SCP-343 & Tier 3

[DemiiPowa]

SCP-343 (Article Canon) is listed as:​

At least 9-A, possibly higher (Casually warped his own room, making it larger than before. Claimed to have create the universe, but it hasn't been proven and is usually portrayed as false in most canons)

The last part can be ignored since it has nothing to do with this specific rating, as Article Canon ratings are focused solely and only based on what is mentioned in the SCP's article. With that being said, I have 2 issues with the current rating.

---

1. The justification for SCP-343 being 9-A is weak/nonexistent. I'm assuming it comes from him having warped his room to make it larger, but the profiles itself lacks any sort of calc.

2. SCP-343's rating should be listed as: "Unknown, possibly 3-A".

• He stated that he is the one who created the Universe.
• His article describes him to have "Apparent Omnipotence" (Obviously omnipotence isn't a thing, however, a character being called "Omnipotent" speaks to how powerful they are)
• Is also stated to have "A knowledge of all things"
• Has showcased multiple reality warping feats.

I believe all of these are enough reasoning to have a "Possibly" rating. In case I need to reference what the "possibly" rating is used for:

Should be used to list a statistic for a character with some basis, but inconclusive due to the justification being vague or non-definitive. The probability of the justification in question for being reliable should be notable, but mild. This term should be used sparingly.

All scans are linked in the first sentence of this post. Unless this 3-A rating is passed, then SCP-343's 9-A rating should be removed from his profile until he has a valid calc linked to it.

---

Agree w/ 3-A: Tyranno223, BLS, 1st_Virtue_of_Pure_Void (3)
Agree w/ Low 2-C: ActuallySpaceMan42, ShionAH, Gasper, ShionAH (4)
Agree w/ Unknown, possibly 3-A to Low 2-C: StrymULTRA, Demiipowa (2)
Agree w/ possibly 3-A, at most low 2-C: Small_Ophion, PhantomØ4 (2)

 

[Small_Ophion]

The last part can be ignored since it has nothing to do with this specific rating, as Article Canon ratings are focused solely and only based on what is mentioned in the SCP's article.

If this is true, then yeah I agree. Other canons shouldn't influence the Article Canon unless the author themselves makes the extended canon I think?

The justification for SCP-343 being 9-A is weak/nonexistent. I'm assuming it comes from him having warped his room to make it larger, but the profiles itself lacks any sort of calc.

Yeah I agree, if 3-A doesn't pass this should be removed untill we get a proper calc. Are you going to do it if needed?

SCP-343's rating should be listed as: "Unknown, possibly 3-A".
• He stated that he is the one who created the Universe.
• His article describes him to have "Apparent Omnipotence" (Obviously omnipotence isn't a thing, however, a character being called "Omnipotent" speaks to how powerful they are

This seems fine for possibly

• Is also stated to have "A knowledge of all things"
• Has showcased multiple reality warping feats

Only thing I don't understand is how these two prove your point. First one seems to 343 being stated to be Omniscient and the second just saying he warps reality often.

 

[DemiiPowa]

If this is true, then yeah I agree. Other canons shouldn't influence the Article Canon unless the author themselves makes the extended canon I think?

Yeah I agree, if 3-A doesn't pass this should be removed untill we get a proper calc. Are you going to do it if needed?

This seems fine for possibly

Only thing I don't understand is how these two prove your point. First one seems to 343 being stated to be Omniscient and the second just saying he warps reality often.

Understandable, I presume only the universe statement is enough

as for the calc, it's only necessary if the Possibly 3-A rating isnt passed.

 

[DemiiPowa]

Also Bump

 

[StrymULTRA]

3-A not really. Should be Low 2-C as creating the universe most of the time means doing that from nothing, not even space-time.

Though if we want to be nitpicky, maybe a "Unknown, possibly 3-A to Low 2-C" should do the trick.

 

[Tyranno223]

This sounds good. Although is his statement alone enough? Maybe "at most" might be a better phrase to use, but that's nitpicking I suppose.

 

[ShionAH]

Although is his statement alone enough?

I mean it doesnt make sense for him to create a space without time lol

 

[Tyranno223]

I mean it doesnt make sense for him to create a space without time lol

Not that, I mean for the universe statement as a whole.

 

[ShionAH]

Not that, I mean for the universe statement as a whole.

Creating a universe is Low 2-C I think 3-A is less common

 

[Tyranno223]

Creating a universe is Low 2-C I think 3-A is less common

I meant as in, is the statement we have enough to rate either 3-A or Low 2-C as "possibly".

 

[StrymULTRA]

I meant as in, is the statement we have enough to rate either 3-A or Low 2-C as "possibly".

We'd simply give both, easy as that.

 

[ShionAH]

I meant as in, is the statement we have enough to rate either 3-A or Low 2-C as "possibly".

ooh

 

[Tyranno223]

We'd simply give both, easy as that.

