Revisions to High-Godly and True-Godly Regenerationn

[Antvasima]

Thank you.

 

[JackJoyce]

I want to ask something. Does nuking the dimension kills a Type 3 or 4 concept by default? Because they are not transcendent of the reality.

 

[Antoniofer]

Don't think dimensions have anything to do with concepts, except for those that dimensionality covers (space, time, probability, possibility, variable, etc.); its more of an arbitrary requeriment, at least personally.

 

[KingPin0422]

People still comment about "dimensional/1-A erasure" but I'm pretty sure that people doesn't known what that means. And, what's exactly the difference from regenerating from type 2 conceptual erasure and type 3 when the idea of the character is simply that, an idea?

A type 3 concept is bound to its object in reality; a type 2 concept is not.

If you destroyed, say, every circle in reality, the type 3 concept of "circle-ness" would be destroyed as well via a domino effect, but the type 2 concept would still persist.

 

[JackJoyce]

It can also be restored by re-making an object of a previously existent concept (concept creation)

 

[SinsofMan]

Open question, so if we now have High-Godly being erased from a Type 2 concept.

Does that mean Mid-Godly is unofficially Regenerationn from nothing up to Type 3 Concept?

Coming back from conceptual erasure >> Void Manipulation/EE (Usually)

 

[Antvasima]

I am not sure. My apologies.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

Technically, as your type 3 concept disappears when you do, yes.

 

[Udlmaster]

Well, perhaps we could have True-Godly being regenerating from their narrative being erased, as that fulfills our hierarchy of powers:

Physical < Metaphysical < Conceptual < Narrative/Plot

As we know, to erase your narrative is beyond the range of concepts, as it erases all levels of yourself from ever existing on all levels, meaning that Conceptual would rank lower.

This would then line up with the pattern of levels of erasure rather than the random change for True-Godly being erasure based on the power of the user, as we know, this doesn't make sense at all, because we don't treat higher dimensional erasure as negating lower dimensional Regenerationn.

And the 1-A Being could erase this hypothetical lower with say Conceptual Regenerationn being only on a spiritual level, but because this being is 1-A we're assuming that this spiritual erasure would destroy this being even though they should regenerate from it.

 

[Antoniofer]

Technically, conceptual fall under the category of metaphysical iirc; the thing above concept is archetypes, perspective (cuz concepts exist cuz we perceive them that way) and pataphysics.

Although, I agree with your general idea.

 

[Udlmaster]

Yeah, you get what I mean, Metaphysical can literally mean anything that isn't physical, which if you wanted to, one could expand it to mean Concepts and such, but I meant it as Mind, Soul and such related things.

 

[Udlmaster]

And for the argument of Type 1 concepts being for True-Godly Regenerationn is no different from the "1-A erasure on spiritual level > Conceptual regen because It has 1-A source", the only difference between Type 1 and 2 is just 1-A being in it and so it's no different.


The power of the erasure shouldn't matter for regen, only the level of erasure.

 

[Antoniofer]

Yeah, as I said previously divide concept by types seems kinda arbitrary, destroying your idea is destroying your idea. I also agree that "1-A erasure" doesn't means anything. So according to you, Low-Godly is metaphysical, Mid-Godly conceptual and High-Godly narrative (that I assume it would be the same as pataphysical), isn't it?

 

[Udlmaster]

Well, that regen from physical erasure is Low-Godly, Regenerating from soul/mind and such Destruction will be Mid-Godly, Regenerating from your concept being erased is High-Godly, and finally having your narrative erased would be True Godly:

All physical = Low-Godly

All Metaphysical (Souls and Mind) = Mid-Godly

All Conceptual = High-Godly

All Narrative = True-Godly

 

[Antoniofer]

I understand that "physical" or "metaphysical" means "regenerating at physical/metaphysical level" (being regenerating at physical level reforming from a quartz or something), but I guess I have it wrong.

Also, there's few verses (or philosophies) that treat the destruction of the soul, mind and body as conceptual level (Anima for example, as the destruction of the souls means the separation from the Nexus of Souls).

 

[SinsofMan]

I agree with Udls proposition.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

What if there is no clear distinction of souls, or the mind being conceptual in a verse? What is the low end standard then? Also, what if the soul is something that is "higher existential" Or "Higher dimensional" in a verse?

 

[Udlmaster]

Good question, i have a personal example where souls in WoD are in fact concepts, philosophies etc. And they tend to overlap.

Now, to answer your question, it would mean that if the soul is a concept or such, then the higher level would overwrite, meaning if said character erased this person's soul and said souls are treated as Conceptual, then said character regenerated, then they'd get High-Godly regen, as the soul acts like a concept.

As for Higher Dimensional, that would just mean the Erasure is higher dimensional and wouldn't change the outcome of the erasure's Level, only who it can effect and if it bypasses resistances.

