• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact AKM sama if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
ShivaShakti
Reaction score
835

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Hello. My question my be silly, but now. Is Umr-At Tawill higher than Hypnos?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    Err...yes, the universe is ordinary with the fantasy elements aside. I guess what I'm trying to rectify is that you seem to be arguing that each universe is a basic 3-Dimensional universe, with no transcending features to them save the Gates connecting them to the void(s). Yet higher dimensional beings and objects do exist, do they not? Beings like the Great Old Ones, Nodens, the Nightgaunts and others are beyond 3-Dimensional space, but they don't exist in the void of ultimate chaos with the Ultimate Gods.
    Again, the Great Ones and the Dreamlands that they rule over are very explicitly described as part of the 3-dimensional section of the universe, so they aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and the fact the whole point of their character is how feeble the human notion of a "deity" is should hammer the point home as is (Though this idea is admitedly contradicted by Nodens' very existence, but I digress.) The Nightgaunts aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and are only as high as they are through scaling, and Nodens himself is an entity that's defined as far beyond the Great Ones, and not strictly associated with the Dreamlands beyond being the ruler of the Great Abyss, so those two aren't a particularly strong argument in that regard, especially when, again, the Dreamlands are explicitly 3-dimensional and not transcendental realms at all, according to Through the Gates of the Silver Key.

    On a related note, why is a quote from Conan the Barbarian allowed to be used for scaling but my use of Ithaqua as a comparison to Cthulhu "discredits the whole post?" I don't want to appear petty or overly bothered by it, but I would like a reason why one would be allowed and the other wouldn't.

    That's because Robert E. Howard, the writer of the original Conan stories, was part of Lovecraft's circle of friends, and the two often put references to each other's works in their own, so they're considered a secondary canon of sorts. Entities from sources written after Lovecraft's death are considered non-canon for our purposes, on the other hand.

    Really, that's the biggest gap that needs to be bridged between what I understand and what the revisions are saying. Because to me, the logical follow-through would be: there are infinite numbers of spatial dimensions, with each lower dimension being a fragmentary expression of the more complex existence above it. That would mean that whatever God or Gods existed in these realms would be, by definition, different levels of archetypal existence tied to the dimensions that they inhabit. Each would be a fragment of a greater archetype until the Supreme Archetype is reached at the ultimate pinnacle of archetypal existence.
    The relationship between the layers of the dimensional hierarchy and the one that the Archetypes hold towards the rest of existence is certainly similar, but certainly not the same, considering how the Ultimate Void which they inhabit is very explicitly outside of dimensions, and an undimensioned state of being is already reached by trespassing the First Gate, which is just the initial step out of a multitude, not to mention much lesser entities like the Great Old Ones existing in a state beyond dimensions. You're mistaken in that the Archetypes aren't the denizens of the higher spatial dimensions: They inhabit the void that lies beyond them entirely. For instance, their region is directly stated to be the realm where all dimensions simply dissolve into the absolute:

    He crawled through the dark orifice with tense, adventurous assurance, lighting his way with matches taken from the sitting-room. In another moment he had wriggled through the root-choked fissure at the farther end, and was in the vast, unknown inner grotto whose ultimate rock wall seemed half like a monstrous and consciously shapen pylon. Before that dank, dripping wall he stood silent and awestruck, lighting one match after another as he gazed. Was that stony bulge above the keystone of the imagined arch really a gigantic sculptured hand? Then he drew forth the Silver Key, and made motions and intonations whose source he could only dimly remember. Was anything forgotten? He knew only that he wished to cross the barrier to the untrammelled land of his dreams and the gulfs where all dimensions dissolve in the absolute.

    If so, I'd argue that the only thing we probably really disagree on is the order of the Archetype-Ultimate God relationship, as I believe the former to be just a part of the latter, which transcends even archetypal existence
    Again, see above in that the Archetypes aren't the denizens of the higher spatial dimensions, but of the void that exists way beyond them, instead: You're probably conflating the two due to similar descriptions, but the overall context of the story and the cosmology as a whole makes it clear they are very different. The higher dimensions reaching up to the "dizzy and reachless heights of archetypal infinity" doesn't hold much relevance when this entire hierarchy is then described as an "infinitesimal thing" that the First Gate alone encloses.

    Moreover, as for the distinction between the Ultimate Gods and the Archetypes: In your blog, it seems like you focused too much on how we used "Yog-Sothoth" being a fractionary conception of the Supreme Archetype as evidence of a division between the two, but that's not really the case, and that quote in particular was just supporting evidence. The core of the argument comes from how the story explicitly states that the Archetypes can choose to participate in a change-involving perspective and view reality through more limited lenses, if they so desire, and we used that as a way to remedy the inconsistency between how they are portrayed in other stories and how they are portrayed in TtGotSK: The former having them as mutable, local entities defined as having been created at some point and as capable of reproduction and the like, and the latter having them as ineffable, uncreated entities who are truly eternal and experience no form of change whatsoever.

