- 3,346
- 1,912
Summonable beast class servants exist now
-
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.
Nasuverse Discussion Board (New Forum)
- Thread starter DemonGodMitchAubin
- Start date
- 25,632
- 15,962
Is this a W?
- 3,346
- 1,912
this might actually existWhere Nasuverse really scales
Tier Zero root and shiki and 1A Gilga and artoria for me
mega w, nero is one of my favorite servants
- 25,632
- 15,962
Does she get too much screen time though
- 3,346
- 1,912
- 25,632
- 15,962
There’s plenty of servants that need more screen time
- 967
- 372
It's a single-player game, so I think it's whatever. If you have the money to spend, good for you.
- 39,691
- 15,627
Biggest whale/leviathan in FGO-tuber
Your SSR collection is almost similar to him albeit still low lel
- 25,632
- 15,962
How big is your collection?
- 967
- 372
Is he a bigger whale than TouhouSniper?
I mean, Touhou uses SQ as Golden Apples... Can't go much whalier than that
- 39,691
- 15,627
- 25,632
- 15,962
I was guilty of using sq as apples back then, now I save sq and apples and only use the golden apples when necessary
Overlord_Darkness
Username Only- 1,084
- 407
can someone call staff members for conclusion here? https://vsbattles.com/threads/abigail-williams-foreigner-addition.152829/
- 4,524
- 2,242
Fair
Well no. Omnipotence by nature cannot be surpassed. It's why it's called "all powerful". Omnipotence can achieve things that are paradoxical. An omnipotent being can create an object they cannot lift and then lift it anyway cause they're omnipotent. In the same manner, they can't really be surpassed by an apophatic being because then they wouldn't really be omnipotent.
Could you elaborate on this tidbits, spefically on the impossible worlds part?
- 967
- 372
Sorry, but you are just wrong, and this is Cataphatic/Apophatic Theology 101. Even in Cataphatic Theology, when one says "God is omnipotent" they have the understanding that "the one true god" is beyond and above said concepts such as omnipotence...
And even then, on your very example, you aren't describing omnipotence - "An omnipotent being can create an object they cannot lift and then lift it" LITERALLY means that he FAILED at creating an object he cannot lift, and there's absolutely no way of getting around it. (Okay, there is one way, but its dumb - He created an object that he couldn't lift as per that specific timeframe, not necessarily in the future. But let's agree you didn't mean it this way.) This is not a paradox, it's just a demonstration that such being isn't as omnipotent as you are making him to be.
(An I know the example is a simplification, but it's almost infuriating how people use terms in a gramatically correct way that actually mean nothing in high tier discussions here)
Last edited:
- 4,524
- 2,242
I'll respond to this. You're missing that it could also be a case of God being above the two distinctions. God technically did make something he couldn't lift, but then also managed to lift it because the distinction between lifting and not lifting should naturally not matter to an entity like God. Unless I'm like completely wrong or something
That's interesting. Mind elaborating?
- 967
- 372
I can think of some lines of reasoning following this logic, but I believe they are problematic.
A) Focusing on the Object - even if the being (God) itself is above the distinction, the object itself, if created as a physical entity, shouldn't. If the being explictly imagined "an object he cannot lift" (and in theory should be capable of creating anything), then, "(being) cannot lift" would have to be a property of the object, not of the being. If this said object is then lifted by the being, you have to, for example, that the object itself is above the distinctions (because it is DEFINED as "object that cannot be lifted by being"), or you have to argue definitions (that the object's "essence/form" changed as per being lifted); this to me leads to the problem that the object imagined/conceptualized =/= the physical object manifested.
B) If "the distinction between lifting and not lifting should naturally not matter", you create a problem in your preposition. Lacking said distinction, "object that cannot be lifted" and "object that can be lifted" would be either the same thing, or it would be a phrase that even if gramatically correct (signifier following rules of the language), has no actual meaning, as in it doesn't refer to anything that's real/possible/existent (signified(E.G. - Colorless green ideas sleep furiously; This phrase follows all rules of english and is therefore gramatically correct, but is senseless/means nothing). This leads to things like "X can lift any object" and "X cannot lift anythinng at all" meaning the same thing, if you expand the logic of "no distinction". (Problem A also exists here, as even if God ignores the distinction, the object itself shouldn't)
I'm gonna steal @Tdjwo post to answer
- 842
- 511
Nvm omnipotence scales to possible and impossible worlds.
