Abstract entities can have HDE

[Reiner04]

So @Oblivion_Of_The_Endless and @Azertyhuuh raised an issue today regarding profiles that list Abstract Existence (Type 1) or Incorporeality while simultaneously having HDE. The argument was made in [this thread] that it should be impossible for non physical or abstract beings to possess HDE to begin with. I hold the contrary opinion, as we have multiple precedents of abstract or incorporeal beings possessing HDE. Below are several examples:

Shibai, Simon, Anti-Spiral, Beyonder, Madoka, Six Fold God, Dialga, Giygas, and so on.

This thread is intended to resolve whether Abstract and Incorporeal beings can truly HDE in a fiction. Since the purpose of this discussion is to revise our current standards, meaning existing precedents no longer dictate the outcome, I am now against listing AE Type 1 and HDE together on the same profile. Depending on the consensus reached here, I believe we should add a short explanatory note to either the Abstract Existence or incorporeal or HDE page to clarify this matter.

Edit: @Aolphl brought another point on my wall that might need clarification too on their respect page.

Agree with not listing AE (type 1)/incorporeality and HDE together: Planck69, Reiner04

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Permission granted by @Reiner04

Here is my personal opinion on this matter: the fundamental concepts that shape reality are not bound by the dimensional system, and this is something we all know because concepts, by their nature, are part of reality itself and encompass all possible dimensions. This is their nature. For example, a concept like Death applies to all beings in reality regardless of their level, even if they are L1A. The same applies to other concepts because their scope operates on a universal level of reality, independent of the dimensional system. This is their nature, and they inherently possess an L1A range on a universal level of reality.

I think that in this case, granting them range is better than giving them higher-dimensional existence in my view. Some have agreed with this, and matters related to concepts especially stir debate here. It seems the issue has gotten out of control. Characters that are themselves one of the fundamental concepts of reality should inherently have an L1A range.

Instead of granting higher-dimensional existence, giving full universal range (L1A) to characters that are themselves one of the concepts shaping reality seems logical to me.

 

[Planck69]

Permission granted by @Reiner04

Here is my personal opinion on this matter: the fundamental concepts that shape reality are not bound by the dimensional system, and this is something we all know because concepts, by their nature, are part of reality itself and encompass all possible dimensions. This is their nature. For example, a concept like Death applies to all beings in reality regardless of their level, even if they are L1A. The same applies to other concepts because their scope operates on a universal level of reality, independent of the dimensional system. This is their nature, and they inherently possess an L1A range on a universal level of reality.

I think that in this case, granting them range is better than giving them higher-dimensional existence in my view. Some have agreed with this, and matters related to concepts especially stir debate here. It seems the issue has gotten out of control. Characters that are themselves one of the fundamental concepts of reality should inherently have an L1A range.

Instead of granting higher-dimensional existence, giving full universal range (L1A) to characters that are themselves one of the concepts shaping reality seems logical to me.

Yeah, no. We are not by default giving away Low Outerversal range to all abstractions of Type 1 concepts. The scope of "reality" is not a fixed one across fiction.

As for the thread, I agree with not listing them together. For relevant profiles, it can just be labelled range for them. Though chances are, this is already the case.

 

[Cipher72]

Permission granted by @Reiner04

it should be impossible for non physical or abstract beings to possess HDE to begin with.

I don't believe this to be the case at all for AE type-1

Firstly I would like to quote the two pages

For AE we have

Type 1: Exists purely as an abstraction. These characters lack a true physical form, and affecting them requires the ability to affect directly the abstraction itself, because eventual physical manifestations are merely avatars.

&
For Incorporeality;

Incorporeal (or Non-Corporeal) beings are those who have no true physical form. Though they may have physical avatars or bodies, but their true essence exists non-physically, whether as a soul, as energy, or as an abstract concept.

And for Higher Dimensional Beings;

A given object or entity is referred to as being higher-dimensional when they exist as part of a system with a number of coordinates axes greater than our own, or in layman's terms, if they possess more than three dimensions.

Now I can see the argument for Incorporeality if said being was say fully made of energy or just soul something non physical but Fiction often times throws a curve ball.

Spoiler: Exhibit A

Let's take a look at our Beloved MR.Mxy who is verbatim a fifth dimensional being yet his true essence is Incorporeal.

