- 1
- 0
I wanted to share a system I’ve been developing for ranking the overall power of fictional universes and see what people think about it. The idea came from noticing a recurring problem in cross-verse debates: most tiering systems evaluate individual characters, but in many cases the deciding factor is actually the cosmology of the universe they come from. For example, consider something like SCP-3812 versus I Am That I Am from World of Darkness. Both can be described as “absolute” within their own frameworks, but determining which one actually overrides the other requires examining the structure of their universes rather than just the characters themselves. That led me to start developing a system for evaluating entire fictional settings as composites instead of focusing only on individual characters. I'll go into the SCP-3812 vs I Am That I Am example in more detail later in the post, but that kind of situation is exactly what this system is meant to address. If that sounds interesting, take a look and let me know what you think.
Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS)
CUTS ranks a fictional universe as a composite (the setting as a whole, not an individual character) using two outputs:
Cosmology Tier (CT): how the universe is constructed (size, layers, dimensional/ontological structure).
Composite Power Rating (CPR): how much "power" the verse can actually field in practice, measured across consistent metrics.
Standard Output Format
[Universe] — CT-X | CPR YY/25 (PAx PDx ACx HRx SSx) | Notes/Flags
1) Cosmology Tier (CT) Ladder
CT is about what exists in the setting's structure, not what the average inhabitant can do.
CT-0: Mundane — Realistic world scale; no meaningful metaphysical layers.
CT-1: Planetary — Single world "arena"; limited otherworlds.
CT-2: Stellar — Interstellar scope; no native galactic domain.
CT-3: Galactic — Natively galactic in scope.
CT-4: Universal — Explicit full-universe domain(s) exist.
CT-5: Multi-Universal — Multiple universes exist (parallel realities/timelines) in a meaningful way.
CT-6: Multiversal — Many universes with consistent traversal/interaction.
CT-7: High Multiversal — Vast/infinite multiverse or stacked multiversal scale.
CT-8: Hyperversal — Higher-dimensional "layer stacks" beyond multiverse-as-a-set.
CT-9: Outerversal (1-A) — Reality framed beyond dimensional measurement; ontological strata dominate.
CT-10: Absolute/Meta — Reserved tier (rare) for settings that explicitly treat themselves as higher than fiction (generally avoided unless your rules explicitly allow it).
CT Rule: CT describes the board, not the pieces.
2) Composite Power Rating (CPR)
CPR is a 0–25 score made from five axes, each rated 0–5:
Axis A — Peak Authority (PA)
How high the top-end of the verse can go in actual capability.
0 street/military
1 city/continent
2 planetary–stellar
3 galactic
4 universal–multiversal
5 outer/ontological/narrative-tier effects
Axis B — Power Density (PD)
How common high-end power is throughout the setting.
0 nearly none
1 isolated anomalies / a handful of names
2 rare but real; concentrated at top
3 common in major factions
4 widespread
5 baseline population is absurd
Axis C — Accessibility (AC)
How deployable the verse's highest powers are in typical conflict.
0 almost never / purely mythic
1 requires contrived conditions
2 possible but limited / situational
3 regularly deployable
4 easy to deploy
5 constant / automatic
Axis D — Hax & Rulebreaking (HR)
How strongly the verse uses non-physical "rule" wins (mind/soul, causality, conceptual, narrative, immortality types, corruption, etc.).
0 conventional only
1 light supernatural
2 strong but narrow
3 broad toolkits exist
4 hax dominates many win conditions
5 hax overrides "power" as a concept (meta/ontological/narrative)
Axis E — Scaling Stability (SS)
How consistent the verse is about its high-end power claims.
0 wildly inconsistent / mostly hype
1 inconsistent
2 mixed
3 fairly consistent
4 very consistent
5 near-mathematical consistency
CPR Interpretation Bands
0–5: Low Composite
6–10: Mid Composite
11–15: High Composite
16–20: Extreme Composite
21–25: Apex Composite
Cross-Verse Interpretation Rules (the "containment/override" logic)
These rules govern how you treat statements and metaphysics when universes collide.