    Of course, we only take the former descriptions as true because of Dream-Quest defining them in those terms from the perspective of an omniscient third-person narrator, as well as Lovecraft framing them in this manner in his family tree. If the only evidence towards that being the case were second-hand descriptions coming from lower beings/artifacts, such as cultists or the Necronomicon, then we wouldn't really take it into account.
    LordNidhoggr
    LordNidhoggr
    That's because Robert E. Howard, the writer of the original Conan stories, was part of Lovecraft's circle of friends, and the two often put references to each other's works in their own, so they're considered a secondary canon of sorts. Entities from sources written after Lovecraft's death are considered non-canon for our purposes, on the other hand.
    No. If that's the standard, Ithaqua meets it. Derleth was also a collaborator of Lovecraft and he introduced Ithaqua in his 1933 story "The Thing that Walked on the Wind," a full four years before Lovecraft died.

    Again, the Great Ones and the Dreamlands that they rule over are very explicitly described as part of the 3-dimensional section of the universe, so they aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and the fact the whole point of their character is how feeble the human notion of a "deity" is should hammer the point home as is (Though this idea is admitedly contradicted by Nodens' very existence, but I digress.) The Nightgaunts aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and are only as high as they are through scaling, and Nodens himself is an entity that's defined as far beyond the Great Ones, and not strictly associated with the Dreamlands beyond being the ruler of the Great Abyss, so those two aren't a particularly strong argument in that regard, especially when, again, the Dreamlands are explicitly 3-dimensional and not transcendental realms at all, according to Through the Gates of the Silver Key.
    Again, see above in that the Archetypes aren't the denizens of the higher spatial dimensions, but of the void that exists way beyond them, instead: You're probably conflating the two due to similar descriptions, but the overall context of the story and the cosmology as a whole makes it clear they are very different. The higher dimensions reaching up to the "dizzy and reachless heights of archetypal infinity" doesn't hold much relevance when this entire hierarchy is then described as an "infinitesimal thing" that the First Gate alone encloses.
    Ok, I think I've found the problem I had and part of the trouble here is vocabulary, and part of the problem is interpretational. The interpretational part is that you are using the phrasing of a descriptor of the beings beyond the Ultimate Gate to say that there is a distinction between the Archetypes and Ultimate/Outer Gods. I don't see why a change in perception of reality from seeing all things in their absolute form to seeing things in a lower form necessitates a change in the observer. As for vocabulary, when I talk about the archetypes of the various dimensions, I am referring to them as the definition of archetypes, not necessarily the entities in the ultimate abyss. This quote:

    All descended lines of beings of the finite dimensions, continued the waves, and all stages of growth in each one of these beings, are merely manifestations of one archetypal and eternal being in the space outside dimensions. Each local being—son, father, grandfather, and so on—and each stage of individual being—infant, child, boy, young man, old man—is merely one of the infinite phases of that same archetypal and eternal being, caused by a variation in the angle of the consciousness-plane which cuts it. Randolph Carter at all ages; Randolph Carter and all his ancestors both human and pre-human, terrestrial and pre-terrestrial; all these were only phases of one ultimate, eternal “Carter” outside space and time—phantom projections differentiated only by the angle at which the plane of consciousness happened to cut the eternal archetype in each case.

    By definition, a higher version of a lower manifestation of being is an archetypal being, because it serves as the archetype for the lower manifestation. That's literally all I was trying to say. That said, I did misinterpret your statements about the Dreamlands being three-dimensional. The story does clearly say that all the dimensions of archetypal infinity exist before the First Gate, with the Dreamlands and the world of men (read: the three-dimensional universe that functions according to the laws of physics we understand) are mere "parts of the three-dimensional phase of the small wholeness reached by the First Gate," with the "wholeness" part clearly referring to the higher and lower dimensions that exist. So, my fault there.