I mean, can we rely on a singular statement for such a large upgrade. It's not a matter of how it is rated, I'm asking if the statement alone is enough for a "possibly" rating (regardless of the option) or if it's better for an "at most" or just unknown.

 

[Gasper]

Well, he was reviled to be only the Methuselah, so i'm not sure if his statement of creating the universe is meant to be taken seriously.

 

[Tyranno223]

Well, he was reviled to be only the methusolah, so i'm not sure if his statement of creating the universe is meant to be taken seriously.

That's only in one canon, and it's not Article Canon.

 

[Gasper]

That's only in one canon, and it's not Article Canon.

Yes but i think that's in kaktusverse, one of the most popular of his depictions.

 

[DemiiPowa]

Yes but i think that's in kaktusverse, one of the most popular of his depictions.

This rating is referring only to article canon

 

[DemiiPowa]

I mean, can we rely on a singular statement for such a large upgrade. It's not a matter of how it is rated, I'm asking if the statement alone is enough for a "possibly" rating (regardless of the option) or if it's better for an "at most" or just unknown.

An "At most" rating is stating that his definitive higher cap is 3-A, which is much more extreme than "Possibly" which is just working based off of what we have. "At most" is taking the statement without question and "Possibly" is taking the statement with an amount of doubt.

 

[StrymULTRA]

What about Low 2-C though

 

[DemiiPowa]

What about Low 2-C though

His article doesn't state anything about the universe being infinite in size, which is a requirement to be Low 2-C.
3-A is the creation of the observable universe

 

[StrymULTRA]

Universes do not need to be infinite in size to be Low 2-C. Dragon Ball being the most relevant example here.

And yes, because Low 2-C does not care if the universe is finite or infinite, it takes in account the axis of time which is already uncountable infinitely larger in the same way.

 

[Gasper]

His article doesn't state anything about the universe being infinite in size, which is a requirement to be Low 2-C.
3-A is the creation of the observable universe

No, universe can be finite and still be low 2-C

 

[BLS]

Possibly 3-A is fine

And yes, because Low 2-C does not care if the universe is finite or infinite, it takes in account the axis of time which is already uncountable infinitely larger in the same way.

There's nothing in the article suggesting he created the timeline / time along with it, pretty sure base universe creation feats are just 3-A. Never mind it's not stated to be infinite either

 

[StrymULTRA]

There's nothing in the article suggesting he created the timeline / time along with it, pretty sure base universe creation feats are just 3-A

Not really.

 

[BLS]

Not really.

The Sonic one implies past, present and future i.e time. FMA literally is 4D and mentions being beyond the physical world. 343 article canon is not comparable to either. Also what i meant by "base universe creation" is simply creating the observable universe, which is imo the more reasonable take when there's not much to go off

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

The universe is all of space and time and their contents, including planets, stars, galaxies, and all other forms of matter and energy.

Universe by definition is Low 2-C unless it is specifically stated to refer to the physical universe.

 

[BLS]

Universe by definition is Low 2-C unless it is specifically stated to refer to the physical universe.

"Due to the unknown spatial size of the universe, we use the size of the observable universe as a baseline for universal feats."

Regarding Space-Time i.e Low 2-C

"It fulfills the standards for being a universe-sized realm (see the first section of this page) and all of its time is also involved in its feat. I.e. the structure involved in the feat is the timeline of an entire universe."

If i understood the standards correctly, the very base of Universe creation is treated as just 3-A and you need some kind of time equivalent for low 2-C

 

[DemiiPowa]

"Due to the unknown spatial size of the universe, we use the size of the observable universe as a baseline for universal feats."

Regarding Space-Time i.e Low 2-C

"It fulfills the standards for being a universe-sized realm (see the first section of this page) and all of its time is also involved in its feat. I.e. the structure involved in the feat is the timeline of an entire universe."

If i understood the standards correctly, the very base of Universe creation is treated as just 3-A and you need some kind of time equivalent for low 2-C

agree FRA
going by site standards

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

"Due to the unknown spatial size of the universe, we use the size of the observable universe as a baseline for universal feats."

The universe has spatial dimensions and temporal dimensions. If we are just talking spatially, then yes, the universe is 3-A, however adding temporal dimensions makes the universe Low 2-C

Regarding Space-Time i.e Low 2-C

"It fulfills the standards for being a universe-sized realm (see the first section of this page) and all of its time is also involved in its feat. I.e. the structure involved in the feat is the timeline of an entire universe."

In general, the word Universe refers to all Space, Time, Matter & Energy, which would be Low 2-C. Otherwise, no statements of a character destroying the universe would be Low 2-C.

