‘different cosmology’…….

I agree with your explanation: the highest planes of the cosmology are a different way of viewing fundamental structures in general, like the Overvoid, but I never said DeMatteis is making things up.

What I said is that he has a different way of setting up his worldview because of his Hindu beliefs, which, as you yourself said, doesn’t necessarily make two cosmologies totally different.

And sorry to say it, but not knowing what the ‘Overvoid’ is means not knowing basic concepts from Morrison’s map, because even if he also establishes an equivalent in his worldview (since writers probably have a conceptual schema for the characteristics of some fundamental part of the cosmology) he still doesn’t know what the name Overvoid entails per se, so my claim is correct (and that isn’t even the only evidence).

Your whole wall of text explaining things I already know is completely unnecessary once again.

Also seriously? Trying to pretend like you’re confused when I’m literally just replying to the very arguments you made isn’t going to work.

I’m confused about why you’re writing stuff I already know. I’m fully within my rights. Does that bother you? That’s your problem, not mine.

I find it hilarious that you think we’re having the debate of a lifetime here when you’re literally just nitpicking everything I say, looking for a fifth leg on the cat, and clearly trying to drag this out more than it should.

Yeah no, I don’t. You can do as much emotionally charged backtracking and petty response flinging as you want, I promise, it’ll get you nowhere in a debate against me. If you don’t want to address my arguments(because you can’t) that’s fine, I’ll just take it as a concession.

I’m not even disagreeing with the essence of your messages, nor am I arguing a diametrically opposite stance, but hey, man, if you want to keep writing stuff as cringe and corny as ‘you can’t disprove me, bro,’ ‘you won’t get anywhere debating me,’ and ‘I will just take it as a concession (???????)’, then have fun, you’re very tuff and cool, sigma edits why so serious remix 2025.

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

Okay. Should I create a private Marvel Comics cosmology revisions thread with you included in it, to attempt to figure out how we should handle this properly?

I guess that’s a good idea. But don’t include me, thanks. Not only do I already have two verses to completely revamp, I also think there are people more qualified than me in Marvel for that task. I’m just helping out a bit here because I saw something odd in the OP’s proposal.

Other Marvel supporters suggested to continue goofy thread. I wrote what I can make cosmology revision since my view on cosmology was different from goofy. No one write anything against it. And Ultima blog uses scans from Dematteis cosmology

Okay.

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

I am not sure. Seed seems to have a tendency to go for as ridiculously exaggerated statistics as possible, regardless if it makes coherent sense or not.

Ant. That was years ago, for one, and two, some of the very same scans and arguments are the same ones Goofy and other supporters used to upgrade them during the Revision threads as of a year ago. I purposely didn't get as involved because I expected to still be viewed this way, and it seems that is still very much the case, hence why I'm really not on here that much anymore, and because I have way more things to do in real life now, such as being an intern and creating personal stories. You are entitled to your opinion, and if you and the staff believe it's a hazard to let me assist, alright. But throwing a stray my direction was utterly unneccessary, you didn't have to word it that way.

This is the last time I'll talk about this unless you want to talk elsewhere about this, because it is off topic, and you throwing the stray at me was also off topic.

 

[Rangoon04]

I am not sure. Seed seems to have a tendency to go for as ridiculously exaggerated statistics as possible, regardless if it makes coherent sense or not.

I know I'm relatively new here but respectfully, Ant, this doesn't seem like a productive thing to say, especially about an active user on this forum

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I tend to have unfiltered honest communication, but apologise if I caused offence.

I will create a Marvel Comics cosmology revision private message thread.

 

[Phronemos]

It wouldn't be wise to incorporate DeMatteis's ideas into current cosmology, especially since it would likely lead to significant scaling issues. Marvel's evolving narrative is revealing in that Oblivion isn't so superior to other cosmic beings (especially The One Above All). The Divine Creator, in particular, has no contemporary counterpart (The One Above All is clearly not the True Supreme Being, due to events in Defenders: Beyond and The Incredible Hulk). Unless there's a real, or at least tangible, commonality between the two cosmological interpretations, I'm against it. And I'm also in favor of not complicating matters further until Ultima takes over. There's no rush, because the distinction is good now.

