Rakih_Elyan
He/Him- 4,475
- 3,088
-
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"
- Thread starter Iamunanimousinthat
- Start date
-
- Tags
- tiering system
- Status
- 6,213
- 16,615
Technically "Omnipotence" (Defined as "Limitless power") wouldn't really exist as a separate attribute within the Tier 0, since its utter undifferentiation would prevent it from having any such plurality within itself (So "Omnipotence," "Omnipresence," and whatever others would just be referring to one and the same thing). But that's less because it's "beyond omnipotence" and moreso because we can't conceive of omnipotence to begin with. So it's a distinction between "Our mental notion of Omnipotence as lesser beings" and "Omnipotence as it really is in-and-of-itself," not "Omnipotence" vs "Beyond omnipotence."
Rakih_Elyan
He/Him- 4,475
- 3,088
So omnipotent in itself is already undifferentiated, so there's no need for such thing as "beyond omnipotence". And because we can't even comprehend the omnipotence itself.
I see.
- 18,713
- 12,972
- 7,904
- 14,966
If the change is made, I hope we are able to work out a fairly robust set of criteria for the new form of qualitative superiority in terms of what disqualifies it and what qualifies it, because otherwise it's going to be a nightmare trying to deal with the various attempts at leapfrogging to 1-A
- 9,389
- 6,692
Beyond omnipotence just sounds like paradox.
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
She/Her- 9,828
- 12,455
But consider: Watching people fail will be really funny.
- 7,904
- 14,966
I agree, but many are also likely to succeed erroneously
- 18,713
- 12,972
- 7,904
- 14,966
If this passes literally every single verse with an existing QS layer that isn't dimensional in nature will attempt to argue that it is ontological. Any "higher existence" will be argued to be outerversal. For instance:
I recall a very silly God of War upgrade that gave Athena qualitative superiority to the rest of the gods on the sole basis that she had ascended to a "higher existence" that was more powerful. Our standards require that it be infinitely so, and there was utterly no evidence to support it being infinite, but it was granted anyways and it was a hard fought battle to downgrade it back to where it should have been.
With wording like this, absent a more diverse set of criteria and disqualifiers, it's going to be an absolute shitshow. That doesn't mean the revision is bad, but we need to be specific.
- 5,637
- 3,655
it will be funny at first
until content revisions gets buried by the same 1-A attempts
- 6,213
- 16,615
mfw I am 1-A (I am a higher existence than a frog).
In any case: I have a very clear set of criteria in mind, already, which I've already expressed throughout the course of the main thread. Tier 0 isn't exactly the only thing I made a list of qualifiers for, after all.
- 13,328
- 21,295
If this gets accepted, one of two things is gonna happen:
- People will immediately begin flocking to CRTs to try and get their verse to 1-A
- No one's gonna do anything and it's just gonna be a waiting game of who's gonna make the first move
- 11,375
- 19,961
Wait at least 2 years for layers stuffs to be translated officially
- 2,134
- 2,421
Actually, I want to ask about relation between NEP2 and R>F under your new tiering system proposal.
Will a 1-A characters be able to interact with a lower character who has NEP2 but they themselves dont nore have feats of interracting with it? Currently IIRC a higher level character needs evidence of NEP interaction to kill a lower being. Will that be the case here too or no?
- 7,904
- 14,966
The problem is I don't know where it is and I'm not really sure how to find it without needing to comb over a War & Peace-length argument. Ideally it should've been in the OP, but you didn't start that thread with the intention of it being a revision which is why it's more of a stream-of-consciousness blog post. It's not a knock on you, I'm just saying I don't really know what's going on and I wager most of the other people don't either. Like, you're well-liked enough that people are just going to agree regardless of whether they can actually make heads or tails of what the points of contention are or what the precise proposal is.
- 6,213
- 16,615
I disagree with the "stream-of-consciousness" bit, but nevertheless: I am well aware of the issues with this, yes. Largely, I just don't see this as being as much of an issue as you do, since even the problems you listed above (The GoW Athena thing, for example) are ultimately problems that relate not much to the existing standards so much as to how they can be interpreted by users, and that interpretive gap is something you can never get rid of, not really.
Which is, in fact, related to something I point out often, which is that some people seem to be under the impression I am introducing wholly new concepts to the wiki, when the concepts themselves are the same. I am simply retiering them.
Don't believe that would change, or need to change, no.
- 6,213
- 16,615
Though this, by the by, is not to say nothing will change apart from the tiers. These proposals will certainly impact several abilities related to the higher tiers being addressed, and lead to a more thorough examination of them, too.
- 7,904
- 14,966
Right, but the interpretive gap can be mitigated to an extent by clarifying what elements are absolutely necessary. I struggle to see how, for instance, the quote of yours describing the new Outerverse level requires anything more than what Athena had.
- 2,357
- 934
I'm definitely on the latter of #1, I already have three verses loaded and ready for this.
