Low 2-C

[F_Deurkleed]

Is creating a finite size spacetime universe+ level now or is it still high universe level?

 

[Lightning_XXI]

It is Universal in size ?

Creating a whole universal space-time should be Low 2-C

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Creating an infinite universe space (but not time) would be High 3-A.

Creating a finite or infinite universe space and time is Low 2-C.

 

[Omegas03]

Is creating an infinite universe + time still Baseline?

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Is creating an infinite universe + time still Baseline?

I don't know. I was once told it doesn't matter if one Low 2-C universe was finite and the other was infinite. Which doesn't make sense to me.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

It is Universal in size ?
Creating a whole universal space-time should be Low 2-C

No, it's smaller than a normal universe. In the tiering system it just says finite, that's why I was wondering.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

@F Deurkleed

If the space time created is smaller than a normal universe then no, it's not Low 2-C, It has to be the size of a universe. It wouldn't be High 3-A either since that would require infinite space being created.

 

[Lightning_XXI]

Well, if it's a dimension creation feat with, like, half the size of the universe, then it's 3-B

 

[F_Deurkleed]

@F Deurkleed
If the space time created is smaller than a normal universe then no, it's not Low 2-C, It has to be the size of a universe. It wouldn't be High 3-A either since that would require infinite space being created.

3-A would require infinite 3D space to be created, but isn't 4D always above 3D, so wouldn't that still be 3-A?

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Yes, 4-D is greater than 3-D but if you make a dimension that's only the size of a solar system, it would not matter if it had it's own space and time because it's still just a solar system. It has to be a universal size space time, anything less won't give Low 2-C.

 

[Omegas03]

Wouldn't a Solar System sized space time still be High 3-A since it is 4D but not Universal in scale?

 

[LordGriffin1000]

That's not how the Tiering System works. However, I'm not that great when it comes to 4-D/Tier 2 stuff so It's best to wait for others to comment.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

3-A doesn't require infinite 3-D power, as 3-A is merely the observable universe, which is certainly not infinite in size. High 3-A is what assumes an infinite amount of matter and energy.

Also, just check the tiering system page. "Characters who are capable of significantly affecting, creating and/or destroying an area of space that is qualitatively larger than an infinitely sized 3-dimensional expanse. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continua of an universal scale."

Or in simpler words, a dimension with it's own space-time of at least universal size. That's what Low 2-C is.

Edit: And no, anything smaller just gets you the AP of the size of the dimension. A solar system sized one merely gets you tier 4, likewise destroying it.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

3-A doesn't require infinite 3-D power, as 3-A is merely the observable universe, which is certainly not infinite in size. High 3-A is what assumes an infinite amount of matter and energy.
Also, just check the tiering system page. "Characters who are capable of significantly affecting, creating and/or destroying an area of space that is qualitatively larger than an infinitely sized 3-dimensional expanse. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continua of an universal scale."

Or in simpler words, a dimension with it's own space-time of at least universal size. That's what Low 2-C is.

Edit: And no, anything smaller just gets you the AP of the size of the dimension. A solar system sized one merely gets you tier 2, likewise destroying it.

How though? Destroying a 4dimensional solar system would take infinitely more power than destroying a regular one. High 3-A takes infinite 3D power, but 4D is always above that.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Because the new system doesn't consider a limited amount of 4-D power to just be inherently superior.

Or are you saying we should give Low 2-C to everyone that can destroy time and space, even if it's in an area the size of a house? It is a minuscule amount of 4-D power, but since it is 4-D, it should be above destroying the universe which is only 3-D power, right? Therefore, it should be above High 3-A which is infinite 3-D power.

How about destroying the time of a single person? It is still 4-D after all.

Unless it is sizable enough, it is simple space and time or space-time manipulation/destruction with a certain range.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

Because the new system doesn't consider a limited amount of 4-D power to just be inherently superior.
Or are you saying we should give Low 2-C to everyone that can destroy time and space, even if it's in an area the size of a house? It is a minuscule amount of 4-D power, but since it is 4-D, it should be above destroying the universe which is only 3-D power, right? Therefore, it should be above High 3-A which is infinite 3-D power.

How about destroying the time of a single person? It is still 4-D after all.

Unless it is sizable enough, it is simple space and time or space-time manipulation/destruction with a certain range.

I'm not saying it should be low 2-c, but al least high 3-a as well. Even if it is the sise of a house, it's still 4d. Someone with even infinite 3d power could never destroy it.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

But High 3-A is infinite 3-D power. There's no ratio of how much 4-D power equates infinite 3-D power, there's not even any idea how much more power you would need to go from 3-D to 4-D, so saying that a solar system-sized timeline would be comparable to infinite 4-D is based in more or less nothing. It is an assumption pulled out of nowhere.