 

[Segetero]

I admittedly don’t understand that much about marvel but I think merging the two cosmologies might be a bit confused as HADAD killed oblivion in the recent storm comic and yet is implied to be weaker even if just slightly than the TOAA who is on par with enigma so it just seems a bit contrary to the dematis cosmology

 

[Rangoon04]

I admittedly don’t understand that much about marvel but I think merging the two cosmologies might be a bit confused as HADAD killed oblivion in the recent storm comic and yet is implied to be weaker even if just slightly than the TOAA who is on par with enigma so it just seems a bit contrary to the dematis cosmology

the Storm writer said he was using universal manifestations iirc

 

[ProfectusInfinity]

I'm gonna skip the composite cosmology stuff for now and focus on some of the tiering.

Individual dreams​

Multiverse/layers of Multiverse​

Worlds within worlds​

All three of these hierarchical structures are just the exact same thing.

Nearly all the scans used in the "Individual dreams" section take place a single chapter before all the scans used in the "Worlds within worlds" section. Both sets of scans are elaborating on the same structure, which is a multiversal web of dreams Silver Surfer's trapped inside of that represent the "worlds within worlds" phenomenon (which is a cosmological principle/theory in Marvel dictating that in both directions, there are universes incalculably larger and smaller than our own), and then the peak of the Macroverse, which is a universe outside all the dreams that contains them as bubble worlds.

Additional Profs what worlds within worlds and layers of multiverse aren't same thing:

• Silver Surfer who in same run teleport to Brahma (which is thing from all thing emanate) can't teleport from Macroverse to Earth-616
• Multiverse was portrayed as Spiral simular to microverse and called space between atoms.
• Microverse is stated to be exist below multiverse.
• The inhabitans of the Microverse called main multiverse a Macroverse.
• Writers knows that worlds within worlds and layers of multiverse are different thing. Take for example current cosmology writer Al Ewing, he was shown knowledge is worlds within worlds and even created character from macroverse, and he also shown realities below and above E-616 (Miracleman history was writen by Geiman, but the main writer of the collection was). Cullen Bunn (Deadpool scans) is also know about worlds within worlds.

This whole section comes off as a non-sequitur since it's not clear how you intend to use the terms "Microverse" and "Macroverse" here, or how the points logically prove that the hierarchical structures are different. Microverse and Macroverse are mainly subjective terms used to describe levels of the same worlds within worlds structure that exists across the Omniverse.

On a subjective level, "Microverse" just refers to a world within a world lower than yourself, while "Macroverse" refers to a higher world that your world is within, hence why the earth dimension has been called the "Macroverse" multiple times by inhabitants of atomic worlds.

On an objective level, the peak "Microverse" encompasses all the worlds within worlds of a single alternate earth, hence why Captain Universe/Enigma Force/Uni-Power, which is stated multiple times to be the 1:1 embodiment of the entire Microverse, is equal to Universal Eternity in existence and feats. Meanwhile, the peak "Macroverse" encompasses all worlds within worlds above Universal Eternity, hence why Silver Surfer implied that the Macroverse was beyond the edges of Eternity.

I don't get what argument the first point is trying to make. The second point outright disproves your premise since you argue that the multiverse and macroverse have a similar structure. On the third point, the Microverse and Macroverse are different levels of the same greater "worlds within worlds" framework, so this point holds little weight. I don't get what argument the fourth point is trying to make, nor the fifth.

To be clear, while I agree with a High 1-A Macroversal hierarchy, this section is pretty disorganized in general.

Multiverse have infinite layers/levels of realities, there upper realities see lower as dream/fiction/shadow/simulation/other lower structure. Every universe is both real and imagination. Each realm is just a fiction to another. Simular statement about every reality can be subreality to other. Universes are dreams made real. Subrealities are dependent on higher realities. And lesser universes are no real to higher. There also exist foudentional realities. The multiverse is built on these realities and any affection on them affects whole multiverse.Currently only known foundational reality is ideaverse. Other realities should scale above individual dreams since inhibitants of higher worlds have higher mindscape.

There are so many problems across this section.

Multiverse have infinite layers/levels of realities

All the realities mentioned in the first scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

The levels of reality in the second and third scan are stated to comprise the framework of the Universe, why are they being used to argue for a supposed hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse?

