What happens if someone creates a verse using the VS Battle Wiki? About the SCP Foundation.

[Question_Man_I_guess]

I recently read two threads: The death of SCP and Can self-created characters be on VS Battle wiki, and some questions arose for me.
So, if someone creates a fictional franchise and mentions terms from this wiki like "Outversal" or "attack power," then their universe is banned, right? But why exactly? Because they would know how to make their characters high-tier, like 1-A or 0?

What if the characters in a fictional franchise are described as beings who can destroy suns with a single punch? Would that franchise count as part of this wiki or another?

 

[SuperNova55555]

So, if someone creates a fictional franchise and mentions terms from this wiki like "Outversal" or "attack power," then their universe is banned, right? But why exactly? Because they would know how to make their characters high-tier, like 1-A or 0?

Because these terms originate from VSBW and it just shows that the verse has been made for battleboarding reasons. Which is not allowed.

What if the characters in a fictional franchise are described as beings who can destroy suns with a single punch?

They are allowed. Being OP is not a disqualifier in any sense, but being OP for the sake of crossverse powerscaling is

 

[Question_Man_I_guess]

Because these terms originate from VSBW and it just shows that the verse has been made for battleboarding reasons. Which is not allowed.


They are allowed. Being OP is not a disqualifier in any sense, but being OP for the sake of crossverse powerscaling is

And how do we know if the creator (or creators) of a fictional franchise made their characters strong just for the sake of it, or for the purpose of "having the strongest characters" on the Wiki?

 

[Question_Man_I_guess]

If the narrator of a story says something like "I hit him with the force of a nuclear bomb or several megatons," would they be disqualified?

 

[KLOL506]

If the narrator of a story says something like "I hit him with the force of a nuclear bomb or several megatons," would they be disqualified?

No. It would not. Context matters.

 

[KLOL506]

And how do we know if the creator (or creators) of a fictional franchise made their characters strong just for the sake of it, or for the purpose of "having the strongest characters" on the Wiki?

Case-by-case basis. Can't put a "One rule fits all" into the equation ever for stuff like this.

 

[Question_Man_I_guess]

Case-by-case basis. Can't put a "One rule fits all" into the equation ever for stuff like this.

Then, if a fictional franchise explains that a certain group of characters or entities are beings with the power and resilience to nuclear bombs (and the plot explains, for example, that governments dropped nuclear bombs on them and they emerged unscathed)? Would that qualify for inclusion on the Wiki?

 

[KLOL506]

Then, if a fictional franchise explains that a certain group of characters or entities are beings with the power and resilience to nuclear bombs (and the plot explains, for example, that governments dropped nuclear bombs on them and they emerged unscathed)? Would that qualify for inclusion on the Wiki?

Yes, because nuclear bombs are not terms born from battleboarding.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

It's a common misconception that SCP uses VSBW terminology to shape their stories. This is incorrect, and has been repeatedly debunked and disagreed with by the various authors of the scp foundation.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Because these terms originate from VSBW and it just shows that the verse has been made for battleboarding reasons. Which is not allowed.


They are allowed. Being OP is not a disqualifier in any sense, but being OP for the sake of crossverse powerscaling is

Outerverse originates from Marvel comics...

 

[Question_Man_I_guess]

Yes, because nuclear bombs are not terms born from battleboarding.

So, let's look at two examples:

In a fictional franchise, it's established (both in dialogue and narration) that the power of a certain group of characters (let's call them Numerical Gods) is similar to a cosmic event like a supernova or multiple supernovae. Then, these characters would belong to the High tier 4-C or 4-B, right?

In another case, in a fictional franchise, it's explicitly stated (by a character or narrator) that a group of characters (let's call them Letterist Gods) have the power to be comparable to 1 QuettaFoe, or that the most powerful among them are beings who destroy high complex multiverses or high hypoverses (i.e., they literally state that). This would disqualify them, wouldn't it?

 

[KLOL506]

So, let's look at two examples:

In a fictional franchise, it's established (both in dialogue and narration) that the power of a certain group of characters (let's call them Numerical Gods) is similar to a cosmic event like a supernova or multiple supernovae. Then, these characters would belong to the High tier 4-C or 4-B, right?

Easy High 4-C to 4-B. Supernovae statements are common throughout fiction.

who destroy high complex multiverses or high hypoverses (i.e., they literally state that). This would disqualify them, wouldn't it?

The words on their own don't mean much without further elaboration. Here they would be disqualified not because they use these terms, but they don't even bother going in-depth with it.

On the other hand, just one mention of a cosmology having membranes would be enough to instantly grant it High Complex Multiverse level, whereas mention of infinite spatiotemporal dimensions would give you High 1-B, or encompassing for every single possible spatiotemporal direction would warrant Low 1-A.

Like I said, highly context-dependent.