Type 5 Acausality Issues/Clarification

[Ultima_Reality]

1. I think it depends on how the Verse treats the characteristic of being transcendent over Linear Time and Causality, and how it affects beings with it.

Say, if Cosmic Entity X is said to be above Linearity and Cause & Effect, yet does not at all fit the definition of Type 5, and is actually portrayed as "acting" and undergoing change even in relation to lower beings, just on a non-linear manner, then the type of Acausality of the entity is Type 4 (Existing in a different system of Cause and Effect than the one we are used to, in this case probably a being who exists in more than one Temporal Dimension)

Now we have Cosmic Entity Y, who has the same characteristics as the above, yet is actually portrayed as being completely immutable and unchanging in relation to lower beings, being thus incapable of being affected in any way by them, the type of Acausality of said entity is Type 5.

That is how I see it, anyways.

 

[FateAlbane]

@Ultima Reality I think even some low tier (as in, Low 2-C onwards) SMT demons would have type 5 if the "above Time and Cause & Effect" quote alone was enough. lol

 

[Ultima_Reality]

tfw Type 5 Jack Frost

 

[Wokistan]

Will get back to this later, but leaning more towards type 2 concept stuff working

 

[FateAlbane]

Oh yeah, the statement applies for all demons. Type 5 Pixie confirmed.

 

[Kaltias]

Type 5 Homulilly

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Oh yeah, the statement applies for all demons. Type 5 Pixie confirmed. </div>

Type 5 Slimes tho

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

"Now we have Cosmic Entity Y, who has the same characteristics as the above, yet is actually portrayed as being completely immutable and unchanging in relation to lower beings, being thus incapable of being affected in any way by them, the type of Acausality of said entity is Type 5."

For my sake, name a character who this applies to and how?

 

[Ultima_Reality]

The Daedric Princes from the Elder Scrolls are examples. They are explicitly said to be be entities who exist above Cause and Consequence, and are thus immutable and lattice-bound creatures of the "Ever-Now", who only appear linear and changeable because that is how they manifest themselves to mortals and lesser entities.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

How is it shown though? Words only mean so much.

 

[Wokistan]

Oryx in the ascendant realm, blatant as hell statements, being untouchable by the vex and really most people not directly related to him or the PC. There's a species that made weapons specifically to deal with type 4s, and after he became male he was beyond those.

 

[Wokistan]

Verses where this type of thing comes up tend to be more literary. The daedric princes chose to appear causal because they feel like it.

 

[PaChi2]

Oryx in the ascendant realm, blatant as hell statements, being untouchable by the vex and really most people not directly related to him or the PC. There's a species that made weapons specifically to deal with type 4s, and after he became male he was beyond those.

Huh. Shouldnt that be "after she became male he was beyond those"?

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Verses where this type of thing comes up tend to be more literary. The daedric princes chose to appear causal because they feel like it.

Pretty much this.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

...

books are facetious

 

[EmperorRorepmeThree]

I don't think type 2 can affect type 5 acausality simply because they shape reality and changing them which alters reality demonstrates it's a cycle of cause and effect. Why would a type 5 be effected by a cause.

 

[PaChi2]

I don't think type 2 can affect type 5 acausality simply because they shape reality and changing them which alters reality demonstrates it's a cycle of cause and effect. Why would a type 5 be effected by a cause.

Example:

I am a horse with type 5 acausality.

Some guy ripped the concept (type 2) of "horse". Horses never existed, exist, will exist, can exist, can be imagined, drawn or dreamed. I, formerly a horse, disappeared.

 

[EmperorRorepmeThree]

But then the Horse wouldn't be affected because he's outside the cause and effect. The effect is obviously all Horse's ceasing to exist.

 

[PaChi2]

But then the Horse wouldn't be affected be sure he's outside the cause and effect. The effect is obviously all Horse's ceasing to exist.

Being unbound by cause and effect doesnt mean you are independent of your concept unless you literally trascend the type 2 concept of cause and effect.

 

[Kaltias]

Yes, but the concept shapes reality in a similar fashion.

Basically at no point in time the horse can exist if that happens

 

[EmperorRorepmeThree]

I'm not understand ing how a character that's outside cause and effect will still be effected. Even if Horse's have never existed The Horse would be outside the influence, no? I don't mean unconnected to the concept just not effected.

What about existing out of the bounds of the concept of causality then?

 

[ShadowWarrior1999]

If the horse is connected to the concept then it's a dead horse.

 

[EmperorRorepmeThree]

My reasoning is that type 2 is still a cause and effect cycle and acausality type 5 is outside that influence.