As for the scan about the multiverse being an upward spiral, we only accept that residents of the Brilliant City universe at the top of the Spiral are broadly multiversal, while inhabitants of the Spectrum beyond the Spiral have legitimate Qualitative Superiority. Ultima clarified this in a brief discussion with Ant.

The last scan is from Jim Starlin cosmology, which is firmly split from all cosmologies.

Simular statement about every reality can be subreality to other.

The difference between "reality" and "simulation" isn't described in an R>F manner here. It's depicted as closer to a multiverse, with "true reality" being a single grain of sand that can be lost in the infinite beach of alternate virtual worlds.

Subrealities are dependent on higher realities.

All the realities mentioned in this scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

And lesser universes are no real to higher.

Where is this stated in the scan?

There also exist foudentional realities. The multiverse is built on these realities and any affection on them affects whole multiverse.Currently only known foundational reality is ideaverse.

The Ideaverse is "foundational" and everything else "built on it" in the sense that the Ideaverse is inhabited by characters from classical ficitonal stories like Moby Dick, the Jungle Book, and Don Quixote: stories that directly or indirectly inspired modern stories like those of Marvel, which means destroying the Ideaverse and its inhabitants destroys all multiversal iterations of the heroes they inspired. The Ideaverse is described as a pocket multiverse in those same scans, which works against the premise of its "foundational" nature indicating a qualitative superiority over the multiverse.

There's also the major isssue that while the Ideaverse is depicted as operating on a multiversal scale in this comic, the Ideaverse is depicted elsewhere as a Universe neighboring the Nightmare Realm within Earth-616, which makes it unreliable as a basis for this supposed hierarchy.

Other realities should scale above individual dreams since inhibitants of higher worlds have higher mindscape.

What? The "higher mindscape" in this scan is the reality stone, and infinity stones are bound to the framework of their home universes. Why is the reality stone being used as the premise for a hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse of alternate earths?

other lower structure

Another infinity stone argument.

 

[Antvasima]

It wouldn't be wise to incorporate DeMatteis's ideas into current cosmology, especially since it would likely lead to significant scaling issues. Marvel's evolving narrative is revealing in that Oblivion isn't so superior to other cosmic beings (especially The One Above All). The Divine Creator, in particular, has no contemporary counterpart (The One Above All is clearly not the True Supreme Being, due to events in Defenders: Beyond and The Incredible Hulk). Unless there's a real, or at least tangible, commonality between the two cosmological interpretations, I'm against it. And I'm also in favor of not complicating matters further until Ultima takes over. There's no rush, because the distinction is good now.

Agreed.

 

[Antvasima]

I'm gonna skip the composite cosmology stuff for now and focus on some of the tiering.

All three of these hierarchical structures are just the exact same thing.

Nearly all the scans used in the "Individual dreams" section take place a single chapter before all the scans used in the "Worlds within worlds" section. Both sets of scans are elaborating on the same structure, which is a multiversal web of dreams Silver Surfer's trapped inside of that represent the "worlds within worlds" phenomenon (which is a cosmological principle/theory in Marvel dictating that in both directions, there are universes incalculably larger and smaller than our own), and then the peak of the Macroverse, which is a universe outside all the dreams that contains them as bubble worlds.

This whole section comes off as a non-sequitur since it's not clear how you intend to use the terms "Microverse" and "Macroverse" here, or how the points logically prove that the hierarchical structures are different. Microverse and Macroverse are mainly subjective terms used to describe levels of the same worlds within worlds structure that exists across the Omniverse.

On a subjective level, "Microverse" just refers to a world within a world lower than yourself, while "Macroverse" refers to a higher world that your world is within, hence why the earth dimension has been called the "Macroverse" multiple times by inhabitants of atomic worlds.

On an objective level, the peak "Microverse" encompasses all the worlds within worlds of a single alternate earth, hence why Captain Universe/Enigma Force/Uni-Power, which is stated multiple times to be the 1:1 embodiment of the entire Microverse, is equal to Universal Eternity in existence and feats. Meanwhile, the peak "Macroverse" encompasses all worlds within worlds above Universal Eternity, hence why Silver Surfer implied that the Macroverse was beyond the edges of Eternity.

