Creation, Attack Potency, and Pocket Realities

[Wokistan]

Can you give me one example where someone makes a pocket reality with an explosion?

Oryx, the Taken King has an attack that's a huge explosion of his pocket dimension, as he pushes it into realspace.

 

[Kepekley23]

> An 8-D object wouldn't be, a string according to string theory would be.

Uh, string theory only has the 4 main dimensions be big. The others would all be compact and smaller ones, a billionth of a billionth the width of a Planck length.

I know our dimensional tiering is a mix of several things with a bit of Lovecraftian stuff thrown in, but even here, 8-D objects wouldn't really dwarf multiverses. That's what I corrected, being a bit pedantic.

 

[Andytrenom]

What does a "big" dimension mean exactly? Isn't a dimension a parameter for measurement?

 

[Jobbo]

Compact dimensions fold in on themselves so they can't be interacted with.

 

[Sera_EX]

Stop with the String Theory.

@Uradelbaur

So all of a sudden destruction > creation? Brings facts to the table please, because I'd love to see it.

 

[Jobbo]

I mean, the tiering system does use string theory. Doesn't really make sense to do so but whatever.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Sera Destroying a constellation through an explosion is greater than creating it, so yes, Destruction ca be greater than creation depending on context.

 

[Sera_EX]

Constellations are the worst example. You need something better than that, I'm afraid.

@Jobbo

I know and it's a serious problem altogether as it is a complete misunderstanding of both string theory and M-Theory, but I won't touch on that. Not now anyway.

 

[Andytrenom]

Constellations are the worst example. You need something better than that, I'm afraid.

How?

 

[Wokistan]

Any large celestial structure with a lot of empty space, very hollow things, etc.

 

[NostalgiaTrip]

Can I just say something?

If you are going by the rules of equivalent exchange, as some science/magic related franchises do, before you can create, you need to be able to destroy.

 

[Sera_EX]

Celestial Body Feats

 

[Wokistan]

We can't assume equivalent exchange, but if the verse works off of that then it's ok.

Sometimes you can also end up with a lower destruction result, like if you do something that doesn't overcome GBE. I've seen planet destruction turn our 5-C or low 5-B before.

 

[Jobbo]

The rules themselves say "Just eyeball it, man" when it comes to such cases.

 

[Sera_EX]

I'm just not going to continue that argument, it'll go nowhere. I mean Dargoo did say this isn't about the validity of creation feats.

 

[Andytrenom]

Creating Solar Systems being rated the same as destroying one through an explosion has issues to me but, I am not getting into that unless I absolutely need to. Don't want to give the impression that I'm planning to carry out a major revision like that anytime soon.

 

[Sera_EX]

But they aren't rated as the same, Andy. Multi-Stellar feats have always been an issue here. Creating a solar system is not 4-B, not automatically anyway. This has been a practice for some time now, that's why I said celestial body feats aren't the best example.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

@Matt

Yeah, I've flip flopped a lot on the issue but the only thing I'm pushing forward is that we shouldn't use the explosion feats. I was mostly frustrated that some people were trying to justfy using a random, unrelated equation just because the correct equation (E=mc2) and GBE doesn't work on those scales.

That and perhaps calcing them is the issue to begin with.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Sera Oh, my mistake then. Probably should have realized since I know Constellation creation feats are rated as high 4-C instead of 4-B/A

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

So, to look back at one of the main reasons I made the thread:

Are we cool with not using the explosion formula for pocket realities? That's legit the only thing I made this thread for outside of reworking the pages.

 

[Sera_EX]

I'm down with that.

 

[Wokistan]

If the pocket reality is made by an explosion or expansion of some sort it'd be fine to use, but generally, I'd prefer GBE or something.

 

[NostalgiaTrip]

So I just read something and I'd like a second opinion.

According to scientists, before the creation of the universe, the Big Bang, there was a singularity of infinite density and intense heat, aka a singularity.

"In short, the Big Bang hypothesis states that all of the current and past matter in the Universe came into existence at the same time, roughly 13.8 billion years ago. At this time, all matter was compacted into a very small ball with infinite density and intense heat called a Singularity."

So does this mean that the creation of the universe happened because they took the matter from a previous one? Much like how the Marvel Universe was made?

I'm asking because it would mean that to create a universe... you would need to squeeze all matter into a single point of 'infinite density and intense heat'.

 

[AguilaR101]

Just so we're clear, it doesn't matter which consensus is reached all methods to "calculate" these types of feats are completely arbitrary and no more valid than the other.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Just so we're clear, it doesn't matter which consensus is reached all methods to "calculate" these types of feats are completely arbitrary and no more valid than the other.

That's incorrect, to be fair.

Some methods correlate with the feat more. Forming a planetary object? GBE comes into place. Making energy from matter? Mass-Energy is the dictionary definition.

Some methods correlate less or not at all. Making a pocket dimension? Unless there's a fireball encompasing the entire area or it formed via an explosion there's no connection between the two statements.

I do think at the small scale calcing them is unreasonable, though.

 

[AguilaR101]

Except neither of those things are commonly portrayed in creation feats, which is what this is about, the lack of correlation between the assigned values and what's actually happening.

Even GBE is an arbitrary assumption as planets are just being poofed into existence, not destroyed or explicitly stated to be held together by gravitational forces the character created, it really is no more valid than other methods.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Fair point, actually.

Although it's fair to say there is significantly less correlation when you're talking about explosions, unless, as you say, it is stated to be like that.

As many have suggested, perhaps these feats just can't be calced, and we should look for better, more consistent and numerically specific feats if you don't want to go baseline.

 

[PrettyFearMachine]

I agree with Dargoo, Sera and others here.

Btw, if the explosion formula is unusable, would the dimensions, like in PMMM, be simply unquantifiable?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

As stated above, pocket realities containing planets and/or stars should combine GBE with Inverse Square law.

 

[PrettyFearMachine]

As stated above, pocket realities containing planets and/or stars should combine GBE with Inverse Square law.

But dimensions like Reality Marbles and the Labyrinths have nothing of the like.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Btw, if the explosion formula is unusable, would the dimensions, like in PMMM, be simply unquantifiable?

The feat wouldn't be invalidated, but it would make the calcs incorrect.

 

[PrettyFearMachine]

That's what I was saying. But okay, got it.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Okay, I think we're all on the same page for using explosion calcs for pocket reality feats.

Can we focus on updating the Creation, Attack Potency, and Tiering System pages? I have a draft for the creation page on my sandbox here, please give me feedback.

And also, can we possibly make a comprehensive size/mass list for smaller-than-planetary objects in relation to tier, or should we leave it to eyeball judgement and focus on finding other, more reliable feats?

 

[Kaltias]

I think that we should make a size list (because eyeballing doesn't work without some kind of reference).

How we should find those sizes though, I do not know

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Large Size defines "Building sized" as 13-14 meters tall, "Skyscraper sized" as between 100 and 1000 meters tall, and "Mountain sized" as between 1000 and 1000000 meters tall.

Of course that hardly counts for for subtiers and most of the entirety of Tier 7 and likely lots of Tier 6, but it's a start.

 

[Antvasima]

@Dargoo

Your draft page looks well-structured, but there do not seem to be any comprehensive instructions regarding specifics for creation feats.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

How far will Madoka Magica be downgraded?

 

[RKGenki]

Let's not talk about specific series here. Save that for after this is finished

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Why would Madoka be downgraded?

 

[Kaltias]

@Matt

Regular magical girls scale from this kind of feats. But as the professor Oak Genki said, it's a discussion for another day (and another thread)