- 4,524
- 2,242
Yes it does exist. It exists in mention. You're arguing semantics. The purpose of that section is that an infinite hierarchy isn't supposed to be necessary to get the tier in the first place. This would completely defeat that purpose
-
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.
Amending the "1-A Without Infinite Hierarchy"-Guideline
- Thread starter DontTalkDT
- Start date
-
- Tags
- tiering system faq
- Status
- 7,904
- 14,966
- 4,524
- 2,242
Yes it is lmfao. The entire point is that you (and DT) are arguing that to get a 1A tier you must explicitly mention that even an infinite number of dimensions would mean nothing to a character because of how much they transcend it. That defeats the purpose of a note that specifically addresses how a character can reach 1A without the need of an infinite hierarchy. Either way the hierarchy is a requirement, whether in the cosmology or in mention, to getting the 1A tier.
- 7,904
- 14,966
No it doesn't, because it allows for something to be rated 1A without being above an infinite hierarchy in the cosmology.
- 4,524
- 2,242
No it doesn't allow that because the character would still need an infinite hierarchy to scale over. It doesn't matter if it's a physical part of the cosmology. The fact is, it's still a necessity in reaching the 1A tier, meaning that the note is completely useless
- 7,904
- 14,966
Yes it does. That's the typical requirement that the exception is aimed at.
- 4,524
- 2,242
No it doesn't. The point is that a character transcends an infinitely layered hierarchy. Whether or not the hierarchy is hypothetical is physical doesn't matter if the character is transcendent over it.
- 7,904
- 14,966
But they don't, no such hierarchy exists. The point is that they would, which is true of all 1-A characters
- 4,524
- 2,242
But you're making it a requirement that this infinitely layered hierarchy is mentioned. It's physical existence in the cosmology therefore becomes irrelevant. In the end, it's still a complete requirement in order for a character/verse to be 1A. It makes it impossible for a verse lacking those such dimensions/hierarchies to reach it without having to use some unsubtle language like "even if there were infinite dimensions they'd still be nothing to this guy!" or something like that.
- 7,904
- 14,966
Yeah that's the whole point of having an exception.
Yep you got it, that is correct.
- 4,524
- 2,242
That's pretty dumb. It seems strict for no good reason at all
- 7,638
- 7,806
@Qawsedf234 Thank you for your time and effort to break down the requirements for this FAQ section in regard to my DC example.
At this time, I'll hop into the other thread to understand the current thoughts on the set divisions and requirements between High 1-B, Low 1-A, and 1-A on conceptual matters.
At this time, I'll hop into the other thread to understand the current thoughts on the set divisions and requirements between High 1-B, Low 1-A, and 1-A on conceptual matters.
- 6,213
- 16,621
Those two arguments only work when operating under the assumption that it makes sense to consider something that's above and outside dimensions as just being equivalent to one dimension higher than whatever is in the setting of the verse, to begin with (In other words, that a theoretical space of 2 dimensions more than whatever is in DC could actually be said to be bigger than the Overvoid, to draw from the specific example here, though bear in mind I don't particularly care about it. I'm interested in the general case), which I'd contest pretty heavily, myself. For that I point you to my post here.
Honestly I was warry of actually bringing that discussion to this thread, but then I realized how directly adjacent the two topics are, since your proposal would imply that just being above dimensionality is not enough unless the verse also establishes the character in question is also above an infinite amount of theoretical dimensions. So, I might as well address that issue here. No point in getting this thread accepted if it'll just get contested immediately after, anyway.
- 18,393
- 14,323
What? And what is point of stricting it?
- 7,904
- 14,966
Well, I think this is the natural obstacle of a system which attempts to serve two masters simultaneously. At the higher levels, dimensional tiering is the primary basis of our tiering system.
We generally do not regard concepts as being automatically 1-A, but this causes quite a bit of intuitional friction. For example, if a conceptual being transcends spacetime in a verse that is -- as far as we can tell -- otherwise an entirely normal universe with no multiple timelines, dimensions, universes, et cetera, we generally do not tier that being as though they'd be above an infinite dimensional infinite multiverse with infinite timelines.
However, if you really think about it, the idea that a conceptual being that transcends a 4-D spacetime would somehow... not do that if a single spatial dimension is added does seem a bit weird. This is counter-intuitive, but it's the compromise we have to make if we want to have a dimensional tiering system that doesn't treat every single conceptual entity as an Azathoth-esque supergod that can destroy infinite multiverses at will.
So generally, we scale conceptual beings to the cosmologies and constructs that they transcend. The exception we are discussing is how we get there for beings who do not have an infinite hierarchy in their verse and how they could ever reach those heights. On this subject, I strongly agree with DT. It would and should require some pretty specific evidence to reach such a conclusion, because being conceptual or even super-conceptual (like some kind of all-concept being or concept-transcending being) should not confer 1-A. I'd weep to see something like "beyond the concept of dimensions" (an entirely incoherent phrase) justified for such a high tier when really what we have is a run of the mill "Concept+" in a normal verse being tiered well beyond their capabilities due to the disjointed relationship between dimensions and concepts, and the inherent difficulty in reconciling them in the same tiering system across multiple fictions that treat them all quite differently.
Last edited:
- 31,645
- 34,692
Yeah, I have heard arguments about "Transcending the entire concept of space, time, and dimension" defaulting to a 1-A statement, but have always found that too assumptive. It can, but not always and really should have Low 1-C be a safer standard assumption. Though, some characters have gotten 1-A via conceptual statements combined with there existing 1-B minimum structures.
