• 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.

Timeless Voids Standards Issues (Staff only)

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, they would still be a zero because the "less" part of "timeless" is the suffix for "without". It literally means "without time" which includes the passage of it, hence the value of zero since there is no progression.

Also, this is not related to what you said but to what another commenter said above. Hearing dialogue in a timeless void wouldn't debunk it being a timeless void. If we went by this logic just because of how reality should operate, you would arguably have FTL characters not being able to see because of how photons work, your velocity would be greater and you should only see complete darkness. Or, you can go with the sound example from another user. That logic shouldn't be the type of idea prioritized to realistically evaluate this or like most of the characters on this site shouldn't be the speed of sound or light.
 
Aight, here's the difference between the standards for say, light dodging, and the standards for infinite via void.

Light dodging: Character A, let's call him Mario, outruns a laser. Said laser is a generic fodder laser, but it meets all the qualifications to be shooting actual photons at lightspeed. Mario is therefore FTL. Mario consistently dodges said lasers, but is never said to be FTL, has no FTL feats other than laser based feats, and constantly matched and even surpassed by people who don't do the same. The creator of the feat had no idea the laser should be lightspeed and by proxy making Mario FTL. However, the creator still made the feat to show that Mario is fast enough to react to lasers, something clearly related to speed. So the rating stays.

Infinite via void: Character B, let's call him Luigi, is able to move and function and fight in what qualifies to be a type 3 void. Luigi has connections out the patootie to the void. We rank Luigi as infinite. Luigi has no other feats showing infinite speed, is never said to be infinite, and constantly matched or even surpassed by people who don't have the void feats. The creator of the feat has no idea about our void standards that by proxy make Luigi infinite in speed. Difference here is that the creator had no intent to show this as a speed feat at all, finite or otherwise, as opposed to the former, which does.

Yeah yeah "author intent" and "death of the author" but my point still stands.
 
Now the issue, the verse nowhere state this to be a speed feat in no form or shape, aka, speed is not a factor that affect moving, thinking or interacting within this Timeless Void, however, according to our standards, the character does technically qualify as having Infinite Speed.
Is this really true? If the verse treats it as just another place, that means it wouldn't count under our timeless void standards

The realm should display characteristics a realm without time would be expected to have, such as the lack of a visible passage of time, unless this is Cinematic Time.
Type 1: "Timeless" Voids: Voids that supposedly lack time but are completely contradicted to be such. Examples: The World of Void in Dragon Ball Super.
Type 2: Insubstantial Voids: Voids that have some properties of being timeless, but not enough to warrant Infinite speed, at least not most of the time. Examples: The Demon Realm in Dragon Ball Heroes and the Distortion World from Pokémon.
 
Yes, but many verses get Infinite speed via voids without having as much evidence as Dragon Ball Heroes has, and yet we give them Infinite and not Heroes, so this is to downgrade those verses that don't have evidence that "Moving in Timless Void = Infinite Speed".
 
@Ionliosite Oh okay. But the OP explicitly said that DBH would get infinite speed under our standards, which it explicitly doesn't, and was trying to reform the rules so DBH wouldn't get infinite speed. And a lot of people in the thread were suggesting removing timeless void standards entirely.

Your opinion of "downgrade the other verses" is fine, but wasn't one that I saw a lot from reading the OP and quickly skimming the thread.
 
Agnaa said:
@Ionliosite Oh okay. But the OP explicitly said that DBH would get infinite speed under our standards, which it explicitly doesn't, and was trying to reform the rules so DBH wouldn't get infinite speed.
Click to expand...
The thing is, the new evidence provided basically now makes the Demon Realm a Type 1 Timeless Void, which is why the rules are being changed, because verses have gotten Infinite for much less than DBH has, and thus are becoming more strict so verses that clearly don't consider moving on a timeless void such as Heroes as a speed feat in any way are downgraded.
 
Ionliosite said:
Agnaa said:
@Ionliosite Oh okay. But the OP explicitly said that DBH would get infinite speed under our standards, which it explicitly doesn't, and was trying to reform the rules so DBH wouldn't get infinite speed.
Click to expand...
The thing is, the new evidence provided basically now makes the Demon Realm a Type 1 Timeless Void, which is why the rules are being changed, because verses have gotten Infinite for much less than DBH has, and thus are becoming more strict so verses that clearly don't consider moving on a timeless void such as Heroes as a speed feat in any way are downgraded.
Click to expand...
Why the heck did DBH's Timeless void get downgraded from Type 2 to Type 1? The hell? What "Evidence" do you speak of because this sounds like blatant ignorance of the entire Upgrade thread we had previously.

Please name the "contradiction" for it to qualify it as a Type 1 because no, it's absolutely not. We've had an entire literal thread about this. The only "contradiction" is us seeing them move, which is sort of crucial to tell a story.
 