 

[BLS]

In general, the word Universe refers to all Space, Time, Matter & Energy, which would be Low 2-C. Otherwise, no statements of a character destroying the universe would be Low 2-C

Universe can just refer to the observable universe. It does not automatically mean every character that has statements like "i'm going to destroy the universe" or "i created the universe" is immediately assumed to be Low 2-C i.e the timeline or a component of time aswell. Additional context is needed

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Universe can just refer to the observable universe. It does not automatically mean every character that has statements like "i'm going to destroy the universe" or "i created the universe" is immediately assumed to be Low 2-C i.e the timeline or a component of time aswell. Additional context is needed

But by default we treat universe as Low 2-C, and there is no reason to assume otherwise in this situation.

 

[BLS]

there is no reason to assume otherwise in this situation.

Yes there is, he could have just created a big bang scenario / all matter. You need to actually prove time is involved in the creation / destruction process somehow or there is qualitative superiority going on.

Citing Low 2-C standards

"Characters or objects that are capable of significantly affecting[1], creating and/or destroying an area of space that is qualitatively larger than an infinitely-sized 3-dimensional space. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continuums (the entire past, present and future of 3-dimensional space) of a universal scale. However, it can be more generally fulfilled by any 4-dimensional space that is either:"

"A) Equivalent to a large extra dimensional space. That is, a higher-dimensional "bulk" space which embeds lower-dimensional ones (Such as our universe) as subsets of itself, whose dimensions are not microscopic / compactified."

"B) Portrayed as completely transcending lower-dimensional objects and spaces in the setting of a given work of fiction."

Meanwhile 3-A

"Characters or objects that can create or destroy all celestial bodies within a finite 3-D space at least equivalent in size to the observable universe via an omnidirectional explosion that covers the entire space, alternately create or significantly affect[1] a 3-D universe or a pocket dimension of comparable size, which does not involve the destruction and/or creation of space-time."

Low 2-C is the Space-Time Continuum of the Universe, while 3-A is the physical 3-D thing. Not here to argue standards, you can do that elsewhere

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Yes there is, he could have just created a big bang scenario / all matter. You need to actually prove time is involved in the creation / destruction process somehow or there is qualitative superiority going on.

Unless you can prove that, then the default is Low 2-C. It doesn't matter what it COULD be, the universe by default is Low 2-C, and the burden of proof is on you for statements of it being otherwise.

 

[BLS]

the universe by default is Low 2-C,

Default for creation / destruction is 3-A
" Due to the unknown spatial size of the universe, we use the size of the observable universe as a baseline for universal feat"

and the burden of proof is on you for statements of it being otherwise.

What are you arguing me or the standards? With vague statements, the burden of proof should lie on the side that is claiming the creation of an entire infinity ontop / the timeline is to be given out without context or statements proving indeed that there is extradimensional, superiority or space time involved

I'm not saying that Universes generally don't have Low 2-C structures by the way if that's what you're arguing about, merely stating with no further context, a universe creation feat i.e 3-A as in the physical universe is more reasonable. Don't know if you understand i'm not arguing about the universe and more so the "creation" part, of which this entire discussion is built on. 343 "creating" is the statement, iirc there's nothing implying he made the timeline which is more of an assumption than simply meaning creating the physical observable one, mind you from what i understand Low 2-C is infinitely bigger than 3-A.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

There's nothing left to prove since it's the standard for universe creation

Default is 3-A, again
" Due to the unknown spatial size of the universe, we use the size of the observable universe as a baseline for universal feat"

Keyword SPATIAL, normal Low 2-C Universes have 3 Spatial Dimensions. Even in Real Life, we don't know the actual spatial size of the universe, as such we use our OBSERVABLE UNIVERSE, as the baseline for universal feats. However, universes, in general, 3 Spatial Dimensions, 1 Temporal Dimension are still Low 2-C.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

The default is Low 2-C

 

[BLS]

snip

Read through my comments, literally not my argument and you're arguing in bad faith. This is about the standard of universe creation "Feats", if the character doesn't specificy he is higher dimensional, superior to or creator of the space-time aswell, then he should just have 3-A for the universe creation feat i.e the oberservable one, not the infinitely higher tier

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Read through my comments, literally not my argument and you're arguing in bad faith. This is about the standard of universe creation "Feats", if the character doesn't specificy he is higher dimensional, superior to or creator of the space-time aswell, then he should just have 3-A for the universe creation feat i.e the oberservable one, not the infinitely higher tier

You are stating, more proof than the literal word universe, is required, for Low 2-C. No other profile, across the entire wiki, has ever required it, but for some reason this one SCP, requires it. Seriously, go to a Low 2-C Profile with universe statements, and find where they mention timelines, or the 4th dimension.

 

[1st_Virtue_of_Pure_Void]

Agreed

 

[BLS]

You are stating, more proof than the literal word universe, is required, for Low 2-C.

Are you arguing semantics at this point? "Universe" can mean both 3-A and Low 2-C, the tier 3-A is literally called "Universe level".

but for some reason

Excuse me? Implying i'm biased against this verse?. There are tons of 3-A characters that have statements of universe destruction / creation that are not Low 2-C fully atleast, most having "possibly"