I don't get what argument the first point is trying to make. The second point outright disproves your premise since you argue that the multiverse and macroverse have a similar structure. On the third point, the Microverse and Macroverse are different levels of the same greater "worlds within worlds" framework, so this point holds little weight. I don't get what argument the fourth point is trying to make, nor the fifth. This section is pretty disorganized in general.

There are so many problems across this section.

All the realities mentioned in the first scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

The levels of reality in the second and third scan are stated to comprise the framework of the Universe, why are they being used to argue for a supposed hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse?

As for the scan about the multiverse being an upward spiral, we only accept that residents of the Brilliant City universe at the top of the Spiral are broadly multiversal, while inhabitants of the Spectrum beyond the Spiral have legitimate Qualitative Superiority. Ultima clarified this in a brief discussion with Ant.

The last scan is from Jim Starlin cosmology, which is firmly split from all cosmologies.

The difference between "reality" and "simulation" isn't described in an R>F manner here. It's depicted as closer to a multiverse, with "true reality" being a single grain of sand that can be lost in the infinite beach of alternate virtual worlds.

All the realities mentioned in this scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

Where is this stated in the scan?

The Ideaverse is "foundational" and everything else "built on it" in the sense that the Ideaverse is inhabited by characters from classical ficitonal stories like Moby Dick, the Jungle Book, and Don Quixote: stories that directly or indirectly inspired modern stories like those of Marvel, which means destroying the Ideaverse and its inhabitants destroys all multiversal iterations of the heroes they inspired. The Ideaverse is described as a pocket multiverse in those same scans, which works against the premise of its "foundational" nature indicating a qualitative superiority over the multiverse.

There's also the major isssue that while the Ideaverse is depicted as operating on a multiversal scale in this comic, the Ideaverse is depicted elsewhere as a Universe neighboring the Nightmare Realm within Earth-616, which makes it unreliable as a basis for this supposed hierarchy.

What? The "higher mindscape" in this scan is the reality stone, and infinity stones are bound to the framework of their home universes. Why is the reality stone being used as the premise for a hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse of alternate earths?

Another infinity stone argument.

Also agreed.

 

[Progrev228]

Nearly all the scans used in the "Individual dreams" section take place a single chapter before all the scans used in the "Worlds within worlds" section. Both sets of scans are elaborating on the same structure, which is a multiversal web of dreams Silver Surfer's trapped inside of that represent the "worlds within worlds" phenomenon (which is a cosmological principle/theory in Marvel dictating that in both directions, there are universes incalculably larger and smaller than our own), and then the peak of the Macroverse, which is a universe outside all the dreams that contains them as bubble worlds.

How they can be same hierarchy? Tenebrae said what there infinity holograms one within one another and in next issue written what Silver Surfer flew through the tunnel of worlds, the infinity of universes to enter macroverse. And Tenebrae said what dreams within dreams can't hold Silver Surfer, why would she teleport the Silver Surfer just one step higher in the hierarchy? Later they enter microverse, several issues early Silver Surfer was in dream inside dream, why he then don't enter microverse if to your opinion this should be same thing.

I don't get what argument the first point is trying to make. The second point outright disproves your premise since you argue that the multiverse and macroverse have a similar structure. On the third point, the Microverse and Macroverse are different levels of the same greater "worlds within worlds" framework, so this point holds little weight. I don't get what argument the fourth point is trying to make, nor the fifth. This section is pretty disorganized in general.

1) Brahma is multiversal substanse from which all worlds emanate and in same run was shown different universes. So it should be one of highest realities in multiverse. Silver Surfer able to easy teleport there but wasn't able to teleport from Macroverse which means what macroverse exit above multiverse.
2) I'm not fully understand how this scans disproves what multiverse and macroverse sould have same structure.
3) Inhabitants of microverse called main plane one reality macroverse, we know what main plane of reality not just one universe but also whole multiverse with hierarchy and higher realities.
4)It shown what writer understand what worlds within worlds are different thing, they portray them as different things. Like if mergiverse or lesser universe (which was story in E-616) was same thing as microverse Al Ewing wrote what they microverse or what Miracleman from macroverse since he understands consept of worlds within worlds. And shown in Deadpool killogy what Dreadpool ascend in worlds within worlds since he also understand that consept.

the realities mentioned in the first scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

The last scan is from Jim Starlin cosmology, which is firmly split from all cosmologies.

