-
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.
Revisions to High-Godly and True-Godly Regenerationn
- Thread starter Mr. Bambu
- Start date
-
- Tags
- regeneration
- 6,215
- 16,641
I agree with Bambu and the others that deeming high-level Regenerationn to be "returning from back-ups" is way too specific as a standard and mostly comes off as trying to take how it works in a single verse and trying to apply it to all of fiction, something we should obviously avoid as much as possible, at least to me.
Returning from narrative erasure being True-Godly is cool and all but I feel like it's way too vague and obviously needs some ironing out so we can determine what qualifies for it and what doesn't, lest we have Popeye and Bugs Bunny as True-Godly regenerators or something. I admit it has potential, though.
Personally, if we're going to have High-Godly as regenerating from conceptual erasure, I think True-Godly could be regenerating from some abstract level past nonexistence itself. Say, an entity who is comprised of nothingness (or who straight-up doesn't exist) that gets destroyed but regenerates from it anyways would get True-Godly, and so would someone who can return from getting yeeted after nonexistence itself is "destroyed" and all that is left is some deeper and more primeval form of nothingness or some abstract whatever. It's relatively straightforward and doesn't overcomplicate things too much, methinks.
Returning from narrative erasure being True-Godly is cool and all but I feel like it's way too vague and obviously needs some ironing out so we can determine what qualifies for it and what doesn't, lest we have Popeye and Bugs Bunny as True-Godly regenerators or something. I admit it has potential, though.
Personally, if we're going to have High-Godly as regenerating from conceptual erasure, I think True-Godly could be regenerating from some abstract level past nonexistence itself. Say, an entity who is comprised of nothingness (or who straight-up doesn't exist) that gets destroyed but regenerates from it anyways would get True-Godly, and so would someone who can return from getting yeeted after nonexistence itself is "destroyed" and all that is left is some deeper and more primeval form of nothingness or some abstract whatever. It's relatively straightforward and doesn't overcomplicate things too much, methinks.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
I actually don't think it's that complex, on the surface we can see a hierarchy of levels that encompasses each other like the layers of an onion, I feel it's far more easier to explain to someone new the ranks of regen I proposed then trying to explain and justify True-Godly Regenerationn to them.
And I do agree with Bambu and Antoniofer, that "Narrative erasure" should definitely be ironed out, because we will get the parody/gag characters to be wanked to True-Godly, therefore my proposal is this;
We make a clear distinction between what is Toon force and what is Plot Manipulation, and as such, we would have to apply a meta-Level distinction to each of these, for example a commonly used variant is:
Traditional Plot Manipulation, Reader Avatar and Author Authority.
The distinction being this:
Someone who has Traditional Plot Manipulation would be someone who exists within the Narrative and is able to control it, manipulate it and destroy it. I.E Buggs Bunny
Reader Avatar is someone who is either partly or fully not apart of the Narrative and is only able to manipulate the Narrative due to them reading or interacting with the Narrative and are able to manipulate the Narrative like such. I.E Tommy Taylor (The Unwritten), Barret Oliver (Thr Neverending Story)
And Finally Author Authority is someone who controls the Narrative by being the Writer and Author of the Narrative and thus can change any aspect of the Verse and Narrative they choose and maybe actively writing the Narrative as the story goes on. I.E Writer Monkey in Limbo (DC Comics), Retcon Corps. (DC Comics), Featherine (Umineko), Storyteller/Game Masters (Tabletop Games)
And I do agree with Bambu and Antoniofer, that "Narrative erasure" should definitely be ironed out, because we will get the parody/gag characters to be wanked to True-Godly, therefore my proposal is this;
We make a clear distinction between what is Toon force and what is Plot Manipulation, and as such, we would have to apply a meta-Level distinction to each of these, for example a commonly used variant is:
Traditional Plot Manipulation, Reader Avatar and Author Authority.
The distinction being this:
Someone who has Traditional Plot Manipulation would be someone who exists within the Narrative and is able to control it, manipulate it and destroy it. I.E Buggs Bunny
Reader Avatar is someone who is either partly or fully not apart of the Narrative and is only able to manipulate the Narrative due to them reading or interacting with the Narrative and are able to manipulate the Narrative like such. I.E Tommy Taylor (The Unwritten), Barret Oliver (Thr Neverending Story)
And Finally Author Authority is someone who controls the Narrative by being the Writer and Author of the Narrative and thus can change any aspect of the Verse and Narrative they choose and maybe actively writing the Narrative as the story goes on. I.E Writer Monkey in Limbo (DC Comics), Retcon Corps. (DC Comics), Featherine (Umineko), Storyteller/Game Masters (Tabletop Games)
- 11,073
- 12,662
I agree with Matthew that Regenerationn from narrative seems strangely specific. I mean, that narrative is necessarily above concepts isn't even given in the first place.