@Cal Those examples are extremely different and not a fair comparison. Your first example involves a character having consistent FTL feats and little things to contradict these feats. The other example involves a one time feat that is inconsistent and heavily contradicted, which is a blatant Outlier. Obviously if this were the case then infinite speed wouldn't work, but this thread is trying to remove any timeless void feat even if it's consistent.
 
I think that it is a good idea to rewrite the Timeless Voids Standards page to create harsher restrictions.

We need to clarify that only verses that explicitly state that it requires infinite speed to move in a timeless void should scale from this.

That said, I do not think that it is a good idea to get rid of the page entirely, as that would leave our community without relevant guidelines. It would risk to cause even greater inflation for infinite speed than we have currently.

Should I move this thread to the staff discussion forum, and then highlight it?
 
Elizhaa already asked for this to be highlighted, so I really think doing so is a wise idea.
 
Okay. Should I move the thread to the staff forum first, to avoid too much chaos?
 
People who are actually contributing to the current discussion should be allowed to comment if this is going to be Staff only.
 
Antvasima said:
Should I move this thread to the staff discussion forum, and then highlight it?
Click to expand...
This point seems like a good idea.

I would fine if people that are already contributiong be allowed in the discussion if it is Staff only.

I will say having a note like this could help with new comments from users:

  • This note will be regarding new comments from users. This thread is Staff Only. If you wish to contribute but are not a staff, please send your proposed comment to another staff member, or obtain their permission. A conclusion must be reached, and this process helps the thread stays more organized.
 
@Akreious

Why the heck did DBH's Timeless void get downgraded from Type 2 to Type 1? The hell? What "Evidence" do you speak of because this sounds like blatant ignorance of the entire Upgrade thread we had previously.

Type 2s are insubstantial voids, type 1 is actual timeless voids. That's not a downgrade.

Anyway I'm indifferent.
 
When this revision ends types of void would no longer matter.
 
Hst master said:
Type 2s are insubstantial voids, type 1 is actual timeless voids. That's not a downgrade.
Click to expand...
The page has Type 1 as not actual Timeless voids like the World of Void in DBS.
 
DatOneWeeb said:
@Cal Those examples are extremely different and not a fair comparison. Your first example involves a character having consistent FTL feats and little things to contradict these feats. The other example involves a one time feat that is inconsistent and heavily contradicted, which is a blatant Outlier. Obviously if this were the case then infinite speed wouldn't work, but this thread is trying to remove any timeless void feat even if it's consistent.
Click to expand...
I...literally used the exact same words minus the things in bold for each example.
 
Your post was talking about the "differences" between light dodging standards and timeless void standards when one of them was an obvious outlier. Use an example that has both feats being consistent, then the only actual issue is Author Intent, which I disagree being the reason to remove these standards.
 
The thing is, the new evidence provided basically now makes the Demon Realm a Type 1 Timeless Void, which is why the rules are being changed, because verses have gotten Infinite for much less than DBH has, and thus are becoming more strict so verses that clearly don't consider moving on a timeless void such as Heroes as a speed feat in any way are downgraded.
Why the heck did DBH's Timeless void get downgraded from Type 2 to Type 1?

Oh, sorry, I meant that Heroes apparently counts as a True Void, I misread the types. Anyways, this thread is staff only now, I was just clarifying this misunderstanding.
 
I will say, a Timeless voids should for all intents and purposes posses "0" as their value for their value of time.

Simply put, Time is merely the way we measure change in space, if there is no time (timeless) then there is "0" change, there isn't regressive change/change in reverse (1 Aspect of Immeasurable speed) and it's not simply progressing either.

Because of this, this still means that "Time" (The change in space) is 0, this means that the equation isn't broken when it comes to Timeless Void (In retrospect, I find the change aspect of Time particularly ironic when Voids are by nature timeless as they are a void meaning no change can occur anyway)

Immeasurable speed is when you appear before you moved, negative time value. If Timeless Voids had no time value then it would be superior to Immeasurable speed.

Just food for thought.
 
Just gonna drop by quick-like and say I've agreed for awhile that timeless voids shouldn't alone be considered ample evidence of an Infinite speed rating. There was some other verse like this recently with an issue similar to this, though I can't seem to remember which it was. Won't be contributing much to the thread since it isn't really my territory, but there's my cursory thoughts on the matter.
 
I know this is staff only, but i have to ask

Wouldn't removing the timeless void standard make Iinfinite speed very hard to access to the point only a few verses would have it and getting Immesurable speed would be much easier ?
 
Overlord775 said:
I know this is staff only, but i have to ask
Wouldn't removing the timeless void standard make Iinfinite speed very hard to access to the point getting Immesurable speed would be much easier ?
Click to expand...
I mean, depends?

Immesurable might be more common, but that's like arguing that Low 2-C is easier to get than 3-A, because most people at that level get the former.
 
We need to be more strict, yes.