All the realities mentioned in this scan are based on quantum mechanics, which is incompatible with 1-A.

Okay

The difference between "reality" and "simulation" isn't described in an R>F manner here. It's depicted as closer to a multiverse, with "true reality" being a single grain of sand that can be lost in the infinite beach of alternate virtual worlds.

In Dream scans, previous page there Dimitrios say what they can be in Dream.

The levels of reality in the second and third scan are stated to comprise the framework of the Universe, why are they being used to argue for a supposed hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse?

They definetely talk about multiverse in that storyline

Where is this stated in the scan?

Sorry i was busy in day when i upload scans in imgur so i forgot to add previous page.

The Ideaverse is "foundational" and everything else "built on it" in the sense that the Ideaverse is inhabited by characters from classical ficitonal stories like Moby Dick, the Jungle Book, and Don Quixote: stories that directly or indirectly inspired modern stories like those of Marvel, which means destroying the Ideaverse and its inhabitants destroys all multiversal iterations of the heroes they inspired. The Ideaverse is described as a pocket multiverse in those same scans, which works against the premise of its "foundational" nature indicating a qualitative superiority over the multiverse.

There's also the major isssue that while the Ideaverse is depicted as operating on a multiversal scale in this comic, the Ideaverse is depicted elsewhere as a Universe neighboring the Nightmare Realm within Earth-616, which makes it unreliable as a basis for this supposed hierarchy.

There no mentions in my revission what foundational realities are supperior to multiverse they just affect whole multiverse and should be scaled to it full potential.
And Deadpool killogy is multiversal event. (Marvel wiki)

What? The "higher mindscape" in this scan is the reality stone, and infinity stones are bound to the framework of their home universes. Why is the reality stone being used as the premise for a hierarchy above a hierarchy above the multiverse of alternate earths?

Mindscape is reality of collective consciousness, sleepwalker enter reality within reality stone he see different comics and leter see comic about him and realises what his reality are dream to higher mindscape aka. to higher reality with higher consciouness.

Another infinity stone argument.

Don't understand what is problem there, mergiverse is reality in soulworld in soul stone it is have same structures, abstracts and also have infinity stones. And mergiverse is lesser reality compared to earth-616.

 

[Progrev228]

Bump

 

[BunBun]

My fellow broathers i Progrev228 stand here today to make a Marvel cosmology revision. Since current status of Marvel comics not on his best days and Goofy (previous user who make revision) lest the wiki. So i decided to show you guys my own view of marvel cosmology.

Spoiler: Individual dreams

Each mind possess infinite number of thoughts and this thoughts are realities, "infinite number of holograms each one folded within the other". Each of this realities have same structure as main reality. And each of them is just a dream of another. This is proven since Tenebrae able to fold Silver surfer in this universes many times and references this as "dreams within dreams". So each consciousnessemcompaces infinite hierarchy of dreams which have structure as his reality. Universal abstracts or any other character shouldn't scale to this since it will be paradoxcial.

Spoiler: Multiverse/layers of multiverse

Multiverse have infinite layers/levels of realities, there upper realities see lower as dream/fiction/shadow/simulation/other lower structure. Every universe is both real and imagination. Each realm is just a fiction to another. Simular statement about every reality can be subreality to other. Universes are dreams made real. Subrealities are dependent on higher realities. And lesser universes are no real to higher. There also exist foudentional realities. The multiverse is built on these realities and any affection on them affects whole multiverse.Currently only known foundational reality is ideaverse. Other realities should scale above individual dreams since inhibitants of higher worlds have higher mindscape.