    Moreover, as for the distinction between the Ultimate Gods and the Archetypes: In your blog, it seems like you focused too much on how we used "Yog-Sothoth" being a fractionary conception of the Supreme Archetype as evidence of a division between the two, but that's not really the case, and that quote in particular was just supporting evidence. The core of the argument comes from how the story explicitly states that the Archetypes can choose to participate in a change-involving perspective and view reality through more limited lenses, if they so desire, and we used that as a way to remedy the inconsistency between how they are portrayed in other stories and how they are portrayed in TtGotSK: The former having them as mutable, local entities defined as having been created at some point and as capable of reproduction and the like, and the latter having them as ineffable, uncreated entities who are truly eternal and experience no form of change whatsoever.
    If you want to be specific, to the point of being pedantic, no it doesn't. It says that the "But the entities outside the Gates command all angles, and view the myriad parts of the cosmos in terms of fragmentary, change-involving perspective, or of the changeless totality beyond perspective, in accordance with their will." It also says "The archetypes, throbbed the waves, are the people of the ultimate abyss—formless, ineffable, and guessed at only by rare dreamers on the low-dimensioned worlds. Chief among such was this informing BEING itself . . . which indeed was Carter’s own archetype. The glutless zeal of Carter and all his forbears for forbidden cosmic secrets was a natural result of derivation from the SUPREME ARCHETYPE. On every world all great wizards, all great thinkers, all great artists, are facets of IT." This can be interpreted to mean that the beings beyond the gates are archetypes, or that archetypes are among the beings beyond the gate. It's very easy to point at this and Carter's earlier statement of Yog-Sothoth as the limitless being and say that it proves Yog-Sothoth alone is the supreme being of the mythos with "Randolph Carters" as its lowest-level avatars.

    As for using the archetype discussion to remedy inconsistencies, what stories have any of the Ultimate/Outer Gods as mutable or finite beings, besides (arguably) Nyarlathotep? I understand wanting to do that, but I guess what I'm failing to understand is why the gods have a distinction between their "named selves" and this "archetypal existence." The only being that's been specifically said not to visit the universe is Yog-Sothoth. But the other entities beyond the Ultimate Gate are never given this limitation, so I don't understand why there would be a "lower form," compared to the Archetypes, that would arise from this distinction. It's pretty clear that even lesser beings can interact with three-dimensional space without limiting their forms given the many descriptions we have of such beings having dimensions beyond the normal three, or causing those attempting to perceive them to kind of...break.

    Again, the Great Ones and the Dreamlands that they rule over are very explicitly described as part of the 3-dimensional section of the universe, so they aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and the fact the whole point of their character is how feeble the human notion of a "deity" is should hammer the point home as is (Though this idea is admitedly contradicted by Nodens' very existence, but I digress.) The Nightgaunts aren't really higher-dimensional entities, and are only as high as they are through scaling, and Nodens himself is an entity that's defined as far beyond the Great Ones, and not strictly associated with the Dreamlands beyond being the ruler of the Great Abyss, so those two aren't a particularly strong argument in that regard, especially when, again, the Dreamlands are explicitly 3-dimensional and not transcendental realms at all, according to Through the Gates of the Silver Key.

    The Nightguants are as powerful as they are because they're explicitly described as being able to survive the birth and death of myriad universes during their chase through time and space. Just being in a position where you could be exposed to the birth and death of multiple universes should automatically present them as higher-dimensional beings because they exist outside of the universe(s). If you mean that the Nightgaunts don't transcend the First Gate, that's not what I was arguing; I'm arguing that they are higher than three-dimensional beings. I assume you're referring to the Great Old Ones when you say "Great Ones," here, which I'm going to have to disagree with, too. The gods of the Dreamlands are explicitly described as weak, and they clearly only exist in that three-dimensional phase of the first gate. But the Great Old Ones are specifically said to be beyond matter and be "undimensioned," which should put them outside of the hierarchy of dimensions and thus scale them to other beings (able to exist) outside the gates, which would at minimum be more powerful than Hypnos as he was basically gibbed by the mere attention of the beings beyond the gate. And the Nightgaunts, bringing everything full circle, should scale at least somewhat to the Great Old Ones given that they do not fear them because they are protected by their master, Nodens, who is explicitly stronger than [the GOOs].

    So, in my mind, the problem I have is identifying the Ultimate Gods' aspect as Archetypes distinctly from their other attributes. Given that TtGotSK identifies archetypes as those things from which all lesser things are drawn based on how any given level of existence intersects with said archetype, an archetypal existence should just a descriptor-a function of the Ultimate/Outer Gods' existence, and Archetype and Ultimate God should be synonymous. I'm also still wondering how Hypnos is supposed to have breached the Ultimate Gate, given that passing through the First Gate should qualify for the transcendental experience he had and the fact that neither Hypnos nor his companion were ever met by 'Umr At-Tawil, who is described as being greater than all the nameless terrors transcending our world (which should mean beyond the First Gate, already a place beyond all dimensions) and should thus qualify for high 1-A himself.
    LordNidhoggr
    LordNidhoggr
    So...uh, are you going to respond, or are you just leaving it as-is?
    Ay.

    I don't see your Discord on my list of friends anymore. Haven't for some time now. Thought you might just be gone or something. Did you delete it?
    ShivaShakti
    ShivaShakti
    Yeah. Some people who have either left or got banned from the wiki kept trying to come after me and send me weird links lol.
    MrKingOfNegativity
    MrKingOfNegativity
    And people wonder why I change my tag all the time.

    Someone in the server was kind enough to give me your new tag. I went and sent a FR already.
    ShivaShakti
    ShivaShakti
    Accepted it
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top