• 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.
157
38
From this thread of Ultima

•Question[161]: Ultima, I have a question about monadhood. If a character has the feature of a monad but there are certain factors that prevent him from qualifying as 0, what tier should he be? Low1-A or not because it has all the features.

•Ultima Answers Questions[162]: Would be 1-A at minimum, assuming it broke only the Tier 0 requirements. Probably High 1-A if there's a 1-A cosmology under it.

That means VeldaNava Key:God can go up to 1A?

Because if we refer to the description in his profile, I think it can go up to level 1A.
[ "Ha-ha-ha! Well, because I'm not omnipotent. When I was born, all that existed was my will. It was complete, fully, not a piece missing to it—a flawless existence, where all was one and one was all. I was the only thing in the world. Doesn't that sound boring to you?" ]

Because I don't have many feats about him. So I can only ask questions and wait for others to correct me.
 
No. 1-A would work under the idea that the thing transcends (Read: is superior to) the differentiation between points in a space. The description of "All was one and one was all" doesn't have anything suggestive of that.
 
No. 1-A would work under the idea that the thing transcends (Read: is superior to) the differentiation between points in a space. The description of "All was one and one was all" doesn't have anything suggestive of that.
I don't have much information on him and if it's not a waste of time please wait for Tensura support explain further Especially Elizhaa
 
No. 1-A would work under the idea that the thing transcends (Read: is superior to) the differentiation between points in a space. The description of "All was one and one was all" doesn't have anything suggestive of that.
Why? Do you have any more explanation? You just answered me on this one.
 
Why? Do you have any more explanation? You just answered me on this one.
There is not much to explain in the first place. Vague mentions of oneness just don't really mean anything, so the verse has to then tells us what it means by that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top