Personally I'm still more or less with the original Regenerationn rankings. Or if we want to make things a bit more liberal and specific, maybe something like this:
That's my take on it at least.
Personally I'm still more or less with the original Regenerationn rankings. Or if we want to make things a bit more liberal and specific, maybe something like this:
- Mid-Godly: Regenerationn from yourself being turned to nothing. The mechanism of the Regenerationn can rely on things that are restricted to the level of existence the character is on (e.g. time, space, Type 2 and lesser concepts, objects, laws, mechanism of magic, narrative...) For example characters which highest feat of Regenerationn is getting their body and soul erased.
- High-Godly: Regenerationn from being turned to nothing. The mechanism of the Regenerationn doesn't rely on thing that are restricted to the level of existence the characters are on, but only on things on a higher level of reality. For example characters which regenerated from the destruction of their plane of existence and themselves together or characters which have demonstrated being able to regenerate independent from all of the things mid-godly Regenerationn may rely on.
These characters should generally be capable of regenerating outside their plane of existence, so that things like there being a law on their plane that states "can not exist here" can not (for all practical purposes) kill them.
- True-Godly: No idea. High-Godly, but the Regenerationn may only rely on 1-A stuff, I guess.
That's my take on it at least.
- 10,758
- 6,491
>Things that are restricted to the level of existence the character is on
A type 2 concept isn't. That's one of the definining characterstics of such a concept
A type 2 concept isn't. That's one of the definining characterstics of such a concept
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
Well, yes, Narrative would be above Conceptual existence, as without your narrative, you don't exist even conceptually, for example:
Your Narrative is all you are, including everything you've ever done, ever be, ever do, all your existence on all levels, if you are no longer written on the page, all you've done, will do, will be, your very existence will never have, never will and never is. Even your concept is gone because of this.
The Major problem is that the original is fallacious, we're assuming that's any EE from a 1-A being > all other regen. I.E Physical EE from 1-A > Conceptual regen because 1-A.
Were making a hasty conclusion which isn't backed up by our own system, that's the major issue, with My proposal of Narrative erasure or Ultima's proposal of beyond the Duality of Existence and Non-existence are levels of reality, layers of an Onion.
Your Narrative is all you are, including everything you've ever done, ever be, ever do, all your existence on all levels, if you are no longer written on the page, all you've done, will do, will be, your very existence will never have, never will and never is. Even your concept is gone because of this.
The Major problem is that the original is fallacious, we're assuming that's any EE from a 1-A being > all other regen. I.E Physical EE from 1-A > Conceptual regen because 1-A.
Were making a hasty conclusion which isn't backed up by our own system, that's the major issue, with My proposal of Narrative erasure or Ultima's proposal of beyond the Duality of Existence and Non-existence are levels of reality, layers of an Onion.
- 10,822
- 1,646
Not necessarily, for example: the concept of humans is above all layers of reality-fiction difference, if it is erased, then not even Featherine Augustus Aurora survives.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
A Reality-fiction differences is not the same as the Narrative, they are very different.
Seeing someone as lower-Dimensional doesn't mean I get to erase their narrative, they are vastly different.
Plot/Narrative functions on a meta-Level of reality, it doesn't exist on the dimensional planes, meaning that if there's infinite dimensions within this hypothetical fiction, the Narrative would encompass all these, and all things outside of these infinite dimensions and such.
Beings who sit outside the plot do often see the verse as fiction, but with the added fact that they control the narrative.
In short, this is correlation and causation, Reality-fiction differences are often found with Beings who manipulate the plot, but isn't caused by a reality-fiction difference. For example, Mages from WoD are beings who exist within the Narrative and are apart of the verse, no reality fiction difference, yet they control the Narrative freely.
Seeing someone as lower-Dimensional doesn't mean I get to erase their narrative, they are vastly different.
Plot/Narrative functions on a meta-Level of reality, it doesn't exist on the dimensional planes, meaning that if there's infinite dimensions within this hypothetical fiction, the Narrative would encompass all these, and all things outside of these infinite dimensions and such.
Beings who sit outside the plot do often see the verse as fiction, but with the added fact that they control the narrative.
In short, this is correlation and causation, Reality-fiction differences are often found with Beings who manipulate the plot, but isn't caused by a reality-fiction difference. For example, Mages from WoD are beings who exist within the Narrative and are apart of the verse, no reality fiction difference, yet they control the Narrative freely.
- 3,075
- 677
Sounds overly specific. These meta things are never good.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
We have far more complex things within the Wiki, one has to remember, we are pushing Regenerationn to it's upmost heights, we are pushing it past the abstract and into the highest reaches of imagination, we are trying to give a value to something that is beyond Concepts themselves.
- 10,822
- 1,646
What should the top ones be, then?
