• 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"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ultima_Reality said:
If you have a thing X such that "X would exist if it weren't for these laws and rules," then that thing is automatically not a Monad, since the Monad cannot be subject to anything outside of itself, on account of its self-sufficiency and independence from anything at all. If it exists, it's something that necessarily exists. Which is to say, it exists by definition.

If it doesn't exist, it's not because "These laws and rules prevent it from existing." It simply... doesn't. That doesn't introduce any problems when it comes to comparing cosmologies.
Click to expand...

It’s more like “X can’t exist because of these rules and laws”. For example, if a story states that souls cannot exist, then they simply don’t exist. Nothing in the story would become a soul if the rules were arbitrarily changed without arbitrarily adding a soul into the story.

My question is why is a cosmology with a monad “stronger” than a cosmology where a monad cannot exist?
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
For example, if a story states that souls cannot exist, then they simply don’t exist. Nothing in the story would become a soul if the rules were arbitrarily changed without arbitrarily adding a soul into the story.
Click to expand...
This wouldn't mean that a soul couldn't be stronger than something in that verse or the verse itself, if we were drawing a comparison between two different works of fiction. If a story says its impossible to go faster than light, it does not mean that FTL characters get slowed down in match ups with characters from the no-FTL verse.

Essentially, the fact that something "can't exist" in one verse does not inform any meaningful conclusions about comparative scaling between it and verses where that thing does exist.
 
Last edited:
Kairach said:
I think it's the best example of it, from my knowledge on the character it's just the player themselves who manipulate all aspects of the game.
Click to expand...
Yeah that is, exactly, why it wouldn't ever be Tier 0.

Iamunanimousinthat said:
It’s more like “X can’t exist because of these rules and laws”. For example, if a story states that souls cannot exist, then they simply don’t exist. Nothing in the story would become a soul if the rules were arbitrarily changed without arbitrarily adding a soul into the story.

My question is why is a cosmology with a monad “stronger” than a cosmology where a monad cannot exist?
Click to expand...
I think what Deagon said already sufficiently answers this, though I'd note that, by then, what you're talking about aren't really "rules" of the verse, so much as brute facts about what does and doesn't exist in it. In that case, the "regular" cosmology of the verse where a Tier 0 exists and the verse where a Tier 0 doesn't exist are identical, and so the former can, of course, be compared to the latter. That's just a very basic principle of battleboarding as a whole and also goes for things happening in much lower tiers, too.
 
Arceus0x said:
Don't see how LOTR would get tier 0 but Narnia does have the supreme being residing at the top of a reality heirarchy
Click to expand...
Maybe a difference in presentation? Eru and the Ainur sit outside of everything while the Emperor sits at the top of his dimensional hierarchy. But then again, idk much about Narnia.

We'll probably see an explanation once revisions for R>F changes roll out. I'm personally still curious whether the Ainur get 1-A or not. I assume they do.
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
You mean Sandman rebooted the lore of Lucifer which you said isn't in the continuity with Carey’s Lucifer.
Click to expand...
I'm not really in a position where my opinion is took as fact on the wiki (as in, the Sandman Universe is currently a part of the Carey/Gaiman verse and I can't really do anything about it).

VeryGoofyToddler said:
Also, the Presence is already in Perfect Enlightenment. However, the Monks themselves “believe” that by destroying all forms of matter and undoing Creation that floats in the Void(his mind) that God finally has it. This was strictly what the Monks believed to be the case, not that God needed it to happen.
Click to expand...
Where is that stated, though.
 
Deagonx said:
What makes Truth a monad?
Click to expand...
I always thought Fullmetal Alchemist was supposed to be an Hindu-like "All is One, One is All" cosmology. The wiki currently seems like it interprets Truth as like, a walking universe like Eternity or something, which doesn't seem very plausible from my (admittedly cursory) knowledge of the series.
 
NHTkenshin2 said:
Where is that stated, though.
Click to expand...
That's what they “seek” to do. It's within the scan. How they view God does not mean it is. Monks believe in the Enlightenment and creation is already contained within his mind, so why would he want to destroy Creation? Would it be what the Monks want to do because they see the Universe as a distraction, not God.
 