No? They'd still be omnipotent going by their descriptions they are all powerful but only scaling to possible and impossible worlds. They are still bound by predicates they would be below negative theology and its not a contradiction its just their nature.
Impossible worlds are logical impossibilities, a P and ¬P being true at the same time is a logical impossibilities, impossible worlds are not confined by the strict rules of possible worlds.
- 967
- 372
I can understand the concept you are describing here, but can't help but find it funny because of the words chosen (possible/impossible), unless "impossible worlds" mean things like made-up worlds of fantasy/mental worlds/etc (worlds that don't exist manifested/realized/in actuality)
- 842
- 511
Possible world can fall under the category of worlds that aren't actualized, logical possibilities even when they are not true in the actual world are said to be true in possible worlds as a result of them not violating the laws of logic.
For example possibly A implies necessarily possibly A Or if A is logically possible then it follows that A is necessarily Possible (A is true in some possible world), the actual world is the world that we live in, when a possible world is just what the world could've been. Impossible worlds are worlds that violate the laws of logic and are thought to not exist because the actual world and possible worlds are logical while impossible worlds aren't.
Impossible worlds are only posited to exist in extended modal realism, outside of that P and ¬P being true simultaneously is not a proposition that can be true in any possible world and the actual world but in some impossible world P and ¬P can be true simultaneously.
- 4,060
- 1,713
speaking of which, does shin megami tensei have negative theology? i heard many people say it has but no one gave any scan for it. I asked in the SMT discussion thread but all i got were invalid responses.
Also, does elder scrolls has it?
Also, does elder scrolls has it?
- 985
- 619
You lack patience.
- 4,060
- 1,713
what do you mean by that? Are you looking for the scan yourself as well?
- 842
- 511
Ye but it seems to be contradictory in smt tho, atleast for "yhvh" idk about "the axiom"
For elder scrolls ye it does
- 4,060
- 1,713
YHVH is like, an avatar of axiom. Maybe the axiom has apophatic?
you mean the amaranth? But doesn't Anu becomes the amaranth? So a non apophatic being can become apophatic?
But there is also a new amaranth....can there be two or more apophatic beings in a verse?
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,180
- 1,299
- 985
- 619
- 5,416
- 6,222
is someone gonna tell him
- 842
- 511
Idk man sounds like an excuse to justify implementing an already contradicted negative theology
Sure
It's never specified that, that can be the case in negative theology so idk, but if it is I don't think it'll lead to contradictions to negative theology unlike someone who's above a negative theology being
- 985
- 619
What is blud waffling about?
- 842
- 511
Is there anywhere specified that the axiom is Ineffable or is it assumed from yhvh being an avatar of it which the line of reasoning would be completely stupid to say because something that was said to be Ineffable is not contradicted but it's an avatar of another thing that thing has negative theology too?
If it's assumed then smt has no negative theology outside of the made up Ohio version, but if it's specified that the axiom itself is Ineffable then sure maybe smt does have negative theology
Pretty sure you understood clearly what I implied unless you're
- 985
- 619
Yes. The evidence is widely available and is even partially incorporated into our cosmology blog. Though no one outside the supporters have figured it out yet.
No. I don't know what Issei is talking about.
I don't understand this. If YHVH had direct statements of being Apophatic, then The Axiom would scale due to its relationship with the rest of the verse. YHVH isn't an avatar of The Axiom either.
Watch your tone.
- 5,416
- 6,222
SMT might also go down in flames if the low 1-A thread also passes 
. Sad world we live in.
. Sad world we live in.
TheKingStrategist13
He/Him- 1,318
- 1,180
A argument about Apothetic Theology and SMT's Axiom in the Nasuverse Chat
Standard VSBW moment
Standard VSBW moment
- 25,632
- 15,962
Accept and live with it unfortunatelySMT might also go down in flames if the low 1-A thread also passes
TheKingStrategist13
He/Him- 1,318
- 1,180
Mmm, we shall see. That's still a if, after all.SMT might also go down in flames if the low 1-A thread also passes
- 5,416
- 6,222
One part of my brain tells me Persona being downgraded is a good thing but another part tells me SMT being downgrades is bad no no 
- 25,632
- 15,962
Seems like you got an Angel and Devil on your shouldersOne part of my brain tells me Persona being downgraded is a good thing but another part tells me SMT being downgrades is bad no no
TheKingStrategist13
He/Him- 1,318
- 1,180
Kinda funny, I'm the inverse- (Nah fr tho main SMT is chill ig, Persona is just my focus usually)
