• 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 Problem with the Pocket Dimension Star Feats

Why are we discussing this agai? It's getting annoying to keep discussing the same thing over and over again. We've been through this more than twice, it's already been discussed that pocket dimensions don't get 4-A unless it fulfills the requirements already laid out by Matt and others above. We are literally going around in circles.
 
Sera is probably correct. Let's focus on getting the instruction page written.
 
Like seras said i dont think we have to do anything and this discussion as been brought up multiple time i guess its kind of pointless and we should continue as we always did because at this point with the "dots in the sky" or whatever it feels like we are kind of arguing semantics.

when the games does not need to prove anything more so unless an outside third party says something or the game itself says they are not stars we shoudnt do anything about it plus the fact that if it is accepted we would kind of end up revising it again since somelse will find a problem with it


plus the backlash it could recive when we do start downgrading a shit ton of verse like kid icarus this is basicaly a huge downgrade for verses like this way too much troubled and this rule seems way too complicated.


So yeah i go no


We should all vote now and be done with this.
 
@Ashen Please separate your post in paragraphs if you are going to be lengthy with your comment.
 
The issue here isn't whether or not the stars are real as again that's been discussed to death, the issue is whether or not the dimension was created, reality warped (which would warrant a separate tier) or teleported to.
 
I hope I'm making that perfectly clear because Professor Kukui seems to be one of the very few people that knew this and got it right. If the dimension was reality warped it warrants a separate tier unless they can bust or create that dimension from nothing. Pritti constantly tells me many Nintendo feats fall under this category rather than being outright 4-A.
 
I think timeframe should also be considered, no one rates characters 4-A for destroying multiple stars if the feat happened off-screen/over a substantial timeframe, and likewise it's not really fair to assume a dimension that we never saw created on-screen was created instantly or with a single action.

There also be nuance more to how we rate those feats, even if the tier doesn't change some dimensional creation feats ought to be superior to others, a dimension that needs its creator to continously provide energy for it to not fall apart is inherently inferior to one that can exist indefinitely without need for the creator to sustain it.
 
Im going to put this there just for convinience sake


Reality Warping (sometimes called Reality Alteration or Reality Manipulation) is a term used to describe the ability to manipulate reality itself.

The ability to change reality into how the person in question sees fit, while ignoring the rules of science. Users can alter any item already considered real. Any decision made in the past, any item ever created, any movement, choice, color, atom, or molecule that exists can be changed.

All of existence bends to the imagination of a reality warper. Users can rewrite the laws of physics and then change them back in an instant, universes can bend to the will of a reality warper.

Examples include erasing things out of existence, granting wishes, creating universes, creating/altering matter, time manipulation, spatial manipulation, etc.

Like Sera said above we should do a separate tier for reality warping but the thing is like this wiki said reality warping IGNORES the law of science and rewrites physics (reality warpers should get law manip) and the fact they can manipulate space makes it clear that we can have 4-A via RW.

What i am saying like stated above for reality warpers we should just use context and if its a feat recreated several time it should be considered as legit.

Unless we have some reasons to think the stars would be illusory especially in a reality warped created dimension that is only limited by what the weilder himself can think off, I don't think that assuming stars in those to be fake to be a good default assumption.

But yes we should do a separate tier but only because again it does not follow any of the laws of science.
 
I'm honestly surprised people calling out Nintendo for this. I mean, I thought Matt was joking but apparently it's normal.

Only Kirby, Zelda, and Kid Icarus have tier 4 Pocket Dimension feats. Idk about KI. Zelda has only one pocket dimension feat that's rated and it comes from a single visible sun, not a starry sky, and the Triforce and its relationship to the Sacred Realm is emphasized throughout like five games. I personally rejected the Vaati stuff.

Kirby only has two pocket dimension feats in Magolor and Dark Mind, the former we actually see collapse in front of us and the latter is being removed. Even then, they're primarily scaled to Drawcia, who turned a galaxy into paint, Dark Nebula, who nuked many star systems, and Star Dream, who rotated several nebulae by inhaling.
 
Um...I do want to say that how can we say that a "dot in the sky" is actually a star? Iirc during my time in school a dot in the sky could also be a planet
 
^^^ basically everything what cal said hard to know if people were truly serious about Nintendo also this post seems to argue also the feat of Castlevania which doesn't make any sense plus Darkstalker too.

And lets not forget some of the Dc and marvel characters that just use reality warping
 
@BlackeJan A sky filled with dots can be taken as a starry sky.
 
No one is really calling out Nintendo though? Matter of fact Sera was saying it was fine for the most part. I know I was joking earlier hence the slash in my comment
 
And the fact that planets do not always shine bright enough to be dots in the sky makes it more clear its a starry sky
 
Andytrenom said:
@BlackeJan A sky filled with dots can be taken as a starry sky.
Click to expand...
Ok but what would happen if those dots were actually planets instead? I'm not trying to argue against this but there are possibilities
 
The possibility isn't big enough for us to consider, simply put
 
Theirs also Pokémon Dark Matter creating a dimension with multiple stars in the background and it's defeat caused the dimension to collapse
 
Ok but what would happen if those dots were actually planets instead? I'm not trying to argue against this but there are possibilities

If all of these dots were planet i mean it would still be a 4-A feat because the starry sky is replaced by a ton of planet enough planet to fill more then one solar system plus there is still a need of a light source when creating a dimension so it kind of changes nothing it i guess
 
I wasn't calling out Nintendo. I was calling out the wiki itself. Again, Pritti and Kukui (both Nintendo fans) know to differentiate spatial or reality warping from energy based feats. This is a problem spanning nearly any verse with pocket dimension feats, something mentioned by Dargoo way back when.

