Revisions to High-Godly and True-Godly Regenerationn

[Ultima_Reality]

The problem is that "being erased on an 1-A level" is too vague and poorly-defined to be made into a level of Regenerationn of its own right. At most I can see it standing for reforming even after the dimensional axes inherent to your reality are unmade and all of space just collapses into itself due to a lack of directionality, but even then, that would be more akin to what High-Godly currently entails, and wouldn't actually be "1-A level regen".

 

[Antoniofer]

Unfortunately that doesn't say much, I'm refering, if you are erased "beyond the concept of dimensions", from "where" you were erased?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The problem is that "being erased on an 1-A level" is too vague and poorly-defined to be made into a level of Regenerationn of its own right. At most I can see it standing for reforming even after the dimensional axes inherent to your reality are unmade and all of space just collapses into itself due to a lack of directionality, but even then, that would be more akin to what High-Godly currently entails, and wouldn't actually be "1-A level regen".

I actually prefer the having-your-type-1-concept-erased thing. As above, Type 2 Concepts presumably give you some framework to revive from, hence High-Godly being Conceptual erasure being actually qualitatively better. Resurrecting from your Type 1 concept being erased ensures the regen stays 1-A but gives something better than 1-A damage because lol.

 

[Antvasima]

I have removed "staff only" from the top of the thread.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

That sounds reasonable, yes, though I'd like to hear others' opinions on it.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Then give a reason why it is any different other than "it is". Because High-Godly truly is just based on location of Regenerationn rather than damage regenerated from. Currently True-Godly is just regen-ing 1-A damage with no otherwise greater context. Both are foolish.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Although, does anything in fiction even have a feat akin to regenerating after its Platonic Form is somehow erased for whatever reason?

 

[PsychoWarper]

I personally agree with how Bambu is describing them or at least how they should be described.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Although, does anything in fiction even have a feat akin to regenerating after its Platonic Form is somehow erased for whatever reason?

Don't know, would be neat to see. Though I think if a 1-A said "something something yer concept is dead" then I figure that would be enough.

 

[Antvasima]

@Ultima

I have been told that the Cthulhu mythos is filled with such characters.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

I thought High-Godly consisted on someone being able to regenerate even if their dimensional level was erased.

Example: Godoka nukes some 3 dimensional world (erases everything leaving only her dimensional place) and Jack Frost regenerates back despite what just happened.

 

[Paul_Frank]

I disagree with high godly just being regenerating from conceptual erasure.

Rewording it as something like, The ability to regnerate even after you are erased, mind, body, soul and the very dimensions up to and including those that make up your being. Could work maybe.

i.e. if you are 3d and are erased mind, body and soul along with every dimension up to and including your own and you can still regenerate.

 

[PaChi2]

Pretty sure that regenerating in the void after everything got nuked is textbook High-Godly. And yes, it's "drawing in the air", but that was my point.

The person with High-Godly can "draw in the air", the person with Mid-Godly can't.

And not sure if I understood the last question, but if they aren't stated to have restored space-time beforehand, you shouldn't assume it unless other stuff points towards that

The point is that "drawing in the air" isnt any superior to "drawing in a piece of paper". Or "drawing in a wall" or "drawing in a canvas". Its drawing but with the ability to do it in the air. Superiotity comes when you "draw after the concept of drawing is removed", for example.

The proposal is that "drawing in the air" should be considered as a separate skill from drawing and not a higher form of drawing.

 

[Kaltias]

Ye but it is superior to "drawing in a canvas" because it can do everything the former can do then more.

As I said I don't mind if conceptual erasure becomes the new high-godly, i'm neutral, I was just explaining that the current definition of high-godly isn't better than mid-godly because we say so, but because there are reasons for that, instead of being "body+soul+mind+house" regen

 

[PaChi2]

"Ye but it is superior to "drawing in a canvas" because it can do everything the former can do then more"

Thing is, the reason for it to be "higher" is arbitrary because the drawing isnt any more destroyed than it was before. Destroying the paper, removing air, whatever you want, doesnt directly affect the destroyed drawing (drawing is long gone before you burn the paper). And the stance here is that a higher form of regen should be one that directly affects the erased character.

 

[Kaltias]

No, but what it does is making the Regenerationn impossible (For Mid-Godly obv).

Destroying your concept isn't "erasing you harder" either, it's more like altering the universe making your existence impossible.

Thing is, everything beyond Mid-Godly regen by necessity would need to affect something more than you, because "deleting you completely" is the basic requirement of Mid-Godly.

Will comment more tomorrow, now it's late here

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm still in agreement with Ultima Reality.

 

[PsychoWarper]

So should we eventually have like a vote or something of what we are going to do with High/True-Godly and if we choose to revise them how they should be revised?

 

[Zeifyl]

I've always thought High-Godly was dimensional destruction.

So rather than "Body, mind, soul, house" it'd be "Body, mind, soul, every shape+moment that can conceivably be used to construct you."

 

[Andytrenom]

My stance would be that regen levels should be based on "how much you can restore" through and through instead of becoming "where are you restoring yourself in" at some point.