- 4,524
- 2,242
Fair enough I suppose, but I don't think it's just a case of "bigger than the concept of dimensions" and getting 1A. I think there's definitely more evidence required to show that it's a legit thing, but maybe I'm wrong.
- 7,638
- 7,806
@DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234
If the minimum for 1-A is superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical infinite hierarchy, would we consider the superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical finite hierarchy as Low 1-A?
vsbattles.fandom.com
If the minimum for 1-A is superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical infinite hierarchy, would we consider the superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical finite hierarchy as Low 1-A?
Tiering System
The following is a comprehensive overview of the hierarchical system the VS Battles Wiki utilizes to properly categorize and index fictional characters, entities, and objects based on the scale of their feats and the varying scopes that they can affect or create/destroy. Though Destructive...
vsbattles.fandom.com
Last edited:
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Username OnlyVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 3,256
- 3,961
This is being discussed at https://vsbattles.com/threads/low-1-a-wiki-wide-tiering-revision-beyond-dimensions.151894/, so we should probably finish that discussion first.@DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234
If the minimum for 1-A is superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical infinite hierarchy, would we consider the superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical finite hierarchy as Low 1-A?
Tiering System
The following is a comprehensive overview of the hierarchical system the VS Battles Wiki utilizes to properly categorize and index fictional characters, entities, and objects based on the scale of their feats and the varying scopes that they can affect or create/destroy. Though Destructive...
- 10,942
- 12,446
- Thread starter
- #101
That would be the size of the hierarchy +1 level of infinity. Like, being qualitatively superior to a 10D hierarchy would make you 11D level.@DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234
If the minimum for 1-A is superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical infinite hierarchy, would we consider the superiority to the concept of an existing/hypothetical finite hierarchy as Low 1-A?
Tiering System
The following is a comprehensive overview of the hierarchical system the VS Battles Wiki utilizes to properly categorize and index fictional characters, entities, and objects based on the scale of their feats and the varying scopes that they can affect or create/destroy. Though Destructive...
- 7,638
- 7,806
I see.
Should we put this thread on hold until the other Tier 1 thread is concluded?
The 1-A requirements seem to be moving to Low 1-A.
Last edited:
- 10,942
- 12,446
- Thread starter
- #103
I think we can handle this first? Like, the main takeaway from this is that without more explicit mentioned, being above a few levels being added is those level + 1 level of infinity.
I think we can add the note and then take care of the other thing.
This just seems much easier to conclude. Got a lot of agreement already. So I think we may as well finish this first, then the other thing.
I think we can add the note and then take care of the other thing.
This just seems much easier to conclude. Got a lot of agreement already. So I think we may as well finish this first, then the other thing.
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Username OnlyVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 3,256
- 3,961
This thread can be concluded first, but the 1-A in the note you're proposing will be changed to Low 1-A if the other thread gets accepted afterwards. Anyway, how much more consensus is needed before you can apply this change?
- 7,638
- 7,806
I don't have any issues with the requirements themselves.
I just have questions regarding applications and examples.
In a similar manner to DC's Overvoid, would Fate's Root also be relegated to 1-C since there is no actual/hypothetical infinite heiarchy?
I just have questions regarding applications and examples.
In a similar manner to DC's Overvoid, would Fate's Root also be relegated to 1-C since there is no actual/hypothetical infinite heiarchy?
- 10,942
- 12,446
- Thread starter
- #106
Well, I don't know Fate, so I can't answer that.
- 7,638
- 7,806
Well, based on the stuff below from the profile, what are your initial impressions?
- Is the "Spiral of Origin", the grand mass of nothingness that all concepts in existence sprang forth from, and is where everything returns when it is destroyed. Controls
- Exists at the summit of all dimensional theories, existing independently of it's definitions.
- It is completely transcendent of the rest of reality, an unrestrained domain free from binary opposition
- 10,942
- 12,446
- Thread starter
- #108
If one statement is "above all dimensional theories", then one could look into what kind of dimensional theories are mentioned in the verse. If one with infinite dimensions is mentioned, one can debate if it gets such a tier.
But if all theories mentioned are at best 8D and otherwise there also exists nothing larger than 8D space in the verse, it might be 9D-level.
But yeah, take that as just a first impression.
- 7,638
- 7,806
Thank you for the clarification. As you said, a deeper discussion will be in a different thread.
- 3,346
- 1,912
infinite dimensions exist theoretically, as hilbert spaces and quantum multiverses exist, but im not sure how that applies.
infinite layered concepts may also exist, but the crt i made got closed before i could finish the agrument
- 7,638
- 7,806
Thank you for the input, but a deeper discussion will be in a different thread.
- 7,638
- 7,806
It seems we may proceed.
- 18,393
- 14,323
Those are simply theories, you need to elaborate them in verse (for canonicity reasons)
Distinguishing between mentioning a theory and expounding upon it in verse is significant. This differentiation exists for a valid purpose. To illustrate, the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) can potentially be extended to high 1-B. However, in the context of Arceus's verse, the theory is not only mentioned but also elaborated upon and taken to the level of 2-A.
- 168,532
- 77,301
- 10,942
- 12,446
- Thread starter
- #116
I performed the edit.
Tiering System FAQ
A: Whether higher-dimensional entities qualify for such high tiers or not depends on several different factors, which may take root both in and out-of-verse. To explain this situation, we must first clarify what exactly being higher-dimensional entails. In a way, yes, though not how most would...
vsbattles.fandom.com
Can this be closed?
- Status
Similar threads