My proposal is that this needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Now let's talk about Abstract Existence type-1

Let's say;

A character embodies the concept of a certain dimension and said dimension is Higher Dimensional so the character should benefit from both right ?​

Or

A character that embodies Information and said Information also makes up a higher dimension with the character also being stated be higher dimensional.​

Or

A character is stated to be the embodiment of law&order/memories and is also stated to be 6 Dimensional.​

In which of these case is it viable to give both ?

I will talk about two of the characters I know from this list that is Simon and Anti Spiral.
Now Anti Spiral is straight up the very Pocket Universe itself which is 11-Dimensional and yet at the same time is made up of the memories and information of the Anti Spiral race.
Simon has a similar case with his TTGL and STTGL which are quantum bodies made by layering the multiverse and contains Infinite Versions of the same mechs yet at the same time is the embodiment of emotions, hope information etc being actualised within the super spiral space which it creates.

What I am getting at is basically it should be evaluated on a case by case basis imo where blatant statements or inference should be prioritised over not listing both abilities merely because there are contradictions.

It would be appreciated if someone can answer my questions.

Edit: To elaborate I completely agree with the premise of this thread i.e. something can't be both physical and non physical at the same time, as such it's preferable to seperate abstract forms from Dimensional avatars. The only thing I have to add is that in fiction certain characters have statements of both being abstract in nature and n-dimensional (where n>3) and in those cases they should be allowed to keep both.

 

[Vietthai96]

What the.........i feel like staff thread is getting created regularly these recent days

Anyway, while dimensions having physical quality, they are themselves actually not corporeal or physical, like you can't touch space axis or time axis with your hand right? That why interact with them grant you NPI. So a non-physical being can have HDE is normal because HDE isn't implies the character having a physical corporeal body, and of course fiction being fiction as Cipher has said, some have their true inner self beng incorporeal while the "body" outside is physical

That said, time for the HDE, in truth, dimension as i have said isn't a physical thing, it is actually axis of direction, a character isn't possesses dimensions as in literal possesses a physical in their body, but rather their existence extend across those directions. So a HDE being mean dude existence extents across more than 3 directions, even if you argue it is range, this range still applies to their existence thus still results in HDE

So yeah, a non-physical being can still having HDE, though i agree that we should list Incorporeal, NEP, AE1 seaprately from HDE

Yeah, no. We are not by default giving away Low Outerversal range to all abstractions of Type 1 concepts. The scope of "reality" is not a fixed one across fiction.

Actually Low 1-A and upward don't need "scope of reality". It is more of a: we are not giving Low 1-A to anything non-physical without feats, evidence, proof

 

[Antvasima]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Qawsedf234 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @GrathOfLux @FinePoint @SamanPatou @ActuallySpaceMan42

What do you think about this?

 

[FinePoint]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Qawsedf234 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @GrathOfLux @FinePoint @SamanPatou @ActuallySpaceMan42

What do you think about this?

To be truly abstract is to lack a true physical size or presence at all.

Therefore, it would be a contradiction to say they are abstract but 20th dimensional, for example.

It would be more accurate to say they are abstract but have influence over the 20th dimension. I.e. they can still have that tier, but shouldn't have HDE.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. That makes sense to me.

 

[Vietthai96]

To be truly abstract is to lack a true physical size or presence at all.

Therefore, it would be a contradiction to say they are abstract but 20th dimensional, for example.

It would be more accurate to say they are abstract but have influence over the 20th dimension. I.e. they can still have that tier, but shouldn't have HDE.

I think you are confusing physical size with HDE, dimension do not constitute physical size. You can be 363538 dimensional yet just a human-sized being with tier 9 AP, the image in your computer would be 2D yet have no physical size at all, or we have String theory which is a theory involving more than 3 dimensions yet those higher dimensions are compactified and unable to be seen

Again as i have said, dimension is axis of direction, 3 dimensions are 3 directions, up and down, forward and backward, left and right. So more dimensions just mean more weird directions, angles. And HDE being mean their existence just be able to extends toward those weird directions that above the 3 basic one

That is isn't touching the whole fiction weirdness where you have the author stated A is 3754-dimensional and is a living concept as well

 

[SweetDao]

I got permission from @Just_a_Random_Butler (Plant).

Overall, I agree with Reiner04, Planck, and Finepoint's opinions.