Spoiler: Worlds within worlds

Macroverse is exist ouside of infinity of the universes. It is exist above main multiverse, have simular structure and gap between first step of marcoverse is bigger than gap between any realities within multiverse. Worlds within worlds are infinite. So worlds within worlds is infinite hierarchy of multiverses with macroverse-microverse relationship and first step in higher multiverse is bigger than entire previous multiverse and have same hierarchy. It is looks like higher you ascend in worlds within worlds the bigger differences between multiverses, since in macroverse, unlike main multiverse, previous multiverse is not exist even as atoms and Silver Surfer who can travel in microverse have probles to return in his multiverse.

Additional Profs what worlds within worlds and layers of multiverse aren't same thing:

• Silver Surfer who in same run teleport to Brahma (which is thing from all thing emanate) can't teleport from Macroverse to Earth-616
• Multiverse was portrayed as Spiral simular to microverse and called space between atoms.
• Microverse is stated to be exist below multiverse.
• The inhabitans of the Microverse called main multiverse a Macroverse.
• Writers knows that worlds within worlds and layers of multiverse are different thing. Take for example current cosmology writer Al Ewing, he was shown knowledge is worlds within worlds and even created character from macroverse, and he also shown realities below and above E-616 (Miracleman history was writen by Geiman, but the main writer of the collection was). Cullen Bunn (Deadpool scans) is also know about worlds within worlds.

Spoiler: House of ideas/TOAA

I don't want to dwell on this topic for a long time, since all what can be written already in main cosmology page. I just want to add a little bit, TOAA was shown draw sephirotes (and number of sephirotes are bigger then in IRL Kabbalah and realities outside multiverse) and each of sephirotes have R>F differense. So TOAA position (HOI) can't be ascend through hierarchy.

Spoiler: J.M.Dematties cosmology

As you see i used scans from Dematteis comics dispate split you know why? Because Dematteis cosmology isn't different from the main one. It has same structures and hierarchies as main one (hierarchy of dreams in multiverse and worlds within worlds) and Dematteis structures (Macroverse) was mentioned by other cosmological writers like Al Ewing (previous scans) and Dan Slott (scan). Even more Dematteis istelf uses and expands cosmology of other writer Steve Gerber (Fear, Man-thing scans). He was first one who write about universe being dream, worlds within worlds, and universes inside mind. Steve Gerber write same runs before Dematteis (Defenders, Man-thing). Al Ewing also read Steve Gerber runs, and all three of them wrote the same series (Defenders). So Dematteis Multiverse is same multiverse as main one. Now about ouside of multiverse. As we know TOAA isn't marvel supreme being and likely TOAA is manifestation of higher entity, because in Kabbalah exist such thing as Shekhinah is a manifistation of ein sof in tree of life in Malkuth. And it looks very much like TOAA who resides in world of action. What about Dematteis stuff? Well in Dematteis comics heavy impiled what multiverse is just one dream in higher hierarchy, Dematteis itsef in twitter write what nexus emcompaces realities outside of multiverse (Dematteis was first writer who showed Multiversal Eternity in void). Fallen stars and Scrier sayed what they older than Galactus (and Galactus being from previous multiverse was idea long ago). We don't even see true form of Oblivion his form in mighty Thor annual was just a manifisation, Nexus also stated to be transended other realms not just ones. So why TOAA can't be just a manifistation of Divine Creator? It was even stated what Divine creator dreamed about himself. And unlike TOAA Divine Creator is fully transdual being and even Fallen Stars don't understand his true nature. Even super controversal characters like Nemesis is accepted as canon (There Ego gem in this scan), and that issue was writen by Al Ewing main cosmolohy writer and nemesis existen contradicts multiversal cycle which Ewing itself created and he still writen what Nemesis somehow still canon. So why Dematteis works which is contradicts less than Nemesis can't be part of main contunuity.

My country never was part of British Empire so i'm sorry in there any errors in the text.

I agree with this idea. I’ve always thought that Al Ewing just didn’t know how to handle the Divine Creator, since He’s already at the very top. That’s why he never directly talks about the Divine Creator, but he still keeps hinting that there’s something above TOAA. As for the Storm issue, I don’t think we should take all of it as canon only the parts that make sense and are acceptable. And for Oblivion, I think that should just be considered one of his avatars, since that work doesn’t respect other writers and artists and is honestly complete garbage. That’s why I don’t see it as a real contradiction to J.M.’s Oblivion.

