Undertale CRT: Low 1-C Player

[Livinmeme]

Guys, this has nothing to do with the thread.

Yes it does, my point is that the player still tracends the game and chara, but if chara did kill or knocked up or just affect the player, it was because smurf hax

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Yes it does, my point is that the player still tracends the game and chara, but if chara did kill or knocked up or just affect the player, it was because smurf hax

What is a Smurf hax?

 

[NIK_FARIS]

What is a Smurf hax?

Hax that above their tier like tier 6-c character but has tier 1 fate hax

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Hax that above their tier like tier 6-c character but has tier 1 fate hax

So any Tier 3 and below character with Space-time Manipulation has a smurf hax due to having a Tier 2 hax? That sounds something very idiotic to name, ngl.

Either way, nah, Chara does not have Smurf Hax (I'm using it), they do a Low 2-C attack, they recreate said Low 2-C world with hax. Not at all what fits in this criteria.

 

[Zencha9]

ywack

 

[Jibz]

wacky

 

[ShivaShakti]

I suppose the word Smurf is a slur now.

 

[Roachman40]

lets get back on track yall

Yes it does, my point is that the player still tracends the game and chara, but if chara did kill or knocked up or just affect the player, it was because smurf hax

I don't think chara actually attacking the player is very well supported, there is a lot more evidence pointing towards chara destroying the world than the player actually getting attacked in the process.

 

[Hasty12345]

I disagree FRA

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

Yes it seems as if the anomally and Chara are the same after the Genocide ending and going to attack the "next" world

I feel like you can say that the player is the same between games without assuming anything like this.

Beyond Toby saying that one should play Undertale before Deltarune, there are moments within the game where the player - confirmed to be controlling Kris - can let their Undertale knowledge with stuff like greeting Sans or asking about Alphys from Undyne.

Toby said that the world of undertale is left as you, the player, left it. That doesn't run contrary to the player just coming from whichever route to play deltarune instead. I think it's fine to not hold Deltarune canon to Undertale, but I do think Undertale should be held as canon for Deltarune.


As for the player, eh. Keeping things fully to events and possibilities acknowledged in the game, their effect on the world is limited to tier 2. Besides the dirty hacker ending, nothing acts as if you can casually undo the deal with Chara by going to edit some files, or that you are not helpless and stuck in the void after the genocide run. You may be the player of the game, but you've no power to exert anything but tier 2 influence within the game.
I could see immortality type 9, but I don't really see tier 1 working.

 

[Livinmeme]

lets get back on track yall

I don't think chara actually attacking the player is very well supported, there is a lot more evidence pointing towards chara destroying the world than the player actually getting attacked in the process.

What i am saying even if chara did affect directly the player, it still wouldn't contradict the player superiority towards undertale as a game

 

[Delta333]

Disagree, even if the R-F difference here is legit he still should not be tier 1 if he can influence only tier 2 structure, not the 5-D space where he exists.

 

[Livinmeme]

Disagree, even if the R-F difference here is legit he still should not be tier 1 if he can influence only tier 2 structure, not the 5-D space where he exists.

You know that the player is supposed to be the real life manifestation of the actual undertale player rigth? and a HD not being able to affect directly lower dimensions is used alot in fiction

 

[ShivaShakti]

Disagree, even if the R-F difference here is legit he still should not be tier 1 if he can influence only tier 2 structure, not the 5-D space where he exists.

If the R/F transcendence is legitimate, then The Player would be Low 1-C.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Problem of the R/F arguments is that its evidence is very, very scarce, and ofter can be answered with other plausible interpretations. It's not even worth the "possibly" here.

 

[Delta333]

You know that the player is supposed to be the real life manifestation of the actual undertale player rigth? and a HD not being able to affect directly lower dimensions is used alot in fiction

So that means he has 5-D HDE only? Why does existing in 5-D space mean you can destroy it?

 

[GodlyCharmander]

So that means he has 5-D HDE only? Why does existing in 5-D space mean you can destroy it?

It doesn't. Tiers aren't about destroying stuff.

 

[Delta333]

It doesn't. Tiers aren't about destroying stuff.