I created a QnA thread regarding that same issue before Reiner04 created this staff thread, and I got some insightful explanations from Qawsedf234. However, I think there is definitely some issue with the current way we grant HDE to beings that just aren't physical whatsoever.

To quote the HDE page directly:

A given object or entity is referred to as being higher-dimensional when they exist as part of a system with a number of coordinates axes greater than our own, or in layman's terms, if they possess more than three dimensions.

The issue that arises with that definition is that, by the very postulate of the ability, you just can't grant HDE to something that "can't take up space," as Qawsedf234 explained. This is why a concept wouldn't have HDE since it would be contradictory to its nature. As such, an "AE 1" being that embodies, let's say, a concept, a law, or something of that caliber, shouldn't have HDE on their profile unless:

1: It has two keys, one for the true form (AE) and one for an avatar/physical incarnation (HDE)
2: It has a single key, but both AE and HDE relate to something different; while the AE is for the "true nature", the "physical incarnation" that it can take can be HDE.

Unless it's one of those two cases (not counting very specific situations where a verse makes abstract object dimensioned), I think there is definitely a problem.

So, for example, saying that someone has a "4D mind" or a "4D soul" either means that their soul and mind take up some space (and therefore, have some physicality attached to them) or that they aren't "an abstract object" in the rigorous definition of the term. However, right now, we don't assume that an HDE being (no matter the dimension) has a fundamentally different nature for its mind/soul and other non-physical aspects unless stated. (In simpler terms, a 4D being doesn't have a 4D mind unless stated)

I'll take an example from a verse I know: in this verse, abstract objects like concepts, mind, and soul are under the fourth dimension (being time here). If they were truly abstract objects, they wouldn't be affected by the passage of time, since only physical components/physical matter can be affected by time. It would be like saying the "number 7" can wither away and die, nonsensical. However, the verse does imply that it works that way, so to solve the issue, it would need to be studied on a case-by-case basis to be sure of what it can grant (or not). One thing is sure, however, it wouldn't be acceptable as any CM.

So yeah, I don't think it makes any sense to both be "an abstract object not existing in space or in a physical sense" and yet have HDE. However, I think Vietthai also makes a good point, mainly:

Again as i have said, dimension is axis of direction, 3 dimensions are 3 directions, up and down, forward and backward, left and right. So more dimensions just mean more weird directions, angles. And HDE being mean their existence just be able to extends toward those weird directions that above the 3 basic one

I think this is where the issue lies. We all know fictions that can provide weird beings or objects that are "abstract and yet dimensioned", one of the easiest examples would be a 6D Ghost, but I think the problem lies in the HDE page itself, rather than the seemingly incoherent consequences of such a character.

Ghosts, for the most part in fiction, are spiritual; it is not an "abstract object" like a concept can be, but it isn't "physical" like a human being can be. Therefore, when a Ghost can seemingly exist in "the sixth dimension", for example, it works the same as a human being from the sixth dimension, you would give HDE to his body, not to the "non-physical aspect that makes his existence" (Mind/soul...), however in the case of a Ghost, there is no "physical body" that can get the HDE.

So, I think there should be something else for beings like Ghost that are "abstract" yet "able to reach higher dimensions". Because, like Tayman mentioned in the QnA thread, it's more related to "range/range of movement" rather than "having four or more spatial axes". Maybe a Pseudo-HDE, a new "alternate type" of HDE (for beings that are non-physical but can still travel/reach higher dimension with movement), a mention in "range section", etc could solve that problem.

Edit: The idea of Dimensional Travel was brought up to me, and it could be reworded to be an ability for the aforementioned beings that are "not within physical space but can still reach higher-dimensional realms".

 

[FinePoint]

I think you are confusing physical size with HDE, dimension do not constitute physical size. You can be 363538 dimensional yet just a human-sized being with tier 9 AP, the image in your computer would be 2D yet have no physical size at all, or we have String theory which is a theory involving more than 3 dimensions yet those higher dimensions are compactified and unable to be seen
Again as i have said, dimension is axis of direction, 3 dimensions are 3 directions, up and down, forward and backward, left and right. So more dimensions just mean more weird directions, angles. And HDE being mean their existence just be able to extends toward those weird directions that above the 3 basic one

That is isn't touching the whole fiction weirdness where you have the author stated A is 3754-dimensional and is a living concept as well

The image in my computer screen definitely has physical size in the form of protons and electrons, but regardless you're sort of missing the point.

