- 6,074
- 1,871
All I really got was that the End could wipe out everything that had ever been created, which really isn’t requiring being conceptual.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Question: why concept manip and not NPI? As far as I remember, just interacting with concepts has never granted you concept manip over NPI; I think you need more than just interaction to prove that a character has concept manipI agree. Don’t forget supers also get conceptual manipulation for being able to interact with The End.
Contradictions to what? The End's word have to go under an interpretation of an individual to get these abilities. Why do WE have to prove a negative?Does anyone have in-game contradictions to counter The End’s words?
Because the author and creators of “The End” gave The End those words. You’d have to explain why interpreting The End’s words to mean nothing is an option by the story’s narrative.Why do WE have to prove a negative?
Most people disagree with you, tho. You're outvoted by both normal members and staff.But we're going to because Staff can walk over "democracy". Ridiculous.
I never said they don't mean nothing. I said they're weak evidence that require biased interpretation towards a particular meaning - and thus can be countered with a simple: "It also might mean something else, or just arrogance". Which is true.Because the author and creators of “The End” gave The End those words. You’d have to explain why interpreting The End’s words to mean nothing is an option by the story’s narrative.
Than what are the other interpretations of The End’s words? They have to mean something if the narrative made the final boss say them.I never said they don't mean nothing. I said they're weak evidence that require biased interpretation towards a particular meaning - and thus can be countered with a simple: "It also might mean something else, or just arrogance". Which is true.
If the one who made the hypothesis cannot bring any solice to their claim, then it's not even a theory, much less something we should index as a fact on The End's profile - we're quite literally joining canon with headcanon.
Most people - myself included - who voted for agree didn't even know The End had conceptual manipulation.Most people disagree with you, tho. You're outvoted by both normal members and staff.
His arrogance isn't being noted due to your words, no. You're just being pointed out that - "Hey, to literally agree about it's arrogance, why would you take it's word for it?", it's trying to make a point that you shouldn't be arguing for it being reliable in the first place.I still don't see any proof of The End's statments being unrealible as well. It's just people treating my own wording in the page as WoG for some reason.
If it's not counters, how can it be arguments or evidence?"It could be" or "What if" aren't counters and will never be counters. They mean nothing
I just interpreted them as evidence the End could destroy the entire cosmology.Because the author and creators of “The End” gave The End those words. You’d have to explain why interpreting The End’s words to mean nothing is an option by the story’s narrative.
A metaphor for the destruction of all, or simply a claim about how great it sees itself in comparison to rest of reality. It depends on basic methods of destruction to cause harm to the planet, and our dimension. Why would we interpret it as anything more than that based on such words?Than what are the other interpretations of The End’s words? They have to mean something if the narrative made the final boss say them.
Why would the narrative use a metaphor or rather, misinformation for a character’s only major appearance? Who they wrote as unsympathetic and genocidal?A metaphor for the destruction of all, or simply a claim about how great it is compared
Read the rest, I sent it early.Why would the narrative use a metaphor or rather, misinformation for a character’s only major appearance? Who they wrote as unsympathetic and genocidal?
A metaphor for the destruction of all, or simply a claim about how great it sees itself in comparison to rest of reality. It depends on basic methods of destruction to cause harm to the planet, and our dimension. Why would we interpret it as anything more than that based on such words?
This one, sorry.I don’t wanna guess which post to read tho. ;^; What are you referring to?
Not my fault people don't actually read. In fact this entire discussion just proves that even further. People just want self-gratification. This is why there's so many "what ifs" being thrown around. Nobody cares about the actual truth, just powerscaler terms for matches between toysMost people - myself included - who voted for agree didn't even know The End had conceptual manipulation.
This one, sorry.
I accidentally sent it before I finished writing it.
After reading Sonic’s mind and seeing the Egg Wizard merging universes, Solaris eating all of space & time and the Time Eater doing to same but not as many universes, The End says those words. How is it a metaphor if it’s saying it in response of other beings doing the similar?A metaphor for the destruction of all
The End simply doesn’t view Sonic as a threat. It makes remarks about how it thinks the Ancient were in trapping it but views Sonic and the things he did as lower in comparison to the Ancients.or simply a claim about how great it sees itself in comparison to rest of reality.
Don't try to derail this into some philosophical question on how People wish to interact with truth and what people aim to do when powerscaling, that's not a good argument for the situation at hand and just serves as a distraction.Not my fault people don't actually read. In fact this entire discussion just proves that even further. People just want self-gratification. This is why there's so many "what ifs" being thrown around. Nobody cares about the actual truth, just powerscaler terms for matches between toys
It’s NPI with the ability to affect concepts, so that is a form of conceptual manipulation. What doesn’t count is indirect destruction of a type 2 or lower concept by targeting the object it is bound to.Question: why concept manip and not NPI? As far as I remember, just interacting with concepts has never granted you concept manip over NPI; I think you need more than just interaction to prove that a character has concept manip
I suppose so, but would this even apply to The End's moon form? It's implied that it has a true form, right?It’s NPI with the ability to affect concepts, so that is a form of conceptual manipulation. What doesn’t count is indirect destruction of a type 2 or lower concept by targeting the object it is bound to.
Its true form was sealed by the Titans and it retreated into space to regain it, so there’s that.I suppose so, but would this even apply to The End's moon form? It's implied that it has a true form, right?
naruhodo naruhodoIts true form was sealed by the Titans and it retreated into space to regain it, so there’s that.
Because it still works - metaphorically being "all destruction" is still a form of bragging about your power.
After reading Sonic’s mind and seeing the Egg Wizard merging universes, Solaris eating all of space & time and the Time Eater doing to same but not as many universes, The End says those words. How is it a metaphor if it’s saying it in response of other beings doing the similar?
Match is a strong word. But sure.The End simply doesn’t view Sonic as a threat. It makes remarks about how it thinks the Ancient were in trapping it but views Sonic and the things he did as lower in comparison to the Ancients.
This perception is not unjustified. The Ancients’ technology allowed them to make Mechs with 1 Emerald to match The End, while Sonic used all 7 to compare.
The End was not wrong to think Sonic was weak compare to what the Ancients accomplished with the Emeralds.
This is again, begging your own argument. For this complaint to work, your interpretation, your particular "what if" needs to be the truth beyond any doubt. It is not. Do you truly think one non-definitive line is enough to prove something is the embodiment of a literal concept? It isn't.Not my fault people don't actually read. In fact this entire discussion just proves that even further. People just want self-gratification. This is why there's so many "what ifs" being thrown around. Nobody cares about the actual truth, just powerscaler terms for matches between toys
Don't rant about how we index stuff around here, you evidence is weak to any hax, and we're not about to index personal interpretation as canonical information - bar none. The End never alluded to being a literal concept, and never showed any instance of it in any way, shape or form - neither on narrative, on lore, or on it's actual battle.The main problem is that everyone here, with their powerscaling bias, thinks that something being "a concept" is more impressive/needs more proof than anything else, when that's not true. The only reason people are so against it is because it's a big, "powerful" hax rather than they actually are disagreeing narratively. If it was an irrelevant ability, everyone wouldn't give a shit. But that's derrailing