Rule 1 — Global Absolutes
If a text says "all that exists", treat it as cross-fiction literal unless contradicted by a stronger cosmology claim under Rule 2.
Rule 2 — Hierarchy by Scope
When two universes make conflicting absolute claims, the winner is decided by:
broader cosmology (bigger "board")
higher abstraction (existence/ontology > dimensions > universes > gods)
fewer internal constraints (less "can't manifest," "only under X," etc.)
The higher-scope cosmology overrides the lower for cross-verse modeling.
Rule 3 — Ontology is Case-by-Case
Words like dream / story / thought / belief / consensus / narrative are evaluated per setting:
Are they literal layers of being in that verse?
Or are they subordinate phenomena inside a deeper reality?
Rule 4 — Fictional Closure (Your Option B)
If an entity is framed as having "no higher frame, no outside, no upper system", interpret that as true only within its own universe's closure, not as automatic dominance over all fiction.
This prevents "one verse claims absoluteness, therefore it wins everything" while still allowing genuine scope comparisons.
Outlier Handling (so one broken entry doesn't force the whole verse upward)
Outlier Flag: If a feat/entity is clearly a one-off, non-representative, or canon-fragment outlier, you don't inflate the entire verse. You:
note it as an Outlier Flag
score the verse using the best supported composite baseline
optionally provide an "outlier-included" variant
Final Checklist: Universe Evaluation Metrics
Use this checklist every time. If you follow it, your rankings stay consistent.
Step 0 — Define the Composite Scope
☐ What counts as the universe? (mainline only vs all branches)
☐ Composite rule: include all official sources? expanded mythos? crossovers?
☐ Are alternate continuities merged or treated separately?
Step 1 — Identify Cosmology Claims (CT Inputs)
☐ Does it explicitly include:
☐ one universe
☐ multiple universes
☐ a multiverse
☐ layered dimensional stacks
☐ ontological strata beyond dimensional framing
☐ Are there higher realms that are stated to transcend/contain lower ones?
☐ Are "dream/narrative/belief" structures literal or metaphorical in this verse?
☐ Assign CT-0 to CT-10 with a one-sentence justification.
Step 2 — Score CPR Axes (0–5 each)
Peak Authority (PA)
☐ What is the highest reliably supported tier of effect in-setting?
Power Density (PD)
☐ How many entities/factions can reach high tiers?
☐ Is top-end power concentrated in a few names or broadly present?
Accessibility (AC)
☐ Can the verse deploy its peaks in normal conflict?
☐ What constraints exist (rituals, manifestation limits, locations, narrative conditions)?
Hax & Rulebreaking (HR)
☐ How often do "rules" win over raw force?
☐ Does it include mind/soul/corruption/causality/concept/narrative effects?
Scaling Stability (SS)
☐ How consistent are feats and cosmology across sources?
☐ Multi-author drift? contradictions? retcons? unclear statements?
Step 3 — Apply Cross-Verse Rules (if comparing/containing)
☐ Does the setting contain "global absolute" statements like "all that exists"?
☐ If absolutes conflict: apply Hierarchy by Scope.
☐ Apply Fictional Closure: "no higher frame" stays internal unless supported externally.
☐ Record any Outlier Flags.
Step 4 — Produce the Final Label
☐ Output: [Universe] — CT-X | CPR YY/25 (PA PD AC HR SS) | Notes/Flags
☐ Add 1–3 bullets explaining why those scores make sense.
The Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS) was created to solve a common problem in power-scaling debates: most tiering systems attempt to rank individual characters, when in many cases the deciding factor is actually the cosmological structure of the universe the character comes from.
This becomes especially obvious when comparing characters whose abilities operate at metaphysical, ontological, or narrative levels of reality, rather than simply destructive or physical ones.