An abstract has no dimensions at all, and that includes lower dimensions.

To have dimensions at all would imply they are an object which can be measured and has some sort of physical presence. A true abstract does not.

A true abstract, like a concept, does not in itself have any form whatsoever. It may influence objects, it may define them, but itself is not an object. It has no movement, it has no location, it has no direction at all. Type 1 AE requires the character to be purely conceptual. One of their avatars may have HDE, they themselves cannot, by definition.

Abstract, adjective:
- existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.

 

[Thermor]

Bump.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

I have permission to comment as I want from @Antvasima

Concepts are not measured within the dimensional system, and this is something I agree with, but the thing I disagree with and that no one here can ignore, yet everyone still ignores, is that concepts have range by their nature. So if you say, for example, that the concept of death has a limit of 5D, then you contradict yourself, contradict logic, and contradict everything even your own statement that they are things not classified within dimensions and cannot have HDE meaning you contradict everything.

Concepts are things related to thought and the mind, and they surpass any intellect, because concepts exist and at the same time their existence surpasses the limits of our knowledge. Regardless of what kind of being you are, concepts also apply to you whether you are in a higher or lower reality or wherever you are, and this is the truth that everyone here ignores.

If you now say “just measure them,” you are contradicting logic and even your own words. All I asked for is to grant them automatic range, and I shouldn’t even have to argue about something this obvious. It’s logic and cannot be changed just because you disagree; otherwise you first contradict your own words, yourself, and logic. It’s as if you are saying that concepts do not apply to entities of a certain level, while in reality they apply to any level, even +H1A, and this is a fact that should at least be accepted. So they should be given automatic range and this should be mentioned in their profiles.

Any character that represents a concept fundamental to all reality and applicable in every work naturally possesses +H1A range automatically, and anyone who opposes this, as I said, contradicts first their own words and second logic. Also, granting characters range at this level will not affect any of the tiers at all, because range does not mean attack power. Even a character from any level could erase a concept, so it would not affect anything; it would simply be logical.

Imagine someone saying that a concept cannot perceive an entity of any level. Imagine now if someone made a matchup between any character and a character who is literally, for example, the concept of death and classified at 1C. Yes, they might lose due to weak attack power if the opponent is from a higher level, but at least you shouldn’t say it cannot perceive them. It would perceive them as a concept, as the concept of death. So it has the range, even if it might not have enough attack power to defeat them.

 

[Thermor]

The image in my computer screen definitely has physical size in the form of protons and electrons, but regardless you're sort of missing the point.

An abstract has no dimensions at all, and that includes lower dimensions.

To have dimensions at all would imply they are an object which can be measured and has some sort of physical presence. A true abstract does not.

A true abstract, like a concept, does not in itself have any form whatsoever. It may influence objects, it may define them, but itself is not an object. It has no movement, it has no location, it has no direction at all. Type 1 AE requires the character to be purely conceptual. One of their avatars may have HDE, they themselves cannot, by definition.

I have permission from Ant.

How do we deal with concepts that have a visual measurement? An example would be GoW characters as their souls are conceptual type 1 in nature yet has shown a fixated size according to the character like here. Even characters like Hades was shown able to grow their soul in size despite the conceptual/abstract nature here.

Should we simply remove the CM1 nature of GoW souls simply because they have a visual measurement (with some can grow their soul into larger size) or keep it because there's no statements that they have dimensions?

 

[Planck69]

I have permission from Ant.

How do we deal with concepts that have a visual measurement? An example would be GoW characters as their souls are conceptual type 1 in nature yet has shown a fixated size according to the character like here. Even characters like Hades was shown able to grow their soul in size despite the conceptual/abstract nature here.

Should we simply remove the CM1 nature of GoW souls simply because they have a visual measurement (with some can grow their soul into larger size) or keep it because there's no statements that they have dimensions?

Souls do not actually have any canon size in the setting. Garm is larger than both examples here and his soul is represented by tiny flecks of light. It's just a visualization for the player's sake.

Edit: Fenrir when he takes over Garm's body, to be specifc. But this also applies generally to Norse beings.

Else by this logic any abstraction with a visual representation isn't actually abstract.

 

[Thermor]

Souls do not actually have any canon size in the setting. Garm is larger than both examples here and his soul is represented by tiny flecks of light. It's just a visualization for the player's sake.

