• 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.

Low 1-C Saint Seiya(Toei)

Doctor Who is another example of a verse that explicitly mentions the existence of time having 2 orthogonal directions. It does happen.

But with how we currently treat hypertime lines is essentially “we refuse to acknowledge this tier 2 cosmology has glaring antifeats to meet the criteria of 2-C (to 2-A) so let’s use fan fiction to inflate tiers.”

This crt is no different, you can’t have time beyond time, so we have 2 options:

We treat it as a higher dimensional time and thus rate it as low 1-C or

Acknowledge its incoherent and treat it as low 2-C.

The fact we allow for these antifeats to automatically assert the existence of a higher temporal dimension means you can’t deny at least a possibly low 1-C.

So every 2-C verse may as well get a possibly low 1-C rating if there’s an implication of shared timeline (instead of actually recognising it contradicts the cosmology being 2-C to begin with).

By the current hypertime line standards.

And ofc this is just my opinion.
I completely agree I was reading the dbs crt for low 1-C and several people were mentioning that either the timeline is upgraded to low 1-C or the entire multiverse downgraded to 3-A with a single time axis. Tbh this just goes back to the standards and how rigid they are while failing to account for the fact that even verses with a consistent tier 1 cosmology show inconsistencies at times
I think I have explained this before, but there isn't much difference between how you translate certain words in Japanese to English, you could describe that as both transcendence or beyond. Transcendence literally means "being beyond something", so something that is "beyond time" is also a way of describing transcendence even in English. I understand that in this wiki for our profiles we standardize certain words to mean certain things, but the way this works is by finding the meaning of what is said in the original work and then finding which word in the Wiki system fits with that.

So if something describes existing beyond time as being unbounded by the limits of time, unaffected by it and similar stuff, we could still call it transcendence under our system because what matters is the meaning in the original work, not the word as it is described in our system.

The term used there is "超越" (chōetsu) which is formed by two kanji, the first means "being beyond something" and it's often used as a prefix in the same way as super, ultra, hyper, etc. The second can mean cross over; go through, exceed; surpass, etc. It's often translated by dictionaries being the same as "transcendence" or "being transcendental to something". Again, it's no different from saying beyond, because transcendence is literally the state of being beyond something.

In fact, the term normally translated as "beyond" is either "超える" or "越える", the difference is only in the kanji, and these two are the exact kanji used to make the word above. "える" is just "to be able to", in this case, "to be able to be beyond" or "to be able to exceed/surpass/cross over".

So, is it beyond or transcendence? It's the same thing, even if the term used here were "超える" or "越える" instead of "超越" (I didn't watch the anime, so they could very well have used the other terms there and the anime summary decided to use 超越 because they wanted to, there's really no absolute difference).

From the looks of it, it's used to describe a place that is beyond linear time, outside the differentiation of past, present, and future, where all of it overlaps. Using beyond/transcendence to describe it isn't wrong. Where this fits with our current system is an entirely different matter and I'm not updated in regards to that. (Although, I would say that if the entire problem is if the word means "beyond" or "transcendence", even with a lot of very direct words about how that place works, I think this discussion should focus more on those descriptions rather than "being beyond/transcendental", but if this really was a question, now you know there's no difference to it".
Just gonna remind people that dimesnios that are timeless voids or described as beyond spacetime does not qualify for 5d in general.Do what you will with this info
I'd rather had Don'tTalkDT come for the High 1-B upgrade for Saint Seiya (Manga), but alright maybe he can come here instead (let's see if this is 5-D or 6-D or absolutely nothing)
Last edited:
I'd rather had Don'tTalkDT come for the High 1-B upgrade for Saint Seiya (Manga), but alright maybe he can come here instead (let's see if this is 5-D or 6-D or absolutely nothing)
probably gonna be 5D although it might also be nothing because it looks similar to one of those low 1-C sailor moon threads I saw that Ultima disagreed with