I am not denying that a feat of Regenerationn in complete nothingness is something outside the norm for mid-godly characters but that still feels more like a special version of mid-godly more than a straight up upgrade consistent with the rest of the ranking system

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Zeifyl, the latter would be more impressive but that still requires rebranding it. The universe isn't every shape, your concept would fit much better in that definition of High-Godly

 

[PsychoWarper]

Iirc Bambus suggestion is something like

"Mid-Godly: Body, Mind and Soul

High-Godly: Body, Mind, Soul and Type 2 Concept

True-Godly: Body, Mind, Soul and Type 1 Concept"

Would that be correct or is something off?

 

[Antvasima]

Should I add a "bell highlight" for this thread, in order to get more input?

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

JJBA - Jotaro "YES YES YES"

 

[Kaltias]

My stance would be that regen levels should be based on "how much you can restore" through and through instead of becoming "where are you restoring yourself in" at some point.

I am not denying that a feat of Regenerationn in complete nothingness is something outside the norm for mid-godly characters but that still feels more like a special version of mid-godly more than a straight up upgrade consistent with the rest of the ranking system

And isn't regenerating from conceptual erasure just a "special version" of Mid-Godly, too?

You "only" need basic Mid-Godly coupled with the ability to survive without a concept (Which, again, is just another thing making your Regenerationn more difficult, as a concept really isn't part of an individual more than my shadow is part of the body casting it).

As I said above, by necessity if you want a Regenerationn level above Mid-Godly, you need the EE to affect something other than the individual, because completely deleting the individual is the requirement for Mid-Godly in the first place

 

[Antvasima]

I have added a highlight.

 

[Andytrenom]

What I am talking about isn't the ability to survive without a concept, but the ability to restore it as well.

Regenerationn is the ability to repair yourself after being damaged, and being able to repair both yourself and a part of reality relevant to you in my opinion makes more sense to consider as a higher form of Regenerationn capabilities than repairing no more than what would be lost to mid godly destruction but doing so in a void.

Even if it doesn't fit perfectly within the definition of Regenerationn (since you aren't exclusively fixing yourself), the ability to repair reality to a certain extent is still more closely related to that concept than the ability to function without it.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Iirc Bambus suggestion is something like
"Mid-Godly: Body, Mind and Soul

High-Godly: Body, Mind, Soul and Type 2 Concept

True-Godly: Body, Mind, Soul and Type 1 Concept"

Would that be correct or is something off?

This is roughly what my proposal is, yes. As said above, generally Mid-Godly was held to be inferior to High-Godly because High-Godly removed the other thing you had to resurrect from- a place, a universe holding your concept. However, this isn't a very good premise for Regenerationn as many can just go to a void or, indeed, are a void in of themselves.

The conceptual stuff would make it so you remove the framework for that specific individual's existence from the get-go and thus would require a higher form of Regenerationn. True-Godly is the same but with 1-A concepts.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

For the record, Andy makes sense to me, surviving without a concept isn't the same as reforming yourself after conceptual erasure. In this case you regenerate the infrastructure that allows you to exist.

 

[KingPin0422]

I fully agree with Mr. Bambu's proposal.

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

Yeah Bambu's works.

 

[Kaltias]

What I am talking about isn't the ability to survive without a concept, but the ability to restore it as well.

Ignoring the fact that I doubt most of fiction specifies whether or not you are regenerating the concept (Due to the end result being the same + due to how platonism works, concept destruction simply isn't a thing in that philosophy).

The current High-Godly is the example above, drawing, paper and all that.

Conceptual erasure (Of a type 2 concept) is different from that. It's more akin to deleting the drawing, then preventing anyone from drawing it back.

It works more as a regen nullification than a "better erasure".

 

[Elizhaa]

I agree with @Mr. Bambu's proposal in concept. I still will keep an open mind for other arguments. Edit: I will remain neutral.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Kal I mean, technically yeah you aren't erasing more of the individual since everything that could be gone is gone, but you yourself said that a level above mid godly would require something other than the individual to be erased, and I agree with you on that regard

I just think that in this situation it would be better to judge Regenerationn capability by seeing how much the character can restore since the ability to restore thing to me is more relevant to the idea of Regenerationn and a better basis for classifying its potency than the character's ability to use a power in "unconventional places" you can say.

 

[PaChi2]

I agree with Mr Bambu.

 

[Kaltias]

Yeah but my point was, not only you can't even know if they are restoring the concept or if they are simply surviving without it unless specifically stated, that has less to do with you having good regen in the first place, and more with resistance to concept manipulation.

 

[Antoniofer]

Personally I do not like the idea of dividing concepts in types (an idea its an idea), and I also think that type 1 is based simply in "beyond dimensions" when there's stuff that aren't covered by any string theory. However, I think that type sounds like pataphysical, that I believe it should be true-godly.

Also, didn't someone say that once one's body, mind and soul was erased, its concept too? In that case, regenerating from a temporal wipe is not covered from that regen.

 

[Andytrenom]

There's a question I want to ask

If someone who can negate Regenerationn upto mid-godly slashes a High Godly character as they are currently defined, should they actually be able to regenerate that wound?

If current high godly isn't above mid godly due to the character being able to heal more of himself but rather heal himself in a situation where a normal mid godly would fail, then would that really translate to regen negation of mid godly level failing against him?

 

[Paul_Frank]

If high godly works in situations where mid godly fails it would of course work when regen up to mid godly is nulled

 

[Andytrenom]

High godly's superiority over mid godly was described as a drawing being able to reappear in air when mid godly can only reappear in a canvas, now why would being better than mid godly in this manner imply mid godly regen negation would fail against him?