Else by this logic any abstraction with a visual representation isn't actually abstract.

So do you think if a concept was visually shown to grow in size, it's just simply a visualization for the viewers? Not just GoW I'm talking about.

 

[KLOL506]

Visualization has no relevance to the potency of the concept. Whole point of concepts are governance over reality. Size is irrelevant.

 

[Planck69]

So do you think if a concept was visually shown to grow in size, it's just simply a visualization for the viewers? Not just GoW I'm talking about.

.....Yes?? Do you think abstract beings must just not be visualized in any media ever? Some of the most blatant examples we have show variable "size" in the forms that we see.

If a concept is called "5-dimensional" it is one thing. But the rest of this whole argument is just silliness.

 

[SweetDao]

I still have two comments permissions due to Plant.

I share Planck's opinion. Game visuals shouldn't be taken seriously unless something is clearly stated or demonstrated that imparts physicality to the abstract object.

Without even mentioning that, I'm sure Kratos and Hades both have NPI. It's really just gameplay restrictions because it would be unfun seeing Kratos grab "literal nothing" during a few attacks.

That would be another problem if it were stated that the soul was "2 meters wide" or something in the narrative, and even then, one could argue it's simply the visual representation and the "size" here is analogous and not physical. However, we wouldn't give Large Size in that case, for obvious reasons.

 

[Thermor]

Bump.

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT

I was asked to bring your attention to this thread.

 

[Vietthai96]

Ngl I don't even understand, some people are confusing physical size with shape or form. Abstraction can have some shapes or forms, fiction literally need to visually depict them in one way or another. Like how they need to depict a nonexistent void for audience to see, while realistically speaking a nonexistent void shouldn't be able to be seen

The image in my computer screen definitely has physical size in the form of protons and electrons, but regardless you're sort of missing the point.

An abstract has no dimensions at all, and that includes lower dimensions.

To have dimensions at all would imply they are an object which can be measured and has some sort of physical presence. A true abstract does not.

A true abstract, like a concept, does not in itself have any form whatsoever. It may influence objects, it may define them, but itself is not an object. It has no movement, it has no location, it has no direction at all. Type 1 AE requires the character to be purely conceptual. One of their avatars may have HDE, they themselves cannot, by definition.

So BDE Type 1 for every AE1?

 

[SweetDao]

So BDE Type 1 for every AE1?

(Permission by Plant, last one too, for now)

Is your question a rhetorical one or a genuine one? Because I believe whatever the intent was, I think the answer is simply "how" we want to go from there.

The first option would be to answer yes, plainly, unless contradicted. Would you say that it makes any sense for a standards space manipulation or a standards time manipulation to affect a concept? Here I'm saying "affecting" as in, directly interacting with the abstract object, not just causing some chain reaction (like destroying all objects of a type 2 concept and therefore destroying it as a result). NPI would solve the issue while keeping the AE/Abstract existence of said abstract object.

The second option would be to answer "no, unless it's specified that their existence is what makes them immune to space/time manipulation". Alllegedly a stricter option, but since we always work on "what is shown or reasonably inferred," I don't think it's completely impossible to go with it. Depends on what the staff would like, really. Although I'd like to say I'm not too fond of that idea because it would require someone without a body to say that Matter Manipulation doesn't work on him, unnecessary imo.

Finally, I'll ask you a question too.

Mind manipulation immunity for every standard rock in fiction? If reading this, you thought "that's obvious, a rock doesn't have a mind by default", then you've answered your original question.

 

[DontTalkDT]

If they have an avatar that can have HDE.
If they have an aspect for which having a concept of dimensionality makes sense (e.g. some depiction of information), then it works, too.
If you want to claim they are a universal in traditional sense or something along those lines, then you have to choose between either having that or having HDE.

 

[Planck69]

If they have an avatar that can have HDE.
If they have an aspect for which having a concept of dimensionality makes sense (e.g. some depiction of information), then it works, too.
If you want to claim they are a universal in traditional sense or something along those lines, then you have to choose between either having that or having HDE.

Sorry, could you elaborate on the "universal in a traditional sense"? As in, a Type 1/2 concept or something else?

 

[Azertyhuuh]

If they have an avatar that can have HDE.
If they have an aspect for which having a concept of dimensionality makes sense (e.g. some depiction of information), then it works, too.
If you want to claim they are a universal in traditional sense or something along those lines, then you have to choose between either having that or having HDE.

