• 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.

Tier 0 Question

Messages
283
Reaction score
69
I have a question about this wiki's tier 0. Can characters of the same essence all be tier 0? The explanation page says that characters "not being separate from each other even in their distinction" are allowed to all be tier 0, so would being of the same essence count? I'm confused because it's crossed out on said explanation page, so I thought I'd ask.
 
A member can't tag a staff. Anyway, about OP, the answer depends on what kind of essence here. A good example here is emanation. There, from a supreme entity (The One), let's say tier 0 here, arise lower beings, far removed from their original nature but still generally sharing the same original natures or characteristics. Note that this does not mean that they are divided. For the prerequisite of emanation is indivisibility, that is, they cannot be divided into smaller components. This is also the prerequisite for tier 0. In general, one would demand a reasonable answer to how they got their nature? Do they lose their tier 0 state by that? If not, why? In short, everything should fit in with what has been presented. Btw, it does not mean to cross them out.
The following explanation, due to the nature of the concepts being tackled, will inevitably have to employ terms that (Although not false) bear diminutive connotations when used to refer to its subject matter. So as to not break the flow of the text and highlight the complete distinction between one and another, all such terms will be employed sous rature when needed, like so.
 
Back
Top