Ultima_Reality said:
I always thought Fullmetal Alchemist was supposed to be an Hindu-like "All is One, One is All" cosmology. The wiki currently seems like it interprets Truth as like, a walking universe like Eternity or something, which doesn't seem very plausible from my (admittedly cursory) knowledge of the series.
Click to expand...
I was looking at the scans for it and the quotes from Truth seem to support it just like, literally being the personification of the universe itself. There might be other scans I haven't seen that make a stronger case for it, but I would be blown away if we gave it tier 0 just because a godly being said basically "I'm everything."
 
Um, Ultima while we got your attention, aside from all possible worlds and all possible character strings, do you know of any other examples that may fit High 1-A+ ?
 
Ultima_Reality said:
Oh rip.
Click to expand...
Well, tell me your thoughts:

I am what you would call "the world." I am "space." I am "God." I am the "truth." I am the "all." I am the "one." and I am "you."
Click to expand...
And the Gate has a diagram of the Kabbalah tree of life on it.

I just feel like we should tread carefully about taking the stance that limited references to certain theological concepts should slingshot something to Tier 0. We've seen authors use various religious influences as accoutrements for mystique and scene-setting many times without adhering particularly closely to any of the actual details, so my hope is that we wouldn't say "Well, Truth says that it is the all and the one, just like a monad would be, so thats tier 0" just as I would hope we wouldn't say "Oh its the tree of life, so scale it to Kabbalah" or "oh they used the word omnipotent, tier 0" etc.
 
Deagonx said:
Well, tell me your thoughts:


And the Gate has a diagram of the Kabbalah tree of life on it.

I just feel like we should tread carefully about taking the stance that limited references to certain theological concepts should slingshot something to Tier 0. We've seen authors use various religious influences as accoutrements for mystique and scene-setting many times without adhering particularly closely to any of the actual details, so my hope is that we wouldn't say "Well, Truth says that it is the all and the one, just like a monad would be, so thats tier 0" just as I would hope we wouldn't say "Oh its the tree of life, so scale it to Kabbalah" or "oh they used the word omnipotent, tier 0" etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah I am kinda disappointed ngl.

Ah well.
 
The amount of characters in DC that even have an outside chance at Tier 0 is exceedingly small, like a single digit number. Even among those, like the Overvoid, there's a very strong argument to be made against it. I'm not even of the opinion that the Overvoid has an R>F relationship with the flaw.
 
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
I know next to nothing about that branch, and it's not canon as a whole to the English version, which is the only one we're allowing on the site.
Click to expand...
Why?

Last I remember (4 years ago), there was no issue with using translated articles from other branches.
Executor_N0 said:
Of course, it isn't that logical to recognize a difference in existence/state/energy between two beings as not being comparable by numerical values while expressing that by giving it a numerical value. So dividing the tiers into physical values and metaphysical existence makes sense
Click to expand...
My argument's more that fiction typically doesn't operate by such strict rules of inaccessibility. So what we're actually doing is just equalising verses which never establish such things, but happen to not contradict it, to being far above verses that don't mention such concepts, or have them be contradicted.

(Specifically, that they include R>F/ontological superiority, but don't put it above all mathematics & composition of lower objects)

So, disagree with the stuff based on that, but agree with the unsavoriness of people determining whether or not they're in favour by which verses it upgrades or downgrades.
 
Arceus0x said:
so will the marvel and dc cringe dudes become tier 0 as well?
Click to expand...
DC goes for DeMatteis’ Gods, such as The Divine Presence & The Smile (The Smile I don’t have recollection of but I know The Divine Presence because I read Matteis’ Spectre comics)

Seeker and The Mystery’s (Which isn’t related to DC) The Magician would get 0 from it. It’s literally DeMatteis’ interpretation of God in fictional form

I still say we should separate The Divine Creator from TOAA for the reasons I mentioned earlier. They retconned a lot of the main stuff from DeMatteis’ stories so it’s dubious to assume The Divine Creator interpretation stayed for TOAA. If we separate that, The Divine Creator should get 0 due to the statement from Matteis that every fictional depiction of God / The Creator he made are the same entity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account
Replies
6
Views
3K
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
demonwarrior2266
Application of Ultima's CRT
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hypertornado099
Hypertornado099
  • Locked
What would debunk the basis of the VSBW tiering system
Replies
6
Views
2K
Urshani
Boy.Line
Qualification issues.
Replies
7
Views
894
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
182K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top