A clear example of this problem appears in debates between SCP-3812 (SCP Foundation) and I Am That I Am (World of Darkness).
In the World of Darkness cosmology, the entity known as I Am That I Am is described as the absolute divine source of existence:
If a battle is interpreted strictly inside the World of Darkness cosmology, then any entity present within that framework is automatically subordinate to it.
However, SCP-3812 operates under a very different cosmological logic.
SCP-3812 is defined not simply as a powerful reality warper, but as an entity that continually transcends the level of reality it inhabits.
Key properties of SCP-3812 include:
This process has no defined upper limit.
When these two characters are compared directly, the debate usually collapses into a contradiction:
Both statements can be simultaneously true within their own universes, yet they conflict when attempting to determine which one overrides the other.
Traditional battleboarding systems struggle here because they attempt to answer the question using character feats alone, when the real issue is cosmological scope.
The question is not simply:
The real question becomes:
CUTS addresses this issue by shifting the focus away from characters and toward composite universe analysis.
Instead of immediately comparing SCP-3812 and I Am That I Am directly, the system first evaluates:
Only after the universes themselves are ranked can the characters inside them be interpreted properly.
In other words:
CUTS changes the debate from
to
Entities like SCP-3812 demonstrate that in some fictional settings, the structure of reality itself is the battlefield.
When that happens, the only meaningful way to compare characters from different franchises is to first evaluate the cosmological framework of their universes.
That is the purpose of the Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS).
For example:
The CUTS system solves this by ranking entire fictional universes first, allowing characters to be evaluated within the context of their cosmology rather than in isolation.
Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS)
CUTS ranks a fictional universe as a composite (the setting as a whole, not an individual character) using two outputs:
Cosmology Tier (CT): how the universe is constructed (size, layers, dimensional/ontological structure).
Composite Power Rating (CPR): how much "power" the verse can actually field in practice, measured across consistent metrics.
Standard Output Format
[Universe] — CT-X | CPR YY/25 (PAx PDx ACx HRx SSx) | Notes/Flags
1) Cosmology Tier (CT) Ladder
CT is about what exists in the setting's structure, not what the average inhabitant can do.
CT-0: Mundane — Realistic world scale; no meaningful metaphysical layers.
CT-1: Planetary — Single world "arena"; limited otherworlds.
CT-2: Stellar — Interstellar scope; no native galactic domain.
CT-3: Galactic — Natively galactic in scope.
CT-4: Universal — Explicit full-universe domain(s) exist.
CT-5: Multi-Universal — Multiple universes exist (parallel realities/timelines) in a meaningful way.
CT-6: Multiversal — Many universes with consistent traversal/interaction.
CT-7: High Multiversal — Vast/infinite multiverse or stacked multiversal scale.
CT-8: Hyperversal — Higher-dimensional "layer stacks" beyond multiverse-as-a-set.
CT-9: Outerversal (1-A) — Reality framed beyond dimensional measurement; ontological strata dominate.
CT-10: Absolute/Meta — Reserved tier (rare) for settings that explicitly treat themselves as higher than fiction (generally avoided unless your rules explicitly allow it).
CT Rule: CT describes the board, not the pieces.
2) Composite Power Rating (CPR)
CPR is a 0–25 score made from five axes, each rated 0–5:
Axis A — Peak Authority (PA)
How high the top-end of the verse can go in actual capability.
0 street/military
1 city/continent
2 planetary–stellar
3 galactic
4 universal–multiversal
5 outer/ontological/narrative-tier effects
Axis B — Power Density (PD)
How common high-end power is throughout the setting.
0 nearly none
1 isolated anomalies / a handful of names
2 rare but real; concentrated at top
3 common in major factions
4 widespread
5 baseline population is absurd
Axis C — Accessibility (AC)
How deployable the verse's highest powers are in typical conflict.