Again, going around in circles.
 
I agree with:

  • We need proof a dimension was created by a character instead of them teleporting to said dimension (ie Mundus)
I absolutely disagree with:

  • We should only assume the stars are real if there is "proof"
Which is just assassinating Occam's Razor and inverting the burden of proof.

The standard assumption always was, and always should be, that the stars are real until people prove otherwise. Not that they aren't.

The feat being inconsistent is not a reason. Consistency is just an arbitrary delimitation we came up with to rate our profiles, not an in-universe measure. If the characters are 6-B and they suddenly perform a 4-A feat, the 4-A feat is an outlier, but it's still a legitimate feat that happened in the narrative. It doesn't suddenly turn into an Illusion Creation feat without any evidenc just so we can write it away altogether.
 
I also agree with Kep.

In addition, I'm pretty sure assuming dots in the sky aren't stars would pretty much make every feat of that nature useless, as very rarely (if ever) do we see characters going "Look at this dimension I made, it has real stars in it, look at these real stars" and then having it zoom into the stars to show they are real.
 
I disagree with Kep. Usually pocket feat dimensions tend to be extreme outliers from verses that suddenly from tier 8 to 6 suddenly jump in a tier 4-2.

Yes, we see stars, but we rarely see said attacks used for potency or destruction.

I would honestly check avoid to use the pocket creation feats in general
 
saying its a extreme outlier is a big ass stretch like dragon said we dont tier by only destruction why those a lot of people just suddenly forget that
 
Xantospoc said:
I disagree with Kep. Usually pocket feat dimensions tend to be extreme outliers from verses that suddenly from tier 8 to 6 suddenly jump in a tier 4-2.
Click to expand...
Can you legit explain how this is even remotely relevant to the dimension being a legitimate dimension with true stars, which is what I actually argued?

This response serves to exemplify what I said in the bottom part perfectly.
 
If it's a feat done by significant bad guy or a final boss fight, i would say that calling it an outlier is just being too strict. Outliers should be left for things that get contradicted after the fact or aren't plot necessary.

The only dimension feat I know for a fact is considered an outlier is within Sailor Moon where Jadeite created a dimension with a moon and stars, and sailor Mars destoryed it. It was considered an outlier because it messed up the scaling and was a huge showing for so early in the series compared to the rest of the arc, and of course, Sailor Moon doesn't need that feat in terms of power for later on in the series.

In other words, if something is gonna be an outlier there has to be a good and compelling reason for it to be labeled so. Too strong or too big of a jump in tier isn't good enough.
 
Size and distance are relative.

We can't assume the "dot in the sky" is as far away and as large in scope as a solar system or sun without proper backing namely because it could just as easily be a smaller ball of fire that is far closer to the area created, considering the pocket dimension is already created supernaturally.

I agree with this change wholeheartedly. I'm against most pocket dimension feats to begin with without proper support in other feats anyways.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what Matt, Saikou, and Everlasting rejected; and that does sound like very defined Headcanon. Again no offence and understand your concerns, but that's not really the main topic or concern. We're focussing on writing the page, and the actual debate is proof whether or not they created the realm all at once.
 
Kepekley23 said:
So, we should assume that Pocket Dimensions are going by some mythological "Firmament" system where the stars are not real stars, but merely Light Dots that are fixed to a sky-dome?
Click to expand...
And should we assume a pocket dimension whose scope is the size of Central Park with a sky yet has a sun in the sky is High 4-C in scope?

It should first be established that the dimension covers a planet before we jump to stars, methinks.
 
It's not really being strict as much as it's considering relativity when judging objects in the sky.

An immensely bright star thousands of light years away will look just the same as a dim star one lightyear away.
 
> And should we assume a pocket dimension whose scope is the size of Central Park yet has a sun in the sky is High 4-C in scope?

Yes, as that's how Occam's Razor works. You see the Sun, you assume a star of plasma, not a small light under a Dome on a flat earth..

If the feat ends up being an outlier, then reject it on the grounds of it being an outlier. This is exactly what I'm saying. People are acting like the feat being an outlier suddenly means it was never an actual feat to begin with, but rather some illusion. That isn't how basic debating and logic works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lloydblitzed
Ninjago Star Tiering and Possible New Value
6 7 8
Replies
307
Views
11K
REX9097
REX9097
Peter1129
Ultra Series Heisei Era Re:Upgrade
Replies
23
Views
1K
Peter1129
Peter1129
RavenSupreme
Martial Peak Novel Cosmology revision (2025 edition) - Part 2 - Star Fields
Replies
11
Views
608
BreezeHM
BreezeHM
James_Plays_4_Games
Warp Star Immeasurable Peak Speed (Kirby Series)
Replies
29
Views
838
CloverDragon03
CloverDragon03
Shiedaisthepeak
League Of Legends Tier 1 Upgrade!
2 3
Replies
106
Views
6K
Spinoirr
Spinoirr
Back
Top