 

[Excellence616]

Bump

 

[Segetero]

In the final issue of the most recent storm comic TOAA is referred to as the uncreated creator I don’t personally think this changes anything but I suppose it is evidence in favor of TOAA being at least some quasi-monad even if it is terribly inconsistent.

 

[Progrev228]

I agree with this idea. I’ve always thought that Al Ewing just didn’t know how to handle the Divine Creator, since He’s already at the very top. That’s why he never directly talks about the Divine Creator, but he still keeps hinting that there’s something above TOAA. As for the Storm issue, I don’t think we should take all of it as canon only the parts that make sense and are acceptable. And for Oblivion, I think that should just be considered one of his avatars, since that work doesn’t respect other writers and artists and is honestly complete garbage. That’s why I don’t see it as a real contradiction to J.M.’s Oblivion.

In the final issue of the most recent storm comic TOAA is referred to as the uncreated creator I don’t personally think this changes anything but I suppose it is evidence in favor of TOAA being at least some quasi-monad even if it is terribly inconsistent.

Storm comic is a fanfic, I don't consider it as canon

 

[Antvasima]

Storm comic is a fanfic, I don't consider it as canon

Well, it is written as a hollow Suggsian power-trip fanfic at least, but Marvel's editorial department apparently just doesn't care about that it breaks the integrity of their cosmology, narrative, and setting as a whole.

 

[MrKerf]

I do think it’s best to ignore Storm for now. Both author statements and in-comic events make little to no sense, so maybe it’ll all be clarified as a fever dream later.

 

[Antvasima]

Let's hope so, yes. The only way to fix this mess is to have some character that is an absolutely rabid Storm fanboy/fangirl wake up from a drug-induced fever dream, but that seems extremely unlikely to happen.

 

[Progrev228]

Bump

 

[VeryGoofyToddler2]

TOAA: High 1-A
Oblivion: High 1-A+
Divine Creator: 0

This is obviously a problem. Oblivion is nowhere near “all-possible worlds” in the current canon.

All I read about the DeMatteis section is second-hand coincidence that is shared because a writer isn't going to say “my work is non-canon.” Is there more prominent or stronger points? Like “Macroverse” in essence is not a new concept that DeMatteis randomly made up, by this token of logic, every mention of DeMatteis using concepts things like “Oblivion, Creator, Dream” would always mean one and the same thing across all canon. That's a problem and I don't think I need to explain why.

 

[ExcelsisBerny]

This is obviously a problem. Oblivion is nowhere near “all-possible worlds” in the current canon.

Yeah. That’s completely true and also one of the problems I mentioned with the OP’s proposal.

All that bullcr4p about Oblivion being God’s unconscious and blah blah was brutally retconned; now Oblivion is just TOAA’s 'first son,' which itself is limited to Assiah within the structure of Mystery.

Honestly, 'mainline' Oblivion is even debatable as to whether it’s High 1-A or not.

Btw, I’m glad to see you’re doing well, Goofy.

 

[VeryGoofyToddler2]

Btw, I’m glad to see you’re doing well, Goofy.

Believe me, I wish I was and a certain someone doesn't want me back, unfortunately. It took the force of God to him to agree to bring me back and so far all I see is insults despite my effort to put a well-made CRT for Marvel.

As for the topic at hand, it needs better reasoning.

 

[Antvasima]

No, I rather easily agreed to allow you back. I am just overworked in general, and do not want you to significantly increase that workload.

 

[VeryGoofyToddler2]

No, I rather easily agreed to allow you back. I am just overworked in general, and do not want you to significantly increase that workload.

Since you recultantly “apologize” (If I could count it as something you would have done without another Admin calling you out for it) then that's fine. Regardless, if shouldn't have been like that in the first place, and I'm allowed to have a opinion especially when I've been doing the “workload” for these topic. You undermining that was a problem, I already knew you weren’t going to be the kindest in the world, if I touched these topic. Nevertheless, I done enough on things like these to warrant my expertise, and unless your Ultima, I'd rather not hear it from you about how to scale things.

OT: Like I said this thread is poorly made at least in the department of unification. If we are to bring back High 1-A. I suggest we reopen my thread because Ultima said he's going on another hiatus and he won't be able to finish the thread I started.