From tiering page :

Characters who can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)

 

[KingPin0422]

From tiering page :

Characters who can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)

Like I said earlier in the thread, while that is the "intended" way to reach tier 1, reality-fiction differences kinda bypass that requirement because even a very small part of an ontologically greater reality (such as a human, in this case) would be infinitely superior to the entirety of a lesser world.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

From tiering page :

Characters who can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)

"or destroy".
Again, it's not about destroying stuff. It's one of the factors, not all of it

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Like I said earlier in the thread, while that is the "intended" way to reach tier 1, reality-fiction differences kinda bypass that requirement because even a very small part of an ontologically greater reality (such as a human, in this case) would be infinitely superior to the entirety of a lesser world.

And as we said before, this is quite absurd.
If the character cannot express that level of transcendence in any way, shape or form, then golly! They shouldn't have Low 1-C attack potency, but just a slapped "HDE" in their power and abilities. (And maybe in durability)

 

[Delta333]

Like I said earlier in the thread, while that is the "intended" way to reach tier 1, reality-fiction differences kinda bypass that requirement because even a very small part of an ontologically greater reality (such as a human, in this case) would be infinitely superior to the entirety of a lesser world.

So we seriously assume that two characters with R-F difference have the same AP value despite one can destroy 5-D while another can only exist within it? I mean it's similar to saying characters with 10-B and 3-A AP are same because both exist in 3-D.

"or destroy".
Again, it's not about destroying stuff. It's one of the factors, not all of it

So you ignore the part about affect and create, which still means affecting 5-D is the requirement just like what I already said previously.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

So you ignore the part about affect and create, which still means affecting 5-D is the requirement just like what I already said previously.

Nah, I'm just correcting your confirmation bias about destruction being a requirement. It's not.
Never said the anomaly satisfied any of the other two though.

 

[Delta333]

Actually I mean affecting 5-D is the requirement, not only destroying so sorry if my arguments lead to misunderstanding

 

[Zencha9]

Disagree, even if the R-F difference here is legit he still should not be tier 1 if he can influence only tier 2 structure, not the 5-D space where he exists.

finally 10-B higher humans in umineko

 

[Livinmeme]

finally 10-B higher humans in umineko

Umineko is a hell hole in terms on tracendens so that doesn't really apply here...

 

[Livinmeme]

Actually I mean affecting 5-D is the requirement, not only destroying so sorry if my arguments lead to misunderstanding

He is a 5-D being, that would make it by default 5-D in potency (look i participated in a exact converstation regarding a china man can we not)

 

[Delta333]

He is a 5-D being, that would make it by default 5-D in potency (look i participated in a exact converstation regarding a china man can we not)

Care to explain? Because as I already said

So we seriously assume that two characters with R-F difference have the same AP value despite one can destroy 5-D while another can only exist within it? I mean it's similar to saying characters with 10-B and 3-A AP are same because both exist in 3-D.

Also the tiering page seems to not say that 5-D being is the requirement, you can be 3-D being with Low 1-C AP normally.

 

[Jinsye]

So we seriously assume that two characters with R-F difference have the same AP value despite one can destroy 5-D while another can only exist within it? I mean it's similar to saying characters with 10-B and 3-A AP are same because both exist in 3-D.

No. A person who can destroy a 5-D realm would obviously be greater than someone who just has R/F transcendence. Both would still be the same tier though.

 

[Zencha9]

Umineko is a hell hole in terms on tracendens so that doesn't really apply here...

R>F famously doesn't exist in umineko yes

 

[Blackcurrant91]

Can we just close this thread and try again? hopefully the next thread wont be so cursed?

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Guys, why is Umineko a topic now? Are we still waiting for Ultima? This was meet with major staff neutrality and a a bigger reproval, this is lowkey rejected already.

 

[Roachman40]

Ultima said he was replying today, so its still the waiting game for now, I suppose.

 

[TyranoDoom30]

Following, and i'm currently neutral

 

[Ultima_Reality]

No, the mechanics of the game being canonical to the lore and world of Undertale does not equate in the very concept of a fictionalized video game also being a canonical fact in the view of said characters, or inside the world.