So for example Vivec has 1-A erasure, but it's only physical erasure, then Chad comes along with his Narrative Regenerationn, his resistance to Erasure would be bypassed, but he'd still regenerate.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Wouldn't something of this nature also Make having different types of Existence erasure mandotoary on a page? Could this also change the wiki's standard of souls? Possibly making souls conceptual by default?

 

[Udlmaster]

In short No and No.

It would only require the manipulation on the page and there being any proof that they can do any damage on said level.

As for souls, it would be a case by case basis, and would need to be proven that Souls = Concepts, and is something very specific.

 

[PsychoWarper]

Im pretty sure when Vivec erases people from the Dream he totally erases everything about their existence.

 

[Udlmaster]

It was an hypothetical with a name given, not a literal example.

 

[PsychoWarper]

Dont spread false informatio

 

[Antvasima]

Well, that regen from physical erasure is Low-Godly, Regenerating from soul/mind and such Destruction will be Mid-Godly, Regenerating from your concept being erased is High-Godly, and finally having your narrative erased would be True Godly:

All physical = Low-Godly

All Metaphysical (Souls and Mind) = Mid-Godly

All Conceptual = High-Godly

All Narrative = True-Godly

Sera EX and Azathoth have come back to the wiki. Somebody should ask them to comment here, along with DontTalkDT, DarkLK, Ultima Reality, and Assaltwaffle. You can tell them that I would appreciate their help with evaluating if this is a good idea.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I think Udl is seriously overthinking and overcomplicating things. I think the wiki should astrive to not be way too much galaxy brain with this. We already overthink far too much.

 

[Antvasima]

I am not so sure. It seems like a valid enough suggestion to at least properly evaluate it.

 

[Antvasima]

I asked the members in question.

 

[Andytrenom]

I do not see how we are overcomplicating things at all. Regenerationn after mid-godly would naturally require you to delve into some complex ideas so we are discussing such ideas, that's all there is.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

It really wouldn't, and trying to force a hierarchy of "Metaphysical than Narrative" into all of fiction is super dumb.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. It doesn't hurt with some more input regarding the other suggestions, even if we keep True Godly as beyond-dimensional erasure though.

 

[Andytrenom]

Mid-godly is returning after losing your existence itself. Normally you wouldn't think there would be something worse than this so there won't be a simple universally agreeable answer when we try to describe a level of Regenerationn superior to this. Just demanding one while putting down any attempt to discuss more complex ideas doesn't help at all and feels more like a disruption than a meaningful suggestion

 

[SinsofMan]

Admitedly, I only like Udls idea because it is more 'inclusive'. I agree with Matt we overcomplicate things. Unsure if this is one of them though. I also like my idea obviously, just keep High-Godly and True-Godly what was proposed. And Have Mid-Godly as just. Anything erasure up to Concept Type 3 including mind, body, consciousness etc etc. I will be fine tho with any of the proposals above tho. Just a matter of wording anyway.

 

[Antvasima]

VSB Regenerationn types are already quite far from the ACF ones. I am not sure how it will be right on your system. It seems already a couple of times I said that I consider high-level Regenerationn as recovery from backups.

Low-Godly (I still think these designations are very strange) - the incorporeal thing is a backup

Mid-Godly - the surrounding continuum itself or its global concept is a backup

High-Godly - the higher order thing or continuum is a backup

True-Godly - the more abstract or higher order dimmensionless thing or continuum is a backup

I do not quite understand why there are any complications.

DarkLK has replied.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Because at least one of those don't make sense (High-Godly) and True-Godly is vague as hell, with "abstract". Being reliant on a back up would also just be Type 8 at that point.

I'm fine with Udl's adjustment to narrative erasure (as in, removal from narration or something) if it gets ironed out. I'd prefer outright removing High-Godly if a consensus can't be reached and just leaving "Mid-Godly as regenning from literally nothing, True-Godly gets renamed to High-Godly".

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Also, to be clear, we can't just say "deary me this is such a complicated thing, better dumb it down" when a fair amount of higher tiers are reached by adhering to complicated scientific theoretical terms and rather baseless philosophy.

 

[Antvasima]

What about DarkLK's response?

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

To me, applying the idea of "having a back up in the space time continuum" to our standards of Regenerationn seems to be forcing an explanation of the ability to "come back from nothing" on all of fiction.

I do not agree with this.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Antoniofer]

DarkLK's suggestion is basically the same as the current levels, before all this discussion started. So its just "regenerating from x tier" that I personally think its doesn't means much (other opinions here differ).

In the other hand, I feel that regenerating from "narrative erasure" is quite vague, and people may... exagerate the capabilities of cartoon characters from that.

 

[Antvasima]

In the other hand, I feel that regenerating from "narrative erasure" is quite vague, and people may... exagerate the capabilities of cartoon characters from that.

This is a good point.