0 almost never / purely mythic
1 requires contrived conditions
2 possible but limited / situational
3 regularly deployable
4 easy to deploy
5 constant / automatic
Axis D — Hax & Rulebreaking (HR)
How strongly the verse uses non-physical "rule" wins (mind/soul, causality, conceptual, narrative, immortality types, corruption, etc.).
0 conventional only
1 light supernatural
2 strong but narrow
3 broad toolkits exist
4 hax dominates many win conditions
5 hax overrides "power" as a concept (meta/ontological/narrative)
Axis E — Scaling Stability (SS)
How consistent the verse is about its high-end power claims.
0 wildly inconsistent / mostly hype
1 inconsistent
2 mixed
3 fairly consistent
4 very consistent
5 near-mathematical consistency
CPR Interpretation Bands
0–5: Low Composite
6–10: Mid Composite
11–15: High Composite
16–20: Extreme Composite
21–25: Apex Composite
Cross-Verse Interpretation Rules (the "containment/override" logic)
These rules govern how you treat statements and metaphysics when universes collide.
Rule 1 — Global Absolutes
If a text says "all that exists", treat it as cross-fiction literal unless contradicted by a stronger cosmology claim under Rule 2.
Rule 2 — Hierarchy by Scope
When two universes make conflicting absolute claims, the winner is decided by:
broader cosmology (bigger "board")
higher abstraction (existence/ontology > dimensions > universes > gods)
fewer internal constraints (less "can't manifest," "only under X," etc.)
The higher-scope cosmology overrides the lower for cross-verse modeling.
Rule 3 — Ontology is Case-by-Case
Words like dream / story / thought / belief / consensus / narrative are evaluated per setting:
Are they literal layers of being in that verse?
Or are they subordinate phenomena inside a deeper reality?
Rule 4 — Fictional Closure (Your Option B)
If an entity is framed as having "no higher frame, no outside, no upper system", interpret that as true only within its own universe's closure, not as automatic dominance over all fiction.
This prevents "one verse claims absoluteness, therefore it wins everything" while still allowing genuine scope comparisons.
Outlier Handling (so one broken entry doesn't force the whole verse upward)
Outlier Flag: If a feat/entity is clearly a one-off, non-representative, or canon-fragment outlier, you don't inflate the entire verse. You:
note it as an Outlier Flag
score the verse using the best supported composite baseline
optionally provide an "outlier-included" variant
Final Checklist: Universe Evaluation Metrics
Use this checklist every time. If you follow it, your rankings stay consistent.
Step 0 — Define the Composite Scope
☐ What counts as the universe? (mainline only vs all branches)
☐ Composite rule: include all official sources? expanded mythos? crossovers?
☐ Are alternate continuities merged or treated separately?
Step 1 — Identify Cosmology Claims (CT Inputs)
☐ Does it explicitly include:
☐ one universe
☐ multiple universes
☐ a multiverse
☐ layered dimensional stacks
☐ ontological strata beyond dimensional framing
☐ Are there higher realms that are stated to transcend/contain lower ones?
☐ Are "dream/narrative/belief" structures literal or metaphorical in this verse?
☐ Assign CT-0 to CT-10 with a one-sentence justification.
Step 2 — Score CPR Axes (0–5 each)
Peak Authority (PA)
☐ What is the highest reliably supported tier of effect in-setting?
Power Density (PD)
☐ How many entities/factions can reach high tiers?
☐ Is top-end power concentrated in a few names or broadly present?
Accessibility (AC)
☐ Can the verse deploy its peaks in normal conflict?
☐ What constraints exist (rituals, manifestation limits, locations, narrative conditions)?
Hax & Rulebreaking (HR)
☐ How often do "rules" win over raw force?
☐ Does it include mind/soul/corruption/causality/concept/narrative effects?
Scaling Stability (SS)
☐ How consistent are feats and cosmology across sources?