- 6,104
- 5,106
Well, if you want my honest opinion, High Godly and True Godly need to go. No one (literally, no one), even knows what they're talking about anymore. Too much meta is being inserted into absolutely everything and it's starting to become cringe inducing. We've become All Dimensions Wiki Lite. Hooray 2019.
- 10,822
- 1,646
I agree.
- 31,860
- 35,080
Sera makes a good point I suppose.
- 643
- 293
I may not agree with Sera on removing the Regenerationn. But I do think we are partially making a mountain out of a mole hill.
There isnt that many High-Godly and True-Godly on the wiki to begin with. Even revising to the suggested with Conceptual Erasure I can only think of a few examples of it being applicable. But I also think the inverse is true. Even if it is 'over complication', it is not like this has to be discussed in one thread with 5 different solutions and why we seem so fragmenting on picking one.
I dont agree with Sera with removing High-Godly, but I think honestly I am also fine with just having Mid-Godly be it and just have it include ALL types of Erasure. Axiomatic, Conceptual, Metaphysical Erasure.
I still think tho I prefer Udls solution. Imo 1. Udls Solution 2. Bambus solution. 3. Seras Solution (albeit with the caveat it includes all types of erasure.) Edit: This shouldnt be like a big deal. Make a staff thread with Bambus or Seras solution and just vote yes or no on both. No nuance, then after yall do that, add nuance and caveats.
There isnt that many High-Godly and True-Godly on the wiki to begin with. Even revising to the suggested with Conceptual Erasure I can only think of a few examples of it being applicable. But I also think the inverse is true. Even if it is 'over complication', it is not like this has to be discussed in one thread with 5 different solutions and why we seem so fragmenting on picking one.
I dont agree with Sera with removing High-Godly, but I think honestly I am also fine with just having Mid-Godly be it and just have it include ALL types of Erasure. Axiomatic, Conceptual, Metaphysical Erasure.
I still think tho I prefer Udls solution. Imo 1. Udls Solution 2. Bambus solution. 3. Seras Solution (albeit with the caveat it includes all types of erasure.) Edit: This shouldnt be like a big deal. Make a staff thread with Bambus or Seras solution and just vote yes or no on both. No nuance, then after yall do that, add nuance and caveats.
- 5,428
- 1,082
I don't think they should go because there are Regenerationn feats exceeding mid-godly. What's the opinion on the drawing and paper analogy?
- 643
- 293
It is a good idea to do that. Not because I am holier then thou great keeper. But like. Everyone seems to be arguing multiple things at once except Sera, Matt and Bambu. As far as I can tell-. No offense guys, I think we should stay out of it.
Regenerationn as a whole should be better defined since we hace sort of weird cases of overlap, exceptions and 'levels'. But for now, one step at a time. Just a yes no vote on which solution above is better is probably the best way to go. Especially since if I am being honest, as a writer. I dont think we care too much about the 'hiearchy' of Void Manipulation vs Conceptual Erasure. It is only an issue with the vs debating community. Not a bad one mind you, but just one that is arbitrarily set.
Regenerationn as a whole should be better defined since we hace sort of weird cases of overlap, exceptions and 'levels'. But for now, one step at a time. Just a yes no vote on which solution above is better is probably the best way to go. Especially since if I am being honest, as a writer. I dont think we care too much about the 'hiearchy' of Void Manipulation vs Conceptual Erasure. It is only an issue with the vs debating community. Not a bad one mind you, but just one that is arbitrarily set.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
I mean, I don't agree with it being Staff only, it feels like arbitrary Gate Keeping for its own sake, much like an echo chamber.
I think it would be best to make a new thread with all proposals;
Mine: High-Godly - Regen post Conceptual erasure, True-Godly - Regen post Narrative erasure
Ultima: High-Godly - Regen post Conceptual erasure, True-Godly - Regen post erasure from Existence and Non-existence
TalkDT: High-Godly - Stays the same, True-Godly - Stays the same
SeraEX: Removal of both High and True Godly regen all together.
I think it would be best to make a new thread with all proposals;
Mine: High-Godly - Regen post Conceptual erasure, True-Godly - Regen post Narrative erasure
Ultima: High-Godly - Regen post Conceptual erasure, True-Godly - Regen post erasure from Existence and Non-existence
TalkDT: High-Godly - Stays the same, True-Godly - Stays the same
SeraEX: Removal of both High and True Godly regen all together.
- 31,860
- 35,080
I like Ultima's version the best of those 4.
- 5,428
- 1,082
The only issue is that there aren't many cases of narrative erasure making it useless for 99% of characters and than what about the Regenerationn of 1-A characters?. Erasure from existence and nonexistence the only verses that has that is SMT and Digimon? Is erasure from non-existence more potent than conceptual erasure?