- 13,328
- 21,295
Oh god...
- 6,213
- 16,615
That's because that description hinges on the user having an understanding of the things being talked about. And providing said understanding is, indeed, what pages like these are for. Everyone knows Reality-Fiction Transcendence as a concept, and everyone knows Beyond-Dimensional Existence as a concept, too (Save certain people who evidently don't know what they should know). So I don't believe the transition between Tiering Systems is cause for as much concern as you think it would be.
- 7,904
- 14,966
Well of course, but R>F is a very straightforward concept. Not that it can't be muddy at times (anything can be muddy under muddy circumstances) but I'm looking for more of a concrete answer with regard to non-R>F qualitative superiority. How do we distinguish between a higher existence that is QS and one that isn't? Like, specifically?
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
She/Her- 9,828
- 12,455
Rip lmao, I'm gonna be waiting at least a year before even thinking of posting a 1-A thread.
- 13,328
- 21,295
I have like, one verse in mind, but I have absolutely no idea when I'd push for it if Ultima's thread passes
- 5,637
- 3,655
since we're basically changing the tier whatever qualities and principles to follow for tierring such hopefully gets reflected on tierring explanation page
atm its mostly just math math math (rip math)
it would need more stuff in it like linking R>F transcendence page or explanation for ontological and dimensionality superiority as more detailed explanations
atm its mostly just math math math (rip math)
it would need more stuff in it like linking R>F transcendence page or explanation for ontological and dimensionality superiority as more detailed explanations
- 6,213
- 16,615
The fact something as nebulous as "higher existence" (Judging by the Athena example you gave) is seriously in the domain of discourse for these things is a bit concerning, frankly, since it doesn't (Or at least, shouldn't) fly even in the current system. I think the question is ill-formed because you shouldn't need to distinguish between cases at all when the object of discussion is something so vague. It should just be rejected on sight.
Overall, as I see it, R>F and BDE are pretty much the two categories that fully exhaust 1-A, to the point you can say the two have the exact same essence and only differ in presentation. If you don't fall under the presentation of R>F, you'll fall under Type 2 BDE. I don't really know of any 1-A or potential 1-A that doesn't just find its place in that dynamic. And for BDE I believe we, of course, already got standards.
- 3,191
- 3,446
Omnipotence is a paradox in the first place, that's why we're putting it the highest fancy tier.
- 18,713
- 12,972
Facts.
Btw how will Eru from LOTR be tier 0? You mentioned that once.
- 6,213
- 16,615
Don't you think it's best to wait until the dust settles before you ask questions like that?
- 13,328
- 21,295
Georredannea15
He/Him- 4,726
- 3,123
Bruhh, why is this suddenly about Athena? R>F has not been attempted in any way with the statements we have, and there is no R>F citation anyway. There's only one thing to try, and I'm already trying this.
So more specific requirements and statements may be added to qualify for these things that not everyone can have. That will be one of the things already added to tier 0. Of course, I don't know what Ultima says about that.
I don't know what the future standards will be, but other things like BDE, R>F and TD may change.
So more specific requirements and statements may be added to qualify for these things that not everyone can have. That will be one of the things already added to tier 0. Of course, I don't know what Ultima says about that.
- 7,904
- 14,966
Well, help me out then, because given this description:
I am left unable to articulate a reason to eject it from the domain of discourse.
Seriously, I want to level with you here for a moment. I'm not trying to debate with you or prove you wrong, I am trying to understand. I do not know how to tell someone "the Athena example isn't enough" because I do not know what the criteria is. "Vague" is the opposite of "specific." If I tell someone something is too vague to warrant consideration I would have to justify that by explaining the specifics. I don't know what they are, hence the inquiry.
Okay, so if I am understanding correctly, the only other way to get QS will be to transcend all forms of dimensionality.
So, I propose a scenario. A verse has a normal spacetime, with spatially 4-D beings that are more powerful than the 3-D beings. Above those 4-D beings are deities who are more powerful than the 4-D beings, and who are not spatial but instead conceptual or ethereal or etc. Are they 1-A? Or would we need to prove that they are infinitely more powerful than the 4-D beings rather than simply, say, 10,000x?
- 7,904
- 14,966
It's the most prominent example in recent memory of an unquestionably undeserved higher infinity being granted based on vague and unsubstantive evidence.
- 3,551
- 3,402
- 18,664
- 18,748
And she got downgraded. You think that she'd get 1-A after this thread passes, and inevitably tightens the standards that she doesn't currently qualify for anyway? With no one arguing for it at that?
Geor's right, this example is nonsensical.
Georredannea15
He/Him- 4,726
- 3,123
Here the explanation 1-A is basically to have a higher existence than all the lower realms within the scope of existence and to transcend them.
Athena's case something very similar, but she has not R>F, BDE or anything like that.
Considering the contexts and statements, there is one thing to try, and I am already trying it. So there is no need to bring this R>F and BDE bullshit.
- Status
