- 290
- 152
This can be used for 2-A Yggdrasil?
Seems more talking about the tree not the timelines itself
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This can be used for 2-A Yggdrasil?
So, is that card-game canon?
Here is the scan for endless futures/timelines.
Nice.Yes, the card game is canon. The card designers have said so in at least a couple of interviews.
I'll try to find the confirmation.
Unless theres something im missing, within that context it clearly looks like endless=infinite, as its coming the writers, an omniscient source right?Sweet.
That being said, last I remember, Xenoverse got the L despite having "endless" statements for its multiverse.
I know, I know, I shouldn't bring in other verses to compare like this, but still, it doesn't hurt to be extra wary.
What’s the context for the timelines thingWill it go to 2-B due endless timelines or 2-A due endless timelines?
So a 2-B, likely 2-A rating as a bare-bones minimum isn't out of question.
So, is somebody here willing to apply this, or should we discuss the issue more first?I will unlock the page, so you can apply the revision then. Tell us here when you are done.
I'd like some more further clarifications from the verse experts/knowledgeables first.So, is somebody here willing to apply this, or should we discuss the issue more first?
Elaborate on what?I'd like some more further clarifications from the verse experts/knowledgeables first.
Once the misconceptions are cleared, I think we can apply the rating.
So I'd like Shmooply and NeoTengus to elaborate a bit more.
What’s the context for the timelines thing
Like are they concurrently existing or “potential” timelines (in the sense they’re futures that could emerge?)
Also NeoTengus said that he was in the midst of looking for the interviews and stuff.Yes, the card game is canon. The card designers have said so in at least a couple of interviews.
I'll try to find the confirmation.
I see. I thought the same thing. Aight. I can accept this.I was looking for interviews where the card designers confirmed it was canon and that they even had Santa Monica team supervise every step of the way. I stopped looking when the other user already said it was accepted as canon. But I can resume again if we are hoping to find some other info.
As for Hellbeast's question. The context of the scan implies the timelines already exist simultaneously within the Well of Urd.
(like decks of cards exist at once you might say. Har har.)
The card game itself supports that idea because the premise of the card game is that player(s) are the Norns themselves. Looking for endless permutations and sequences of events for some path that can stop or at least delay ragnarok.
Seeing as you, the Norn, can replay the same scenarios as many times as you want even if they are failures, it supports the idea that the timelines all exist simultaneously. And not that some are only potential timelines; i.e. become actualized or made impossible by certain steps.
Not really in this case, each branch of Yggdrasil is a timeline, they can destroy some branch in their fight, but that's just destroying several Low 2-C structures, as each branch is a timeline, destroying the whole tree would be 2-A (or 2-B, depend of how we take the statement), but they didnt destroyed the whole tree, so, that's it, also, this is not really the appropriate thread to this, as Gilver said, this thread isn't for scalingSplintering a 2-A structure would make you 2-A too or is it not enough?
Agreed. Let the scaling be done elsewhere.Not really in this case, each branch of Yggdrasil is a timeline, they can destroy some branch in their fight, but that's just destroying several Low 2-C structures, as each branch is a timeline, destroying the whole tree would be 2-A (or 2-B, depend of how we take the statement), but they didnt destroyed the whole tree, so, that's it, also, this is not really the appropriate thread to this, as Gilver said, this thread isn't for scaling
Eh. Each branch is not a timeline. Where did you get that from?Not really in this case, each branch of Yggdrasil is a timeline, they can destroy some branch in their fight, but that's just destroying several Low 2-C structures, as each branch is a timeline, destroying the whole tree would be 2-A (or 2-B, depend of how we take the statement), but they didnt destroyed the whole tree, so, that's it, also, this is not really the appropriate thread to this, as Gilver said, this thread isn't for scaling
Don't want to derail, but splinter just means a small, thin, sharp piece of wood, glass, or similar material broken off from a larger piece, and if theres no quantification of the size of the splinter, you can't really use that to scale.The thread isn't for scaling but the statement wasn't that they broke random branches, but that "their clash so violently shakes the tree of life that it splinters." A splintered tree is a destroyed tree by every accompanying example image of such.
Sadly we're doing just what we said we dont want to do. But regarding definitions, not quite. A splinter, (singular), is a single sharp piece of something. But that's a noun.Don't want to derail, but splinter just means a small, thin, sharp piece of wood, glass, or similar material broken off from a larger piece, and if theres no quantification of the size of the splinter, you can't really use that to scale.
But i don't think this should be discussed rn, this thread isn't meant for thor, kratos, or the big snek
Hmm, while that’s fine that seems to be very much going by interpretation rather then what we actually know of the Norns. The nature of their “peering into timelines” seems relatively mysterious (like if it’s Precog it wouldn’t be a Multiverse but what if it’s just clairvoyance?) and I feel that really does impact the outcomeIf you ask me, the scan doesn't explicitly say that they are "yet to happen", it just says the Norns just see endless combinations, implying they are already happening as we speak.
That could just be what some people think splinter means, it doesn't necessarily or always mean the complete destruction of the object in question. If there is no way to quantify the size of the splinter, then we cannot assume its size. For all we know it could be 10%, 90%, 1%, 0.000000000000000001%, or an infinitesimal portion of the tree.Likewise looking up images of splintered trees only brings up pictures of trees that could only be categorized unambiguously as destroyed.
People can just as easily refer to splintering as small or big fragments, even if its uncommon, or even if it seems ridiculous to you. Thats exactly why on the yggdrasil page theres a note specifically telling you NOT to attempt to scale thor or kratos that way.No usage of the phrase splintered tree in common language that I see refers to anything that would resemble insignificant shavings so small as to be an infinitesimal fraction of the whole tree.
Do not attempt to scale the Norse Gods to Yggdrasil based off of Thor and the World Serpent's fight "splintering" it. For one, splintering an object only refers to breaking a small piece off of its totality, which, while impressive, is not anywhere near a feat of affecting the entire tree. Second, the Giant Surtr, in his death blow that apparently consumed all of reality and ended even the Aesir Gods, explicitly did not affect Yggdrasil and was just serving its cycle of death and rebirth/beginning and end, as stated by Mimir. As such, it'd be highly unreliable to scale any Gods even to Yggdrasil's physical form.
He didn't say the entire tree was shaking. Again for all we know they could be shaking a part of the tree, not necessarily its entirety.And Mimir's language definitely does not point that way either, seeing as he mentioned the whole tree shaking. Evokes the same imagery as a tree shaking in a storm before being broken from the strain.
Guys, keep the scaling part for later. This thread is just for determining what cosmology the tree falls under.That could just be what some people think splinter means, it doesn't necessarily or always mean the complete destruction of the object in question. If there is no way to quantify the size of the splinter, then we cannot assume its size. For all we know it could be 10%, 90%, 1%, 0.000000000000000001%, or an infinitesimal portion of the tree.
People can just as easily refer to splintering as small or big fragments, even if its uncommon, or even if it seems ridiculous to you. Thats exactly why on the yggdrasil page theres a note specifically telling you NOT to attempt to scale thor or kratos that way.
He didn't say the entire tree was shaking. Again for all we know they could be shaking a part of the tree, not necessarily its entirety.
sigh....guess we're too far gone now to stop the de-railing.That could just be what some people think splinter means, it doesn't necessarily or always mean the complete destruction of the object in question. If there is no way to quantify the size of the splinter, then we cannot assume its size. For all we know it could be 10%, 90%, 1%, 0.000000000000000001%, or an infinitesimal portion of the tree.
I'm aware of what the entry says, and it is one of the most needless and head scratching examples of sophistry in interpreting common language usage on this wiki. And its incorrect, as I showed above. The very first Oxford dictionary usage of splintering refers to reducing things to sharp fragments, plural, not singular.People can just as easily refer to splintering as small or big fragments, even if its uncommon, or even if it seems ridiculous to you. Thats exactly why on the yggdrasil page theres a note specifically telling you NOT to attempt to scale thor or kratos that way.
He said "their clash so violently shakes the tree of life that it splinters." Again it takes a rather willfully irrational stance to take that to mean an insignificant piece of bark or a twig was shaken, such to the point that only an infinitely smaller piece of the whole structure was broken off.He didn't say the entire tree was shaking. Again for all we know they could be shaking a part of the tree, not necessarily its entirety.
That’s the thing though, Baldur’s death was always prophesied, it’s implied by Mimir when talking about FimbulwinterThe best evidence of these all being simultaneously existing timelines comes from the timestamp in the second video.
The card designer says that Baldur dying in the actual game was a trigger for Ragnarok as we all obviously know, so in the card game killing Baldur is one of the game over conditions you want to avoid.
If you fight Baldur in the card game, the objective becomes to subdue him instead of killing him, otherwise you will trigger Ragnarok regardless of what you did before.
So far it seems that we have most likely agreed upon a "likely/possibly 2-A" rating alongside the already-existing "2-B" rating for Yggdrasil.So have you reached any conclusions here yet?