Regarding hax for 3D beings with higher-dimensional powers.

[Ricsi-viragosi]

I don't see why it would be an exeption in cases where the character is a higher D godtier.

 

[Saikou_The_Lewd_King]

@Cal So your literal only argument is "it's too complicated"? That we're too far up our own asses? Well sorry for trying to be accurate and not just handing out favorable assumptions to characters to avoid thinking too hard. If we decided to go with the easy and more straightforward way of doing things with every decision, our Wiki would be rifled with bad assumptions.

This is like everything we do here. If we don't have proofs of a character being able to do X and that we can't reasonably assume so, we don't give you X. On a lower scale, if a normal human can affect lower realities like Dreams or virtual worlds, can we reasonably assume they can also affect the real world in the same way? Of course not. That's a ridiculous assumption. The same applies here.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Because few characters are in the situation where they have the book scenario. Writing in a book is vastly different to turning someone into cheese.

 

[Kaltias]

You missed the point.

The analogy was that writer = higher dimensional being deciding everything. So if they say "and Marcus became cheese", Marcus becomes cheese.

This doesn't make them able to turn other people on their level into cheese

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

But doing it to a lower dimensional reality is mostly the same. It isn't any more substantial to the character than one of their dreams.

 

[DMB_1]

If I can truly perceive something as fiction, I don't need a pen and a book to imagine it being turned into cheese.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

snip

Frankly, yes. I stand by that. Always go with the easier and more straightforward assumptions, and honestly, assuming that abilities somehow stop working when your basic punches still do is bullshit. One, that's one Occam's Razor is for. Two, yet again, we're thinking of this FAR MORE than the things we're analyzing. Comparing it to dreams, virtual realities, and books is a false analogy. You're not using powers for that. The creator isn't snapping his fingers and Marcus becomes cheese, he manipulates the story/dream/whatever to get the result. You're not a supernatural being in those scenarios. Any other case, I guarantee you that these people are still supernatural.

 

[Kaltias]

The easier and most straightforward assumption is "your feats show the limits of your powers". Don't assume they can do something until they show it.

Also your counterargument proves my point. The author is using its powers over the plot or whatever to do stuff. That is called "reality warping", from the perspective of the lower level

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

So in a vacuum, where resistances don't come into play, don't assume they can affect things with their powers when they can affect the same things without powers. Got it.

We've been using Bill as an example so far, right? Tell me, how is Bill portrayed as an author at any part of the story? Or Beerus for that matter.

 

[Sera_EX]

Does hax always scale to dimensional tiering

We have to treat it as if it does, otherwise we have a glaring NLF problem.

 

[Kaltias]

Except they are trying to affect an infinitely more complex thing.

No, not for the author example. But fine, let's use them. What points towards Hakai being 4-D? Has it erased timelines? Or 4-D beings?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I do agree that the wiki is getting far too overcomplicated and stuck up its own ass at times. Like a lot of things are convoluted for the sake of being.

 

[DMB_1]

Beerus has ever shown only 3D Existence Erasure. The only one who has ever shown to be able to erase a timeline/universe was Zeno. Just like we assume in Vs threads that hakai doesn't have universal range, or that Beerus doesn't have Universal+ range despite being Low 2-C

Whitch reminds me that if this goes trough, I will have to get his match removed against Ragnalordmo

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Except they are trying to affect an infinitely more complex thing.
No, not for the author example. But fine, let's use them. What points towards Hakai being 4-D? Has it erased timelines? Or 4-D beings?

Hakkai is a bad example doe. Hakkai is a hax from 3D beings. DBS characters are all 3D but have more that universal AP. So no, hakkai needs feats of being 4D.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Except they are trying to affect an infinitely more complex thing.

No, not for the author example. But fine, let's use them. What points towards Hakai being 4-D? Has it erased timelines? Or 4-D beings?

Because his far weaker abilities have 4-D power.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Because his far weaker abilities have 4-D power.

Wait no, that's not how it works.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

It's how it ''should'' work.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

It doesn't matter if Beerus is 3D or 4D or has erased people or timelines.

He is Low 2-C. His power is on that scale. His power and all his techniques come from his Ki, including that Hakai ability.

Ergo, it can erase Low 2-C people.

Getting overly caught up in meaningless discussions shouldn't be a thing for something so simple.

 

[Kepekley23]

Okay. Now that we're suddenly taking the "feats show bounds" pproach, let's make hax AP-based while we're at it. You can instantly take away souls at the drop of a hat? Too bad, only worked on a 600 zettaton being while this one guy we're putting you against is 700 zettatons.

 

[Sera_EX]

I do agree that the wiki is getting far too overcomplicated and stuck up its own ass at times. Like a lot of things are convoluted for the sake of being.

I agree 1000%.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

We're not making hax AP based. It's a matter of not making it a NLF on either end of the spectrum.

