• 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.

The commoners thread: Discussing Ultima's "On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System"

Speaking of religious concepts, if wog states that a certain character has a achieved a religious state of being, is that enough evidence to apply that to the character, or would there have to be in-verse proof to apply it?
It's treated the same as any other namedrop of something in WoG.

If the WoG is related to things in the actual text (i.e. if we know the character has 2,000 abilities, 20 are explored canonically, and 2 are explored in WoG) it's fine.

If it's completely unrelated to things in the actual text, it's not fine.

And we'd only go off of the stuff actually said by the author, we wouldn't "scale it" to other sources elaborating on what such a state of being would entail.
 
Speaking of verses coming back to the wiki, from the little I know of Demonbane based on the last revision they did which would've upgraded them to 0 had it not been for the Tiering Revision, it'd be At least 1-A at a minimum via all the dream/dreamer and R/F stuff on the lower ends of the cosmology

Also even by separating DeMatteis' Cosmology from Marvel, You still get 1-A at a minimum from DeMatteis cosmology due to the dreams within dreams for the higher worlds, much less all of the philosophical stuff his Marvel works have (especially the likes of Into Shamballa and the early Silver Surfer comics)
I forgot to make the Sandbox for Matteis’ Cosmology. I already placed Oblivion as High 1-A+(higher) and Maya as High 1-A+(lower). The Staff, Book, Nexus, Fallen Stars, and Lords of Shamballa are High 1-A. God as we know is 0. The dream layers are a 1-A hierarchy to me.
 
I forgot to make the Sandbox for Matteis’ Cosmology. I already placed Oblivion as High 1-A+(higher) and Maya as High 1-A+(lower). The Staff, Book, Nexus, Fallen Stars, and Lords of Shamballa are High 1-A. God as we know is 0. The dream layers are a 1-A hierarchy to me.
Hm. I understand most of your decisions, but may I ask how Maya and Oblivion are both respectably High 1-A+ ?
Also technically due to the nature of how God is also paradoxically within the Dream of Existence, but is also every being and thing (with God essentially playing the role of every character in the Cosmology), technically speaking there should be more than one 0 since it's all the exact same being just playing the role of these characters.
 
Hm. I understand most of your decisions, but may I ask how Maya and Oblivion are both respectably High 1-A+ ?
Also technically due to the nature of how God is also paradoxically within the Dream of Existence, but is also every being and thing (with God essentially playing the role of every character in the Cosmology), technically speaking there should be more than one 0 since it's all the exact same being just playing the role of these characters.
They're God at that point because they lose their individuality to be the whole(God). Maya will be consumed by Oblivion as the infinite Void preceded the illusion Goddess.
 
So um, I'm looking through random Tier 1 characters to see which would be affected (upgrade or downgrade) by these changes, and I can't help but noticed Akuto Sai's Outerverse justification (even though based on what I've seen from Demon King Daimao in this thread it's likely going to be majorly affected by the tiering change anyways):
"can create any possible story that can be put into writing"
Shouldn't this be, like, higher than just Outerverse level even in the current tiering change for Outerversal ? This seems like the meta-fictional equivalent to actualizing any logically possible reality.
Ultima already addressed DKD having modal realism in this same thread
 
Nasu - Tier 0 Root (confirmed by Ultima)
SMT - Tier 0 Axiom (maybe?)
Umineko - High 1A Featherine (the creator is not a character. More like a title which no known character has reached currently)
SMT is unlikely to be Tier 0. It could still happen, all pieces technically fit but Ultima handles the Axiom as something that arises from humanity itself so more-so a conditioned reality in this context than it is unconditioned. Although everything else, again, fits
 
Wait he did ? What did he say ?
image.png
Essentially Logical Omnipotence will be in reference to intrinsic possibilities in the verse so if a verse has things that occur higher than "All logically possible worlds" then the logical omnipotence would just encompass a larger number of possibilities in such a context and the lower stuff would js be disregarded as a qualitative jump
 
image.png
Essentially Logical Omnipotence will be in reference to intrinsic possibilities in the verse so if a verse has things that occur higher than "All logically possible worlds" then the logical omnipotence would just encompass a larger number of possibilities in such a context and the lower stuff would js be disregarded as a qualitative jump
I see. I mean I personally thought it wasn’t 0. It’d probably be closer to the first version of High 1-A+ rather than the High 1-A+ that encompasses all possibilities
 
So I’m a little confused on the new 1-A standards and I’ve seen people bring up quite a few characters/verses that I thought would just get locked out of 1-A by default, so I’ve got a question (sorry if it’s already been asked, I haven’t been keeping up with all 120 pages):

Is there any possible way for an originally below 1-A character to reach 1-A? For example via a new form, via a 1-A entity making that character “real” with their power, via some kind of other vague ascension into the 1-A structure, etc? Or is it literally impossible no matter what?
 
So I’m a little confused on the new 1-A standards and I’ve seen people bring up quite a few characters/verses that I thought would just get locked out of 1-A by default, so I’ve got a question (sorry if it’s already been asked, I haven’t been keeping up with all 120 pages):

Is there any possible way for an originally below 1-A character to reach 1-A? For example via a new form, via a 1-A entity making that character “real” with their power, via some kind of other vague ascension into the 1-A structure, etc? Or is it literally impossible no matter what?
Yeah, Non 1-A's can become 1-A through alternative means.
 