Fine, you are free to make a CRT where anyone with time stop or anyone that can destroy time is High 3-A, regardless of the scope. Is not gonna go anywhere.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

But High 3-A is infinite 3-D power. There's no ratio of how much 4-D power equates infinite 3-D power, there's not even any idea how much more power you would need to go from 3-D to 4-D, so saying that a solar system-sized timeline would be comparable to infinite 4-D is based in more or less nothing. It is an assumption pulled out of nowhere.
Fine, you are free to make a CRT where anyone with time stop or anyone that can destroy time is High 3-A, regardless of the scope. Is not gonna go anywhere.

4D is always above 3D though. Finite 4D is superior to infinite 3D, so why wouldn't they share the same tier? How would finite 4D be a lower tier when it is superior than infinite 3D?

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Because by that logic, someone that can destroy time in a really small area or that can stop time is comparable to someone that destroyed a timeline.

Are you really gonna argue this? You are free to showcase to me any example of a character making a dimension less than universe sized being completely superior to people with only 3-D power, infinite or not.

 

[Omegas03]

the Tiering System used to have 4D power in an Non universal scale qualify for High 3-A but was changed.

Wait, why is Mobius Dick in Futurama still High 3-A? lmao

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Because some pages are obscure and people don't notice. Is hard checking over everything.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

Because by that logic, someone that can destroy time in a really small area or that can stop time is comparable to someone that destroyed a timeline.
Are you really gonna argue this? You are free to showcase to me any example of a character making a dimension less than universe sized being completely superior to people with only 3-D power, infinite or not.

I mean, it is pretty self-explanatory. Having a 4D feat itself would be superior to anything 3D.


Let me ask you this: would someone with infinite 3D power be able destroy a small 4d dimension?

 

[Omegas03]

Should entirely depend on how the fiction setting treats it tbh.

Heck, a bit unrelated but most verses don't actually think Universal+ and Universal are different at all.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Considering that Time Manipulation and Space-Time Manipulation are things, yes.

Again, with your wording, we may as well grant anyone that can manipulate time on whatever degree Low 2-C.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

Considering that Time Manipulation and Space-Time Manipulation are things, yes.
Again, with your wording, we may as well grant anyone that can manipulate time on whatever degree Low 2-C.

So only with hax then... their raw power is not great enough to destroy a 4D dimension. So it's only logical that someone who has enough raw power to destroy even a finite 4D dimension is stronger than someone with infinite 3D power and should share the same tier.

You need to destroy a 4D dimension the size of a universe to be Low 2-C, so destroying something smaller shouldn't be low 2-c. But I just think it's weird and unfair to basically say: "you have more than power than someone with infinite 3D power, but you'll have a lower tier just because."

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

Except it's not really unfair. To put it as simply as I can, unless the character shows a grand enough feat, they rarely if ever are shown to be superior in AP just because of destroying a small dimension.

As I've mentioned before, by your standards, controlling time no matter how little makes you superior to any 3-D in AP, like the Sorcerer King in Black Clover. Which is evidently not the case when everyone without time stuff can damage them and has nothing even comparable to High 3-A.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

Except it's not really unfair. To put it as simply as I can, unless the character shows a grand enough feat, they rarely if ever are shown to be superior in AP just because of destroying a small dimension.
As I've mentioned before, by your standards, controlling time no matter how little makes you superior to any 3-D in AP, like the Sorcerer King in Black Clover. Which is evidently not the case when everyone without time stuff can damage them and has nothing even comparable to High 3-A.

Controlling time would be hax though, I'm talking about destroying time. That's a greater feat than anything someone with 3D power can pull off (excluding hax). Characters with 4D power can pull off feats characters with 3D power cannot even dream of, so why would we put them at lower tiers and call them inferior? And, logically, 4D on whatever scale, is always superior to (infinite) 3D.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Creating an Infinite sized body of space is High 3-A.

Low 2-C is creating what's at the very Universe sized; at least 93 lightyears in diameter and has an entire space-time continuum. If it's Infinite in size to go with it, it's even better, but still Low 2-C and still considered baseline.

Pocket realities less than Universal with their own Space-time aren't Universal however. It is good hax however.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

But destroying time is also hax. A lot of characters not even close to Low 2-C can do this shit, if not outright destroy reality in a very localized area.