"Works on everyone" and "Only works on x weak people" are equally bad approaches.

 

[Kepekley23]

We're not making hax AP based. It's a matter of not making it a NLF on either end of the spectrum.

"Works on everyone" and "Only works on x weak people" are equally bad approaches.

/r/woooosh

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

@Matt. I think Kep was supporting our side with his comment lol.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

I really feels as if this site has gotten too crazy when it comes to dimensionality and hax in general. Dimensionality is so far up its own ass that it gets more and more complicated by the day. Good luck for everyone to follow it all.

So, say some new user tries to understand this. What are our layman terms? Like something simple we can right down. I get we want to be "correct" here, but let's be blunt, outside of here, no one give two ***** about dimensional hax. So being "correct" is important, but the likes of being understood and something that can be easily and simply explained. Not every human being comes here to learn about physics, theories, mathematics, philosophy, etc. So a simply explanation is needed here. If we truly want to impliment this.

Although I find this to flat out be overcomplicated just to make us all seem to go lolIamverysmart.

 

[Kepekley23]

@Cal

People don't bother reading comments nowadays.

 

[Sera_EX]

Hax is not inherently tier based. That's why it's called "hax".

 

[DMB_1]

But people are more so wondering about "hax vs. dimensionality" rather than "hax vs. AP".

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

The main problem with the self-absorption and overcomplication is that it surrounds the wiki in a self-fulfilling impenetrable echo chamber that newcomers can't hope to breach. And it's all done to satisfy the overanalytical minds of a few rather than the benefit of the community as a whole.

Yes, I say that overall the audience in general matters more. We need to be able to convey these concepts without sounding like asses or like we're giving university lectures.

It seems like every single thread nowadays just rambles on and on about Platonism and Aristotelism, Aleph Cantorian Sets, Non-Euclidian Geometry, types of abstraction and etc etc etc.

Like, jesus. These things should be designed to be as simple as possible. Not as complicated as possible.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Ok so how many other ppl are with "Yes the hax scales" (me included)?

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

Character X: I'm 20-D

Character Y: I'm 20-D

Character X: I can mind hax groups of 4-D people easily.

Character Y: So? I'm 20-D. 4-D mindhax means nothing to me.

Character X: But I'm still 20-D...

Character Y: Mindhax someone on my level first then.

......Something's off here....

 

[Sera_EX]

Depends on the hax, obviously.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Character X: I'm 20-D
Character Y: I'm 20-D

Character X: I can mind hax groups of 4-D people easily.

Character Y: So? I'm 20-D. 4-D mindhax means nothing to me.

Character X: But I'm still 20-D...

Character Y: Mindhax someone on my level first then.

......Something's off here....

LOL! First world dimensionality problems.

 

[Sera_EX]

Dimensionality is really starting to become a problem. I suggest we take things slow, stop overcomplicating things, chill with the hax obsession, and use common sense.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Dimensionality is really starting to become a problem. I suggest we take things slow, stop overcomplicating things, chill with the hax obsession, and use common sense.

Well it all depends on the point of view. Some rely on common sense and say that if you are 20-D then obv you possess 20-D hax, other rely more on the "we need proof and feats". Personally i go with the 1st because it just becomes weird to assume everything is 0-D unless proven otherwise.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Dimensionality is really starting to become a problem. I suggest we take things slow, stop overcomplicating things, chill with the hax obsession, and use common sense.

I blame the "Strongest for every tier" thread

 

[Kaltias]

Does hax always scale to dimensional tiering

We have to treat it as if it does, otherwise we have a glaring NLF problem.

I dunno if you read the arguments wrong, but the side you are arguing against can't possibly go into NLF territory without changing argument.

Because the argument is that those powers have a limit, and we shouldn't assume anything without further showings.

Your side is saying that you don't need any kind of feat, only AP on that level.

So no. At most you can say that i'm limiting the character too much. No NLF.

 

[Sera_EX]

@Kaltias that was a response to Sound of Infinity, rather than the OP.

I actually don't have an argument. As I've told Agnaa and Aeyu a few days ago, I'm tired of talking about dimenaions and hax. I only responded here because Dragon asked me to. I wish I could be more of a help but, I'm just getting bored of these discussions :/

 

[Kaltias]

Ah, sorry. My bad, I left for a bit and had to read all of this in a hurry

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

@Sera. I feel you. I'm longing for Goku's simplicity right now. And you have NEVER heard me say that about Dragon Ball post-Z before lol.

 

[Sera_EX]

Now that being said, I agree with Matt wholeheartedly. We are overcomplicating things and it's mostly because of versus threads, which are ultimately just for fun, so we're going to have disagreements over them but it shouldn't require a new thread every three weeks or so just because "this guy argued with this guy over how this works and then these guys made a fuss over it and blah blah blah". We need to learn to just agree to disagree with each other sometimes and hope that we can persuade more people to our sides in versus threads of that kind.