Here's something the Timeless Voids Standards page doesn't point out: Sometimes verses treat time not as time, but basically as the ability in a place (universe, multiverse, etc.) to have numbers measuring up time like in a normal universe, or age coming to mortals. And characters without infinite speed can come and go from there with no problem. It doesn't matter at all how many times those places are stated to lack time and in how many ways, they do not truely lack time.

This is something common and easilly wank-able, can we do something about it? I don't have the time to follow this thread so this will be my only comment about it.
 
I believe we should be able to do something about it, but I'm prolly not the best person to ask since I have no idea about the mechanics of stuff like this. All in all tho, I absolutely disagree with removing the Timeless Voids page for the reasons Ant mentioned and we should make our standards for stuff like this more strict.
 
I know this is a staff-only thread now but I saw this thread late due to school and just want to give my quick view on the topic while I have a moment to.

For all the reasons, arguments and points already given, I am heavily opposed to nuking the timeless void page in any way shape or form. And not just because of Dragonball's situation regarding their timeless voids (while I was never a huge fan of upgrading them to infinite speed in the past, I absolutely wouldn't disagree with their upgrades just because they supposedly aren't consistent enough as opposed to other verses who get the same for less). Honestly, I personally think our standards are already uneccessarily restrictive and over-complicating things regarding infinite speed feats. We don't need to make them even stricter.

I especially disagree with the "need" for stating you need to have [insert here] speed in order to move in a void. Because not only is that almost never done in fiction (thereby making the tier for infinite speed almost completely pointless), but it's asking to be spoon fed a statement thats restating the obvious. Should we drop FTL for any verse that's stated to be be faster than anything less than or never given a FTL statement at all? Unless it's just inconsistent (therefore, an outlier), no such requirements should be neccessary.
 
How rare an ability or stat in fiction is does not justify us broadening our standards to fit more in there.

If someone is truly infinite in speed, it should be quiet blatant regardless of voids. As it is now, I can't think of a single verse that actual shows infinite speed being needed to move in voids, actions obviously have an order at which they happen (and thus, they are still abiding by "time" in that past and future are clearly diferentiated), etc.

Same way energy to mass is almost never respected, infinite speed to move in timeless voids is never respected either. If one could do that, a lot of other things would follow up. Of coure, a fiction can break common sense, but by that standard who says it's infinite speed rules they are breaking instead of timeless void rules?
 
I agree with keeping the void standards page. That can help with other void related abilities and feats.

But infinite speed ratings should not be given because a character is linked to or able to move or exist within a void. Infinite speed ratings should be given when a character showcases actual infinite speed by either moving a finite distance within 0 seconds or moving an infinite distance in a finite time.
 
>But infinite speed ratings should not be given because a character is linked to or able to move or exist within a void. Infinite speed ratings should be given when a character showcases actual infinite speed by either moving a finite distance within 0 seconds or moving an infinite distance in a finite time.

Which, again, is something that is practically never shown if even at all. This might've been mentioned already, but this is like saying we need to only grant FTL speeds if the characters are actually shown moving at FTL speeds regardless of location, distance moved or presentation. And I can certaintly say without a doubt that not every FTL person and their mother here always move at FTL speeds.
 
Infinity is way different than FTL tough. And they don't need to be FTL 100% of the time.

Infinite speed has way different things that come with it. FTL doesn't have to be as reality breaking as it is in the real world, that is easy to ignore. But infinite speed automatically means that everything is completely frozen in time for you, and that all your actions are taken simultaniously.

Fiction can break that, but we don't assume it's infinite speed logic is what it breaks instead of saying that the timeless void was just space deluxe for the verse.
 
>Infinity is way different than FTL tough. And they don't need to be FTL 100% of the time.

And infinite speed characters do? And when I ask this, i'm not even taking into account that PIS is a factor, or, that it's an outlier for characters with finite speed to even be in the same area code of speed with the former. Not every inconsistency has to end with the higher-end character being the issue.

If a 2-A was, out of nowhere, harmed by a 5-B, you wouldn't immediately jump to the 2-A being the outlier would you?
 
It seems like most staff and other members agree with me so far. Does somebody have a suggestion for how we should rewrite the Timeless Voids Standards page so it only allows infinite speed for cases when this is stated to be a requirement or it fits well with other speed displays in the setting?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GarrixianXD
  • Locked
Infinite speed revision
Replies
10
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Theglassman12
  • Locked
Fighting game standards
Replies
29
Views
3K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
GrathOfLux
Proposal for Site/Forum Image Standards Revision
3 4 5
Replies
175
Views
10K
CloverDragon03
CloverDragon03
H3110l12345I20
  • Locked
Adding Standards for Scaling Real World Animals.
Replies
34
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Ar1216789
  • Locked
Some questions about 1-A, Timelines, Conceptual Manip, as well as other stuff
Replies
4
Views
461
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Back
Top