yes. completely different composition (nonexistent concept)
But the Concept that is non-existent is only a type 2 not a type 1
The only difference between Type 1 and Type 2 Concept is that Type 1 Concept is independent of the reality it governs. In terms of non-interaction, the nature of the concept is not important. A character who can interact with a Type 2/3 Concept of Darkness can interact with a Type 1 Concept of Darkness.
That's literally it.
Isnt the type 1 more fundemental/abstract then the type 2
No, it was never like this. The wiki simply makes a hierarchical distinction between the manipulation of a concept that is independent of the reality it governs and the manipulation of a concept that is dependent on the reality it governs, that's all.
But a Type 2 doesnt govern all of it's reality, only whatever is in its area of influence, also they are dependent on the reality they are in
Type 1 concepts do not have to govern the entire reality. (like type 2 concept) On a planet without life, there are no objects to which the type 1 concept of life.
This is just the nature of the concept, not a reason to make the concept of type 1 more abstract than type 2.
I mean by default the Concept of Life isnt Type 1 and would need more evidence to back it up, so maybe not the best example
There is no concept that is type 1 by default.
I don't know how many times I will say it, but this does not change the fact that it is a concept, it is still abstract at the same level.
I always considered things above the level 1 to be higher than third category, but i also want to know
But in this case, a Type 1 would not be affected by the destruction of the Object while a Type 2 would, as only the Object depends on the Type 1, while Type 2 are dependent on each other
Phrase your question better, because your question as it stands is ridiculous.
Do you think this is important in terms of interacting with the concept itself?
What you said is just the reason why the statement in the quote is on the conceptual manipulation page.
No, he can't interact, I don't know where you got that from, I've been trying to explain from the very beginning that a character that doesn't exist conceptually, no matter what kind of concept it lacks, doesn't exist conceptually and will not be affected by any conventional concept manipulation.
What i was trying to get at was Type 1 being more abstract then Type 2, and would in this case for Type 1 interacting with a Non-Existent Type 2
I think you over complicated the question when the top half question is mentioning aspects but the bottom half asks if higher aspects can interact with different natures when you say NEP type 2.
Get well soon, brother.
If this is the case, I think this is a really arbitrary standard because logically the hierarchy of type has no interaction relationship.
So now you're saying that a character with NEP Nature Type 1/2 and Aspect Type 2 (based on type 2 concept) will be affected by Type 1 Concept Manipulation? (This is what the OP is asking) If so (which I doubt) the Aspect Type 2 section of the NEP page should be revised because there is nothing about it.
Those are type 2 in a vacuum, space and time even as concepts are just the reality so they need more context to be type 1
Thank you
First this depends on the concepts that he's nonexistent to
I agree with your stance, but this is outlined in the Concept Manipulation page itself: "All Conceptual Manipulators are bound by the type of concept they have been shown to manipulate. A character able to manipulate a concept on a Type 3 level cannot manipulate any higher concept type."
Honestly feel there should be more discussion on this weird hierarchy that we had established for stuff like CM1, CM2, Info 2 etc because it definitely impacts the scenario in the OP.