 

[ShadowWarrior1999]

Type 2 conceptual manipulation isn't just cause and effect like say, a punch.

Type 2 concepts shape reality across past, present, and future and of course aren't bound to the objects of that reality. You destroy the type 2 concept of something, that prevents it from being able to have ever existed.

 

[Andytrenom]

I agree type 2 concepts should be enough.

 

[DMB_1]

Yeah, I pretty much agree with the others.

 

[Elizhaa]

I agree type 2 concepts should be enough.

I agree as well

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Yes

Type 2 Conceptual Manipulation, as well as certain forms of Law Manipulation, should deal with type 5 acasual

 

[The_Causality]

>Law

Why? Pretty sure nope.

 

[ShadowWarrior1999]

I have a proposed expansion on the definition. If there's anything that I should rework, tell me.

Type 5: Causality Transcendence: Characters with this type of Acausality transcend the normal boundaries of cause and effect, existing outside of the causality of a system. Even interacting with them normally may prove virtually impossible, which leaves them nearly invulnerable to any harm on their dimensional level. Abilities required to affect them may include those on a higher dimensional level or Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2).

 

[Elizhaa]

I have a proposed expansion on the definition. If there's anything that I should rework, tell me.
Type 5: Causality Transcendence: Characters with this type of Acausality transcend the normal boundaries of cause and effect, existing outside of the causality of a system. Even interacting with them normally may prove virtually impossible, which leaves them nearly invulnerable to any harm on their dimensional level. Abilities required to affect them may include those on a higher dimensional level or Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2).

What about Those with type 5 Acausality in Tier 1-A because I don't think the definition goes in depth regarding them?

 

[The_Causality]

So for now, only Type 2 Concept or above can affect Type 5 Acaulality?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I just want to point out that the concept of a horse, wouldn't be a type 2 concept but a type 3 or even a type 4 concept (whether the concept of a horse exists or not has no affect on the laws of reality.) A platonic form is something like red, circle, round, beauty. It has to be basic and cannot be broken down or simplfied into other thing. A horse is an object participating in mutliple platonic forms.

If you destory horses as a concept you'd be using either type 3 or 4? would a type 5 accausal horse be affected?

 

[Udlmaster]

Okay, this is one of the reasons why I hate Type 2 Concept Manip.

Because, it's wrong, just flat out wrong, it's not a "False" Platonic concept, it's just Flat out, not a Platonic concept.

I've gone through and bothered to read the Timaeus and the mere idea of the False Platonic concept is just a spit into the face of Plato.

Firstly, the fact that it is bound by accidentals like Time and Space means it's no longer "indestructable and unchanging". They're flat out not anymore, they're bound by Time and Space meaning they are subject to changes involving said subjects.

Now "But they're transcendant over the reality they're in" but this is contradicted by the page itself;

"Such concepts, or forms, are mostly transcendent of reality.", them being bound by any accidental them makes them subject to everything else, they're no longer immutable, they're no longer absolute perfect examples of their respective concept, as they're bound by something, negating the perfect ideal.

"is the self-identical Form, ungenerated and indestructible, neither receiving into itself any other from any quarter nor itself passing anywhither into another, invisible and in all ways imperceptible by sense, it being the object which it is the province of Reason to contemplate;" - Timaeus page 52

 

[Elizhaa]

So for now, only Type 2 Concept or above can affect Type 5 Acaulality?

By definition, Tier 1-A, in general, would have Conceptual Manipulation Type 1

 

[Ogbunabali]

Firstly, the fact that it is bound by accidentals like Time and Space means it's no longer "indestructable and unchanging". They're flat out not anymore, they're bound by Time and Space meaning they are subject to changes involving said subjects.

If they are bound by Time and Space they are not, and should not be considered platonic Forms. Since Forms by definition transcend Space and Time.

 

[Udlmaster]

Exactly my point!

 

[Kaltias]

Being bound by time and space is the "False" part.

The alternatives are:

-Grouping type 2 with Aristotelian concepts, which work differently.

-Defaulting it at 1-A because that's Plato's idea

Neither can really work

 

[Udlmaster]

Firstly, the fact that it is bound by accidentals like Time and Space means it's no longer "indestructable and unchanging". They're flat out not anymore, they're bound by Time and Space meaning they are subject to changes involving said subjects.

"Such concepts, or forms, are mostly transcendent of reality.", them being bound by any accidental them makes them subject to everything else, they're no longer immutable, they're no longer absolute perfect examples of their respective concept, as they're bound by something, negating the perfect ideal.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Before we get into that heated philosophical debate, can my question be answered? The question in question: can a type 5 acausal horse be affected by type 3 and 4 conceptual manipulation?