You are, again, saying that no matter how minuscule, 4-D stuff done through AP should make you inherently superior to 3-D. When this is never the case and the character is very obviously still bound to 3-D levels. There's a reason a limited amount of 4-D power doesn't get you much anymore, it is a total arbitrary decision how much is enough for a boost in tier and there are rarely, if ever, any further feats that are even comparable to the resulting tier.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

But destroying time is also hax. A lot of characters not even close to Low 2-C can do this shit, if not outright destroy reality in a very localized area.
You are, again, saying that no matter how minuscule, 4-D stuff done through AP should make you inherently superior to 3-D. When this is never the case and the character is very obviously still bound to 3-D levels. There's a reason a limited amount of 4-D power doesn't get you much anymore, it is a total arbitrary decision how much is enough for a boost in tier and there are rarely, if ever, any further feats that are even comparable to the resulting tier.

Any examples for characters who can DESTROY time but are proven to be inferior to infinite 3D?

I'm just saying. A character with infinite 3D power wouldn't be able to do anything against someone with finite 4D power (without using hax), because they're infinitely inferior. Plus DESTROYING time would be a superior feat compared to destroying anything 3D as well. It should, in my opinion, at least make them equal. But I haven't seen any character be able to destroy time while being unable to destroy something 3D.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

I mean, you are the one bringing it up. I would think you'd have any examples.

I never said anything about destroying time but being unable to destroy something 3-D. I said destroying time and then being superior to anyone that can't perform anything similar at all.

I can't stress this enough. If this is such a big issue, just make a CRT about it.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

I mean, you are the one bringing it up. I would think you'd have any examples.
I never said anything about destroying time but being unable to destroy something 3-D. I said destroying time and then being superior to anyone that can't perform anything similar at all.

I can't stress this enough. If this is such a big issue, just make a CRT about it.

Well you said being able to destroy time doesn't make you superior to someone with infinite 3D power in AP, so I thought you had evidence and examples for that, because otherwise, logically, someone with 4D power is always superior. But whatever, I guess.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

You are the one making the claim, I ask you to back it up, you bring me nothing.

"Whatever" indeed.

You keep ragging on with this stuff and not even making a CRT if you think you are so right, so do you actually think you are right and that the standard should change, or are you just making claims?

It is not even logical. Characters destroying a measure of time are never displayed as qualitatively superior. Not Kaguya, not the painter vampire from Castlevania, not all those RPG bosses making pocket realities.

 

[F_Deurkleed]

You are the one making the claim, I ask you to back it up, you bring me nothing.
"Whatever" indeed.

You keep ragging on with this stuff and not even making a CRT if you think you are so right, so do you actually think you are right and that the standard should change, or are you just making claims?

It is not even logical. Characters destroying a measure of time are never displayed as qualitatively superior. Not Kaguya, not the painter vampire from Castlevania, not all those RPG bosses making pocket realities.

4D being superior to 3D is just common knowledge... you're claiming that 3D AP can be superior to 4D AP, so I'm asking for an example. It's not complicated.

Destroying 4D is harder than destroying anything 3D. It should speak for itself.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

No, I am claiming limited 4-D is not superior.

There's White Queen in Blood Sign, who can destroy time and space with her powers, yet can still be hurt with AP without a shred of anything 4-D. Only reason she's the strongest in her verse is a ton of hax that no one else has.

There's Diavolo and his Stand, which erases 10 seconds of time, gets hurt by normal AP.

Jedah from Dark Stalkers creating his own dimension, still below S+ class demon Belial and his intended successor Morrigan, both have no known 4-D shit.

Am pretty sure there are others.

And like I keep saying, if it's such common sense, make a CRT to make limited 4-D superior to High 3-A. It should be easy if it's such common sense.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

X-D alone isn't qualifications for a Tier. There do exist planet sized pocket realities stated to have 11-Dimensions, but are clearly not High 1-C and simply Tier 5.

 

[Zoey_of_Scadrial]

Having higher Dimensions does not immediatly make one a higher tier. While this is the case in many fictions, it is not so in all fictions. Thus we only use Dimensionality for Tiering if Dimensions have been shown to quallify for infinite transcendence to lower dimensions.

That or if one is labled as Infinite-D or Boundless-D; or as anything lower than 3-D where they would begin going into Tier-11 as 2-D, l-D and 0-D are Hypoversal.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

There even exist a lot of 2 dimensional beings who are actually Tier 4.

 

[Zoey_of_Scadrial]

Please list these, I am curious. I know there is one SCP that can go from being 0-D to Infinite-D, thus Varies, but past that I am unaware.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Culex is a two dimensional entity, made literal in the Japanese version. But he's Tier 4 via power-scaling. It's similar to 3 dimension characters trading blows with Tier 1 omnipresent gods.