And how does it not, exactly? Are you arguing that all of those mechanics that are acknowledged and messed with by multiple characters are actually just metaphorical representations of in-universe elements of the setting that have nothing to do with metafiction? If so, on what basis do you claim that? Especially given how much of these instances are inseparable from the idea that the setting is, in fact, a game: Examples being Chara mentioning stat numbers and messing with the game's window, everything Sans does in his boss fight (And also what Frisk does in there), Flowey not just influencing the game window, but also crashing the game and rewriting the intro, and so on.

In the middle of your post, you used this as an example to further your point:

No, not at all. A verse which has video game elements as real mechanics that character must follow as their reality does not mean said verse is canonically a videogame from the perspective of the fictional setting. This can be viewed in various Isekai, or RPG Anime and Novels. Of course, the example isn't 1:1 with Undertale, but it's just to show that elements like these appear in other forms of media without the conclusion being that.
A verse which has computer-like mechanics that a character must follow as their reality does not mean the verse happens inside of a computer.

But I wouldn't say this is a coherent comparision because Undertale's metafictional elements actually do attempt to play into the work's medium of choice (In this case, a computer game) and dillute the barrier between the audience and the fiction itself, which you can see in the numerous times the characters acknowledge and interfere with the exact same interface with which we do things in the game.

Obviously, the average Isekai whose characters operate through RPG-like mechanics doesn't necessitate the verse to happen within a literal videogame, but the difference here is that those kinds of verses aren't actually trying to fake any form of interaction between themselves and an external audience, because all of those mechanics are internal and directed to in-universe characters, and not at "us."

Given all that, provided I am even getting your point right, I'd say it takes one less assumption to say that all of those events are just exactly what they look like, instead of completely unrelated things which all the metafiction is just an allegorical representation of (Or, worse, that just mysteriously look and act identically to the mechanics of the video game we're playing)

It doesn't negate the probability of a literal player, but that has not been proven yet, there isn't even enough evidence for a "possibly" rating on the respective profile, much less a solid one.

If it doesn't negate it, then how is it a rebuttal of the evidence? Sans' claim that there is an anomalous force messing with the spacetime continuum works whether it is an in-universe stand-in for the player or a literal player, so it's not... anything, really. That alone is a neutral fact that doesn't lend a thing to either side.

hits where the real issue it. Nothing can be symbolic/allegoric/only representing something w/o being the real thing, and that "nothing can be symbolic" is applied obligatorily as some rule that must be followed. That standard is naive and extremely low for the wiki to have.

It's less "Nothing can be symbolic" and more "Why would it be symbolic, to begin with?", really. The foundations of the latter question being something I've already elaborated on up there.

The way Low 1-C stats are given based on characters/realities seeing other realities as fiction is being handled in a very wrong way. Yes, that can give Low 1-C stats that are legit, but not always, and many cases where the Low 1-C stats are wrong are allowed to give those upgrades due to our lack of rules and attention on that manner.

• As in, for example if someone says that a character is 3-A because they can destroy the universe and you need to evaluate that, then you know that what they claim can very well make the character 3-A, but you also know that there can be a million scenarios in which "can destroy the universe" will not be 3-A even if that much is written somewhere as something the character can do. The "R/F Transcendence" (as the op puts it), in the way we deal with it as a wiki, is pretty much in diapers. We have the base idea of what would give, say, Low 1-C stats, but not all the context that would mean Low 1-C stats are wrong.

So, from what I gather, you're saying that there can be cases where a character perceives a lower reality as being literally fictional compared to itself, but nonetheless is not Low 1-C? If I'm reading this right, then I don't see how this is a counter to any of the above. You haven't provided any reasoning as to why, exactly, they wouldn't be Low 1-C even if they do indeed perceive a lesser universe as fiction. These points make it sound like you have less of a problem with this specific case and more with the fundamentals of how we treat Reality-Fiction differences, which is a topic that's not within this thread's scope.

