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 Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Happy to discuss that in the main thread. Ordinarily, I'd agree, but this bit of information seemed to be way too tightly bound-up with something that falls under the general concept of BDE to not note it down on that page. If nothing else, I'd feature it both in it and in the generic pages...
Part of it was also given in the new Beyond-Dimensional Existence page. The example being that if a realm/character/whatever is aspatial and atemporal and yet simultaneously shown to dwarf normal reality by some size analogue (The Void from Lucifer is probably one of the best examples), it fits...
Needs to specifically involve the technical terminology necessary to get to those tiers. So, for instance, High 1-A+ would need to decently expound on logical possibilities and related concepts. And even then the context would need to be pretty exact, since people aren't always using these words...
Yeah, I can see a use for the page, then. I'm not opposed to a rewritten version of it on that basis. Though I'd define the latter case-scenarios a bit more precisely; for example, a verse emphatically stating a void is aspatial, atemporal, etc, but also depicting it through spatial imagery...
That doesn't really change what I said. Think back to the example I gave: Is the 2-dimensional object in question only infinite "in comparison with a 1-D object"? Perhaps in some respect, but it's also infinite in-and-of-itself because of its extension in the x-axis. Same can apply here.
The page itself seems to exclusively refer to the "metaphysically superior" kind of cosmological layer when it talks about hierarchies. With physical and metaphysical differences being separated, you'd have to do a complete rewrite of the page for it to fit in.
I don't know how worth it that...
As it stands, none of this suffices, no. The Demon World would ultimately end up falling under the "significant size" caveat, and a description identifying it as infinite doesn't do much to appease that. Mostly because it is obviously possible to be finite with respect to one axis, but not...
By the way, I ignored them because I don't take umbrage at any of the insinuations above, really. I class myself as just scaling wherever my reasoning leads me, but I am obviously not infallible, and I have no problem with the idea of there being other people around to keep my biases in check...
1. Yeah, though I'll probably expand those types a bit, later.
2. Yeah, insofar as the character is greater than any single dimensional space. Most applications of the ability (e.g. Reducing dimensionality) probably don't make sense when applied to characters like that, either.
1. Yeah.
2. Depends on whether the verse counts the laws of logic as among the mathematical conditions that might cause a universe to be instantiated in it.
3. Yeah. Unless it falls under the stipulations in the FAQ.
4. Under certain stipulations.
5. No, infinite layers into High 1-A is not...
Might be fine. See below for the reason I put that in.
True.
"Levels of infinity" would give off the impression that the new Tiering System still works off on some ill-defined notion that can be equated both to dimensional levels and to metaphysical differences, as we did before. I don't mind...
For my part: I already said that I don't have an issue with waiting. It's not like we're in any sort of rush to apply this. You can take the time you need, as far as I'm concerned.
Depends on what this "They are concepts" entails. If the pillars are all just the same undifferentiated "concept" then that's not inherently an issue, given robust enough statements. Overall boils down to the description given to them rather than the name they're called by.
Yeah, since in transcending all multiplicity whatsoever it also transcends any notion of a succession of states, and also whatever could condition such a succession.
Yeah, that's a fair enough way to assess it. But I don't think it's a good reason to just keep these pages un-applied, still, because either way some degree of confusion is bound to happen during this transition period. Even under what you are suggesting, for example, some verses will be...
SCP is an exceptional case because it's also in the process of being moved somewhere else and deleted. If it bothers you, it doesn't take much to just write down a big note in the verse page saying the verse is about to get thrown out and that, by extension, its ratings aren't going to be up to...
That sounds like a pretty wonky way to go about it. Making a bunch of CRTs for a Tiering System that isn't even formally applied and exists mostly in the form of sandboxes sounds like bad practice overall. Far better to go with the approach I pitched up there.
For the matter, I don't mind...
Afterwards, it's up to the supporters of each individual verse to revise them, if they believe the verses in question ought to be tiered differently with the new system. Most likely, I'll make a "hub" thread for all the CRTs that'll spawn out of these revisions.
More specifically for being described as "above the real" and similar.
Though, can you explain Lucifer's relation to dimensionality, also? The comics are a big vague on that mark, and the fact he's very much depicted as existing just fine in regular reality throws me off.
Narnia is not an Arian cosmology and Aslan is very much the equal of the Emperor. That's all there is to say on that.
Gotta say I'm pretty skeptical of High 1-A+/Tier 0 Narnia based on that reasoning, ngl. Seems like yapping to me.