So I’m a little confused on the new 1-A standards and I’ve seen people bring up quite a few characters/verses that I thought would just get locked out of 1-A by default, so I’ve got a question (sorry if it’s already been asked, I haven’t been keeping up with all 120 pages):

Is there any possible way for an originally below 1-A character to reach 1-A?

For example via a new form
No.
via a 1-A entity making that character “real” with their power
Yes.
via some kind of other vague ascension into the 1-A structure
No.

Pretty much the only way your getting a non-1-A to 1-A is if a 1-A entity causes it or if their soul/heart/essence whatever is naturally 1-A because of verse mechanics and they cast aside their non-1-A attributes to become fully 1-A, even using an ambient 1-A energy to ascend won't work because absorbing it counts as interaction which would be an anti-feat.
 
SMT is unlikely to be Tier 0. It could still happen, all pieces technically fit but Ultima handles the Axiom as something that arises from humanity itself so more-so a conditioned reality in this context than it is unconditioned. Although everything else, again, fits
My understanding is crude, but is that what happens when Seraph reaches Nirvana? Realizing how everything was once one, and in essence, everyone is connected. Stephen makes a comment about how humanity has the potential to surpass the axiom, and yet the axiom is the collective (subconscious?) will of humanity across the Amala-verse? There’s just a lot fingers pointing at the same idea. Eventually where the borders for a sense of individuality or self are erased. The world is me and I am the world (nirvana)?


So maybe not the axiom but something else implied?
 
Monad, in its totality, is the essence behind all things and beyond all distinctions. It’s also known as the highest aspect of “God” in its unknown and truest part. So Godhood seems to vary, but at its highest interpretation, I believe would be a more fitting title than Monadhood. After all, that “God” is part of everything including Monad.
 
Monad, in its totality, is the essence behind all things and beyond all distinctions. It’s also known as the highest aspect of “God” in its unknown and truest part. So Godhood seems to vary, but at its highest interpretation, I believe would be a more fitting title than Monadhood. After all, that “God” is part of everything including Monad.
Beyond anything else, God has the small problem of being tied to a major religion which people already have their own ideas what it means. Not to mention that fiction itself is filled with beings called gods, some even directly modelled after God, but are not applicable of being a Monad.

Too much baggage basically, Monad's relative obscurness means it a much more fitting title in that aspect.
 
Beyond anything else, God has the small problem of being tied to a major religion which people already have their own ideas what it means. Not to mention that fiction itself is filled with beings called gods, some even directly modelled after God, but are not applicable of being a Monad.

Too much baggage basically, Monad's relative obscurness means it a much more fitting title in that aspect.
Yeah, I thought it would be more fun to call 0 “Godhood/Godhead” than Monadhood. Obviously, I already knew of the problem at hand, and given DT's argument against Ultima, I can see why. However, something like “Divinity” sounds much cooler, for lack of better words. However, that also probably lacks practicality.
 
Yeah, I thought it would be more fun to call 0 “Godhood/Godhead” than Monadhood. Obviously, I already knew of the problem at hand, and given DT's argument against Ultima, I can see why. However, something like “Divinity” sounds much cooler, for lack of better words.
Divinity is even worse, at least God/Godhood is generally going to have people think of the omnipotent Christian God, even if their idea of what God is does not fit being a Monad. Divinity you have stuff from religions from all across the world that are no where close to being a Monad. Never mind that fiction likes to turn Divinity into a form of energy or metaphysical force in their series that would make things more confusing.
 
Divinity is even worse, at least God/Godhood is generally going to have people think of the omnipotent Christian God, even if their idea of what God is does not fit being a Monad. Divinity you have stuff from religions from all across the world that are no where close to being a Monad. Never mind that fiction likes to turn Divinity into a form of energy or metaphysical force in their series that would make things more confusing.
I think Unknownable/Ineffable seems like a stronger word for it because it's more holistic than Monad.
 
And this is the major problem, this new Tier 0 is by it's very nature can't be described so we will just be doing what the philosophies of the ages have done and just give it a name that is good enough.

Problem is that as mentioned above is if we use an already popular name then any already existing opinions of those names will cause confusion when trying to explain. Second is if we use something like Ain Soph, Brahman, or Dao, then we appear to be playing favourites. While using stuff like indescribable, or unknowable gets us with people bringing up thesaurus' or directly quoting places where those words are used but not in a way that is sufficient for Tier 0.

Meanwhile Monad, while having issues, is obscure enough that most people won't have an opinion on it already, isn't used too often in fiction inappropriately so that characters who get called it while not being Tier 0 won't pop up too much, and is neutral enough that it doesn't appear to be playing favourites too much.
 
I agree with the Admin above me. I just hope we can move on with High 1-A+, High 1-A, and 1-A quicker than we did with tier 0.
Pretty sure we already did them. It's just waiting for the actual pages that will go on to the wiki at this point. Tier 0 just needed more work beyond the original thread because it was more complicated and important, with High 1-A+ being discussed because it was a new tier connected to Tier 0.

Low 1-A, 1-A, and High 1-A is just about the qualitative superiority stuff agreed to in the already accepted thread.

If anything it would be called Supraessential

Ultima really likes that word...
That works just looks uninviting in a way that Monad doesn't. Probably because Monad is shorter, does not contain a word we kinda understand already in "essential", and that "ra" just trips me up. It's like Superessential but isn't.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top