1 regulation we lack that I pointed out; Even if the "player" had a transcendence like this over Undertale, why would the player be Low 1-C and Undertale as a whole Low 2-C rather than the player being just some regular human in stats and Undertale a fictional game? What makes Undertale real when the argument is that it portrays itself as a game/fiction? Reality Equalization could be used to validate calc's for the Undertale characters, but it wouldn't need to be used on the player to give them a Low 1-C stat.

Because as per the Reality Equalization page you've linked, we would treat the world of Undertale as the "baseline," and the Player as something apart from it. We'd need reason to do the reverse and treat the Player as the baseline instead, and if we did that, it would force us to downgrade the setting of the gameworld to 11-A. You can't have your cake and eat it too, in this case.

To "See/perceive other realities as fiction" is one thing, but we don't clarify more about it. You are real, and you can destroy many things that are fiction, but what if Character A who sees/perceives other realities as fiction can't destroy them. You are real, and fiction can't harm you, but what if Character A who sees/perceives other realities as fiction can be harmed by them. You are real, and you can see the start and end of timelines in fiction in 1 moment stopped in time (...if you write that much in a paper and look at it, ig), but what if Character A who sees/perceives other realities as fiction and only exists in the present and the flow of time applies to them the same as other character in fiction. At what point is "See/perceive other realities as fiction" not enough for Character A to be Low 1-C? We don't say.

Yeah, indeed. We don't say it because it is never not enough provided the Reality-Fiction difference is something literal, and done in relation to a Tier 2 realm. As said before, if you see a world as being fictional in comparision to yourself, you are treated as being a level of transcendence above it. That's about it.

More to it, what if we don't 100% know this facts about Character A but it's presumable based on feats and common sense? What if Character A has fancy superhuman strength unlike what most have and esoteric powers, including powers over time? Those minor things would surely serve as evidence to anyone believing they're Low 1-C, but then they would also never say so as it's paper tin evidence anyone would have the power to dismiss.

I don't understand this point. Can you clarify?

As for the player, eh. Keeping things fully to events and possibilities acknowledged in the game, their effect on the world is limited to tier 2. Besides the dirty hacker ending, nothing acts as if you can casually undo the deal with Chara by going to edit some files, or that you are not helpless and stuck in the void after the genocide run. You may be the player of the game, but you've no power to exert anything but tier 2 influence within the game.
I could see immortality type 9, but I don't really see tier 1 working.

The effect that the Player has on the gameworld doesn't really matter. When it comes to Reality-Fiction Differences, the only requirements that we put in place is that they do, in fact, perceive a lower reality as being fictional. You could have absolutely 0 power to influence a lower reality and still be Low 1-C as long as that one criterion is met.

This is something that is reflected in our current treatment of author characters, even. For example, if you are an entity that sees your entire verse as a book which you can manipulate at will through your writing, then we will assume your Plot Manipulation only works on beings of a lower reality, and that otherwise you have no such power over beings on your level at all. It makes you into a weak Tier 1 (Literally just a regular human in your level of reality), but it doesn't take away your chances of being Tier 1. Making their influence upon the lower world more limited, in turn, doesn't change this scenario at all, it just makes their hax abilities worse.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

And how does it not, exactly? Are you arguing that all of those mechanics that are acknowledged and messed with by multiple characters are actually just metaphorical representations of in-universe elements of the setting that have nothing to do with metafiction? If so, on what basis do you claim that? Especially given how much of these instances are inseparable from the idea that the setting is, in fact, a game: Examples being Chara mentioning stat numbers and messing with the game's window, everything Sans does in his boss fight (And also what Frisk does in there), Flowey not just influencing the game window, but also crashing the game and rewriting the intro, and so on.

Because this is a play on narrative, metafictional story telling. The way Toby Fox tells his story is to give real weight to your actions, and consider the character's situation as "more than just a video game". This, by no means, has the necessity to be a cosmological, or conceptual fact inside the fictional setting, in fact this was never implied. While these video game mechanics are integral to the functionality of Undertale's reality, this would be a factor to further strength the meta narrative Toby is trying to portray to the player, not necessarily a hint on how said fiction reflects on itself.

You gotta understand that asking me "how is it not" isn't going to be effective, because my conclusion isn't "no", it's "not necessarily". And the elements of metafiction and meta narrative alone are not sufficient evidence to strengthen your interpretation. You are arguing that the game, Undertale, is written with the intent of being aware that it is a game, so the anomaly - the player - acts as an actual metaphysical portray of the real player, rather than a fictional force that represents your influence outside of the game. But the evidence provided does not justify this conclusion.
Also valid interpretation of this would be: Undertale is a videogame that has meta elements deeply connected to its narrative and world building, characters and the story telling only consider these elements and mechanics as natural, and this is made so the narrative of the consequences of your actions is much more apparent, as even in this videogame environment, these are "actual people". (As in, your genocidal actions, or someone else's do really affect their lives, and it's not fair for you to just judge them coldly as videogame characters).

This is also a conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence of the original poster. Is this an inaccurate assessment? Does it make use of any assumption that's not supported by the game's own narrative?

In the middle of your post, you used this as an example to further your point:



But I wouldn't say this is a coherent comparision because Undertale's metafictional elements actually do attempt to play into the work's medium of choice (In this case, a computer game) and dillute the barrier between the audience and the fiction itself, which you can see in the numerous times the characters acknowledge and interfere with the exact same interface with which we do things in the game.

Obviously, the average Isekai whose characters operate through RPG-like mechanics doesn't necessitate the verse to happen within a literal videogame, but the difference here is that those kinds of verses aren't actually trying to fake any form of interaction between themselves and an external audience, because all of those mechanics are internal and directed to in-universe characters, and not at "us."

Of course the interaction with an actual player is what makes the difference, this is exactly why I addressed my example as "not being perfectly comparable". The narrative of Undertale much more points towards your interpretation than your average Isekai, but naturally, the intent of the examples was not to debunk your arguments in their entirety, but rather address a flaw in its basis.

Meta Elements or Mechanics can be applied to a narrative without something like what you are implying. It's certainly possible to do that, even if you are having meta conversations with the player about morality, and actions inside a virtual reality. It mostly comes down to how Toby wanted you to see these characters, he certainly does not want you to look down at them as merely fiction.

Given all that, provided I am even getting your point right, I'd say it takes one less assumption to say that all of those events are just exactly what they look like, instead of completely unrelated things which all the metafiction is just an allegorical representation of (Or, worse, that just mysteriously look and act identically to the mechanics of the video game we're playing)


If it doesn't negate it, then how is it a rebuttal of the evidence? Sans' claim that there is an anomalous force messing with the spacetime continuum works whether it is an in-universe stand-in for the player or a literal player, so it's not... anything, really. That alone is a neutral fact that doesn't lend a thing to either side.

Yes. But it actually gives us a reasonable interpretation.
The anomaly very much exists in space-time continuum. It's a fictional force that's very much present inside the universe of Undertale. It's addressed by the narrative directly. It doesn't negate the literal player, it gives us an alternative, that's much more supported.

 

[Livinmeme]

R>F famously doesn't exist in umineko yes

I never said that? What i said, it's that umineko is pretty convuluted and it would probally derail the thread

AKA: not a good example gived that it has so much complexity that undertale R>F

 

[Livinmeme]

Care to explain? Because as I already said

Being HD via actual R>F gives HD ap, that was alredy agreed on

 

[Zencha9]

I never said that? What i said, it's that umineko is pretty convuluted and it would probally derail the thread

AKA: not a good example gived that it has so much complexity that undertale R>F

nothing about the R>F in umineko is complex like at all a single R>F isn't treated as an infinite-D transcendence or whatever or close to that like it's literally normal R>F
the complex stuff in umineko is just the plot

 

[Livinmeme]

nothing about the R>F in umineko is complex like at all a single R>F isn't treated as an infinite-D transcendence or whatever or close to that like it's literally normal R>F
the complex stuff in umineko is just the plot

Isn't umineko a special case anyway? Also it doesn't matter for the purpose of the CRT because most here doesn't know much about umineko so is kinda eh...