- 6,220
- 16,705
Hi all. Connection issues on my end are all solved at last, so, figured I'd start hopping in more often, hopefully.
So, what I want to talk about is this bit in the Beyond-Dimensional Existence page:
vsbattles.fandom.com
So, speaking as the one who revised that page to begin with: When I put that example in there, it was because I wanted to put strong emphasis on differentiating between "Type 1 BDE + Firepower that happens to be enough to blow up all the dimensional structures in your verse" and "Above dimensions by virtue of your very nature and difference from them." Hence the "void of nothingness" example. We've all seen that scenario before: There's a huge void-realm thing, and then normal reality is portrayed as in some way "tiny" compared to it.
Problem is, the current wording makes it sound like we're saying all voids of nothingness necessarily are non-dimensional, and therefore that any void-realm that's depicted as "larger" than dimensional places fits the bill for the 1-A range. That is not something I really agree with; namely because reified void realms in fiction (Due to the very fact they appear as things to begin with) are never truly nothingness or absence in the truest and most radical sense, and so given that they're always qualified in some way, we can't make statements about what they are just in virtue of being "a void."
What makes this bit confusing is easy to detect: I wrote it as "...voids of nothingness that lack space, time and physicality entirely," which was intended to be read as "voids of nothing (that are stated to) lack space, time and physicality entirely." From what I've seen in a few other places, it seems people have taken to read this bit as if there was a comma in there, as something like "...voids of nothingness, that lack space, time and physicality entirely." Basically reading it as saying that aspatiality and atemporality are features of any realm described as void or nothingness.
In the Tiering System presentation thread, I had a brief interaction with Agnaa where he brought up adjacent issues with my inclusion of this as an example, but the heart of what I'm saying here wasn't quite brought up during it, so, figured making this thread would be good. Overall, I suggest changing the example to the following:
So, what I want to talk about is this bit in the Beyond-Dimensional Existence page:
Beyond-Dimensional Existence
Beyond-Dimensional Existence is the state of existing beyond dimensions. In the majority of cases, this will be referring to characters who are timeless and spaceless. That is to say: A "beyond-dimensional" character does not take up any volume whatsoever, nor does it occupy a position in...
vsbattles.fandom.com
So, speaking as the one who revised that page to begin with: When I put that example in there, it was because I wanted to put strong emphasis on differentiating between "Type 1 BDE + Firepower that happens to be enough to blow up all the dimensional structures in your verse" and "Above dimensions by virtue of your very nature and difference from them." Hence the "void of nothingness" example. We've all seen that scenario before: There's a huge void-realm thing, and then normal reality is portrayed as in some way "tiny" compared to it.
Problem is, the current wording makes it sound like we're saying all voids of nothingness necessarily are non-dimensional, and therefore that any void-realm that's depicted as "larger" than dimensional places fits the bill for the 1-A range. That is not something I really agree with; namely because reified void realms in fiction (Due to the very fact they appear as things to begin with) are never truly nothingness or absence in the truest and most radical sense, and so given that they're always qualified in some way, we can't make statements about what they are just in virtue of being "a void."
What makes this bit confusing is easy to detect: I wrote it as "...voids of nothingness that lack space, time and physicality entirely," which was intended to be read as "voids of nothing (that are stated to) lack space, time and physicality entirely." From what I've seen in a few other places, it seems people have taken to read this bit as if there was a comma in there, as something like "...voids of nothingness, that lack space, time and physicality entirely." Basically reading it as saying that aspatiality and atemporality are features of any realm described as void or nothingness.
In the Tiering System presentation thread, I had a brief interaction with Agnaa where he brought up adjacent issues with my inclusion of this as an example, but the heart of what I'm saying here wasn't quite brought up during it, so, figured making this thread would be good. Overall, I suggest changing the example to the following:
Last edited:
