Wouldn't Low 2-C destruction feats cause paradoxes?

[Saqphire]

This is a pretty general question, not directed towards any verse but will use verses as an example.

Low 2-C stipulates that the entirety of a timeline (thus an entire space-time continuum) would need to be created/destroyed/significantly affected. However, when it comes to feats of characters destroying such a construct, sometimes characters that originally belong in that timeline are still somehow alive. This shouldn't be a thing if the entirety of a timeline got nuked, as that also includes those characters' presence in the timeline both during and before the destruction of the feat, so how would the tier work?

E.g. Zeno destroys the future timeline in Dragon Ball Super, but Future Trunks still remains alive in Bulma's time machine. While yes, they did escape the destruction by going back to their main timeline, that should legitimately not matter in Trunks' case since everything that lead up to this point also got erased, and as such he should be erased too. Unless of course, Trunks has type 4 acausality or Zeno's erasure simply didn't include the timeline, or at least not all of it

 

[Saqphire]

bump

 

[Saqphire]

bump of doom and despair and agony

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

The majority of fiction is not that detail oriented when it comes to the implications of destroying universes and timelines. They don't think past the immediate plot needs. I believe this wiki's mode of operation is that characters don't get extra abilities or feats from destroying universes/timelines regardless of the logical conclusions such as, you would need paradox immunity to do so, unless the series explicitly states it.

 

[Saqphire]

The majority of fiction is not that detail oriented when it comes to the implications of destroying universes and timelines. They don't think past the immediate plot needs. I believe this wiki's mode of operation is that characters don't get extra abilities or feats from destroying universes/timelines regardless of the logical conclusions such as, you would need paradox immunity to do so, unless the series explicitly states it.

I see. Might not necessarily agree with that but it is what it is

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

Time travel already implies there is a higher cause and effect above the timeline's history. But since this isn't something one can prove or argue about, how long or how big
It is often irrelevant when scaling

Now, going back to having your past erased. Now that you also have history on a timeline where your past wasn't erased, your foundation remained intac,t and the higher cause and effect still records this (assuming it exist but this is one possible argument). Thus the timeline just assumed you simply started existing at the moment you existed in the timeline that wasn't destroyed

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

This has already been explained within DB's own work: any change in the future or past does not affect another timeline, it just ends up creating a whole new timeline.

 

[StarShooter80]

While this does happen in some fictional works, in others the characters are just not tied to the timeline in that way even if they originated from it, Trunks and Mai not being gone after their timeline was erased is actually an example of that.

Another example would be with Ben 10 Prime, where his own world was erased by the Annihilarrgh, but Ben's existence remained despite the universe he originated from being adios, just living in a clone world he created as Alien X.

Some fictions just don't care about the implications/logistics of it, like they do with many other stuff.

 

[KLOL506]

Most fictions do not give a damn about paradoxical contradictions with regards to blowing up timelines.

Also we just made a rule that destroying a space-time continuum should not by default grant any ability or resistance unless otherwise stated in-verse.