- 6,104
- 5,106
Ultima's proposal (at least for True Godly) is literally the original definition of True Godly to begin with. See what I mean by messing with the original when it wasn't broken?
And narrative erasure is a myth. It's not even real.
And narrative erasure is a myth. It's not even real.
- 9,980
- 2,017
I guess I'm fine with Ultima's version, and avoiding possible (and likely) confusions with narrative erasure.
- 5,428
- 1,082
I'm pretty sure True-Godly was reserved for 1-As and Regenerationn on that level because multiple verses have that erasure. Like Dark Area Digimon and Demons from SMT I think.
- 6,104
- 5,106
Restricting to 1-A was the first of many issues. When Venom originally defined True Godly, he explicitly said it's not limited to 1-As and it didn't even mesh with High Godly definition at the time. Multiple verses having something does not automatically disprove it to be powerful. Especially when the vast majority of fiction doesn't go past High Regenerationn.
- 1,280
- 1,123
I have a few questions.
First: why should existence erasure on the level of an Aristotelian concept be ranked above standard existence erasure? As I see it, the only difference is that the former affects all iterations of the victim across reality, while the latter only affects one specific iteration.
Second: how is simply erasing someone from existence and nonexistence better than, say, erasing the Platonic archetype behind a person's existence? I feel as though the latter would be the superior of the two, for many reasons.
First: why should existence erasure on the level of an Aristotelian concept be ranked above standard existence erasure? As I see it, the only difference is that the former affects all iterations of the victim across reality, while the latter only affects one specific iteration.
Second: how is simply erasing someone from existence and nonexistence better than, say, erasing the Platonic archetype behind a person's existence? I feel as though the latter would be the superior of the two, for many reasons.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,947
- 2,164
1.) As your concept is the source for all facets of your existence, your mind, body and soul all come from your concept, and as such, this means your concept is above physical Erasure, as the concepts makes up all you are, will be and ever was.
2.) To erase their Platonic archetype would be to erase their existence on all levels, all they were, all they was, all they could have been, all their infinite alternate versions, etc. they'd cease to exist, and so, they'd become non-existent, meaning they exist in the Duality of Non-existence, and so, to erase them from the Duality all together is beyond that of Platonic erasure.
2.) To erase their Platonic archetype would be to erase their existence on all levels, all they were, all they was, all they could have been, all their infinite alternate versions, etc. they'd cease to exist, and so, they'd become non-existent, meaning they exist in the Duality of Non-existence, and so, to erase them from the Duality all together is beyond that of Platonic erasure.
- 1,280
- 1,123
1. Okay...? But like, Mid-Godly already assumes that you can come back even if every single facet of your existence is erased, no? The only thing I can see that puts this beneath the erasure of your Aristotelian concept is that it only affects one iteration of the target, compared to the latter which extends to all iterations.
2. No, I mean how is something like Digimon's "existence + nonexistence erasure" inherently better than erasure that targets type 1 concepts? Keep in mind that Digimon caps at High 1-C as of now.
2. No, I mean how is something like Digimon's "existence + nonexistence erasure" inherently better than erasure that targets type 1 concepts? Keep in mind that Digimon caps at High 1-C as of now.
- 10,758
- 6,491
As much as I respect her usually, no. "I have never seen so much over complication in my life", "Literally no one one knows what they're talking about", "It's starting to become cringe inducing" are not good points at allDarkDragonMedeus said:
They are vague complaints that do not go in depth into what's being currently discussed, make significant generalisation and do not provide any arguments that meaningfully contribute to the topic at hand
I'm actually getting tired of things like this, people have a negative opinion on certain parts of the site, and feel strongly about it? Fine, but just proclaiming an issue exists in a discussion without actually specifically pointing out instances of that issue happening and making such strongly worded comments seemingly directed at no argument in particular make me feel you just want to rant instead of actually provide insight in a discussion. Just to clarify I'm speaking abput the comments made before DDM's reply that I quoted.
- 19,531
- 3,926
I definitely disagree with Sera for the simple point that if we get rid of both High-Godly and True-Godly then Mid-Godly will be so insanely varied its not even funny, with that the difference between someone with "Baseline" Mid-Godly vs someone with "High end" Mid-Godly would be unbelievably huge.
Example; the difference between say what Vivec or a Hircine came back from verses what lets say The Overlord (Ninjago) came back from, its an absolutely massive difference in feats.
Example; the difference between say what Vivec or a Hircine came back from verses what lets say The Overlord (Ninjago) came back from, its an absolutely massive difference in feats.
- 10,822
- 1,646
It would be like 1-A. We should definitely prevent this.
- 19,531
- 3,926
- 19,531
- 3,926
Yes yes I understand, ive already gotten my thoughts out there so at this point just make the thread and decide (I just hope a magority will agree with the choice).
Similar threads