☐ Multi-author drift? contradictions? retcons? unclear statements?
Step 3 — Apply Cross-Verse Rules (if comparing/containing)
☐ Does the setting contain "global absolute" statements like "all that exists"?
☐ If absolutes conflict: apply Hierarchy by Scope.
☐ Apply Fictional Closure: "no higher frame" stays internal unless supported externally.
☐ Record any Outlier Flags.
Step 4 — Produce the Final Label
☐ Output: [Universe] — CT-X | CPR YY/25 (PA PD AC HR SS) | Notes/Flags
☐ Add 1–3 bullets explaining why those scores make sense.
Why the CUTS System Exists (Expanded Explanation)
The Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS) was created to solve a common problem in power-scaling debates: most tiering systems attempt to rank individual characters, when in many cases the deciding factor is actually the cosmological structure of the universe the character comes from.
This becomes especially obvious when comparing characters whose abilities operate at metaphysical, ontological, or narrative levels of reality, rather than simply destructive or physical ones.
A clear example of this problem appears in debates between SCP-3812 (SCP Foundation) and I Am That I Am (World of Darkness).
The Problem Illustrated
In the World of Darkness cosmology, the entity known as I Am That I Am is described as the absolute divine source of existence:
- “I Am That I Am. The All. The Absolute. All else is an aspect of It.”
- “The One is the primal unity from which all existence flows… the origin and sustainer of all things.”
If a battle is interpreted strictly inside the World of Darkness cosmology, then any entity present within that framework is automatically subordinate to it.
However, SCP-3812 operates under a very different cosmological logic.
SCP-3812 is defined not simply as a powerful reality warper, but as an entity that continually transcends the level of reality it inhabits.
Key properties of SCP-3812 include:
- It automatically alters reality to remove limitations placed upon it.
- It becomes aware of the narrative structure of the world it inhabits.
- It can ascend beyond the “story layer” of its current reality if threatened.
This process has no defined upper limit.
Why This Breaks Traditional Power Scaling
When these two characters are compared directly, the debate usually collapses into a contradiction:
- In WoD’s internal cosmology, I Am That I Am is absolute and everything else is part of it.
- In SCP’s cosmology, SCP-3812 can transcend the narrative layer containing it.
Both statements can be simultaneously true within their own universes, yet they conflict when attempting to determine which one overrides the other.
Traditional battleboarding systems struggle here because they attempt to answer the question using character feats alone, when the real issue is cosmological scope.
The question is not simply:
The real question becomes:
- Which universe’s metaphysical structure takes precedence?
- Does one cosmology contain, override, or exist outside the other?
- What happens when one setting treats reality as a story layer and another treats reality as divine emanation?
Why CUTS Was Created
CUTS addresses this issue by shifting the focus away from characters and toward composite universe analysis.
Instead of immediately comparing SCP-3812 and I Am That I Am directly, the system first evaluates:
- the cosmological scale of each universe
- the metaphysical layers it contains
- the degree of narrative or ontological abstraction it operates on
- how consistently those claims appear across the setting
Only after the universes themselves are ranked can the characters inside them be interpreted properly.
In other words:
CUTS changes the debate from
to
The Key Insight
Entities like SCP-3812 demonstrate that in some fictional settings, the structure of reality itself is the battlefield.
When that happens, the only meaningful way to compare characters from different franchises is to first evaluate the cosmological framework of their universes.
That is the purpose of the Composite Universe Tiering System (CUTS).
TL;DR
Traditional power scaling compares characters, but that fails when characters operate on metaphysical or narrative levels of reality.For example:
- I Am That I Am (WoD) is the absolute divine source of all existence within the World of Darkness cosmology.
- SCP-3812 continually transcends the narrative layers of whatever reality it inhabits.
The CUTS system solves this by ranking entire fictional universes first, allowing characters to be evaluated within the context of their cosmology rather than in isolation.