Sorry, could you elaborate on the "universal in a traditional sense"? As in, a Type 1/2 concept or something else?

Always with permission from @Antvasima , and there is no need to write this every time; I have the right to participate here as I want.

If a character embodies a certain concept yet still shows physical aspects, this gives it both things: abstract existence and higher-dimensional existence. This is a type of contradictory physiology or contradictions; it is a form of contradictory existence, in fact a new type that should be added, like a character that both exists and does not exist, or an ontologically contradictory being. If such cases that contradict logic exist normally, then something like this is not a problem at all; it is also a new type of contradictory existence. If the character embodies a concept and displays a form, aspects, and events that somehow give it a physical appearance, often this type of character does not have a fixed physical form but changes form with each case in these rare situations, and it may simply be a physical manifestation created by the concept across existence itself to show itself, rather than having an actual body. The concept itself may manifest and create a body across all existence to interact, just as symbolic avatars are created; a body can also be created that extends across all existence, and this is the most logical inference so far; otherwise, this is simply a new case of contradictory existence.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

This is a new type of contradictory existence. Yes, a concept can possess or manifest physical properties in many cases, and it can even be that the whole is part of it in some contradictory way; this is one of the states of contradictory existence. There are even characters whose existence lies between nonexistence and existence, meaning they are not existent and existent at the same time, and this is one of the cases found in fiction as well, and one of the contradictory states of existence. Therefore, if a character achieves this, a type of contradictory existence should be added, while granting it abstract existence and higher-dimensional existence, and this is my personal opinion on this matter.

 

[Thermor]

Bump.

 

[Thermor]

Bump.

 

[Thermor]

Bump.

 

[Thermor]

I want to ask if characters that embody abtracts like concepts can get Large size (like bigger than the universe or multiverse) but not needing to get HDE? An example is this.

 

[Planck69]

I want to ask if characters that embody abtracts like concepts can get Large size (like bigger than the universe or multiverse) but not needing to get HDE? An example is this.

It isn't really possible to be physically bigger than a multiverse and not have Higher-Dimensional Existence so this is a nonsensical question anyways. As for the above link, those are just their bodies/physical forms. The profile itself points out that they have abstract non-physical true selves.

 

[Thermor]

It isn't really possible to be physically bigger than a multiverse and not have Higher-Dimensional Existence so this is a nonsensical question anyways. As for the above link, those are just their bodies/physical forms. The profile itself points out that they have abstract non-physical true selves.

Then what about characters who has large size but has BDE? An example is this.

 

[Planck69]

Then what about characters who has large size but has BDE? An example is this.

He probably shouldn't have that but I dunno enough about it to say.

Also, this isn't a QnA thread. You still have to get permission to post here.

 

[Thermor]

He probably shouldn't have that but I dunno enough about it to say.

Also, this isn't a QnA thread. You still have to get permission to post here.

I have permission from Ant and as I remember, you gain up to 5 post perms. 4 I have used up. Bumps and clarifying my perms shouldn't count.

 

[Thermor]

Got additonal perms from Ant.

I talked to Ant regarding indexing abstract concepts having large size but doesn't have HDE, only BDE. Here some examples:

1. The Great Darkness
2. Chaos King
3. Azathoth

Ant mentioned OP should tackle this issue.

If they have an avatar that can have HDE.
If they have an aspect for which having a concept of dimensionality makes sense (e.g. some depiction of information), then it works, too.
If you want to claim they are a universal in traditional sense or something along those lines, then you have to choose between either having that or having HDE.

He probably shouldn't have that but I dunno enough about it to say.

Yapppp

Yum yum

 

[Vietthai96]

Those Large Size is wrong anyway, because BDE shouldn't have "size" let alone having AE1 together

 

[Thermor]

Those Large Size is wrong anyway, because BDE shouldn't have "size" let alone having AE1 together

Ig we axe all abstracts that has HDE or Large Size.

 

[Vietthai96]

BDE1 having "size" is somewhat understandable but definitely not BDE2 and 3

 

[Thermor]

BDE1 having "size" is somewhat understandable but definitely not BDE2 and 3

Actually thinking about it, it's stated that BDE3 characters can operate on a higher notion of dimensionality. An example is a higher universe inhabitat with "3D humans" having R>F over a lower universe. Large size can still apply probably.