• 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.

Mythology Feats and Cosmology

Status
Not open for further replies.
Malomtek

Malomtek

1,050
491
A lot of our mythology pages are unsourced, low-information garbage, a prime example being this one:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Norns_(Mythology)

"It should be noted that as the worlds share a sun, they should be considered different parts of a solar system, and not different universes."

What is the source for this? And even if it was true, what is to stop people from arguing that the sun was simply bigger in Norse mythology, like in all mythologies where sun worship and sun gods were prominent?

Another problem is the mixing and matching of various conceptions of gods within their profile pages, even conceptions that are wholly unorthodox or "heretical".

A prime example is here:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Dionysus_(Myth)

This page references the Dionysiaca, a religious poem that presents concepts so completely different to "normal" or "conventional" Hellenistic religion that the "Dionysus" presented in it might as well be a completely different god. This isn't even getting into the conflation between Orphic Dionysus and "regular" Hellenistic Dionysus in the page.

Most of the profiles on the gods are just awful, having no citations to back up literally anything in them.

Here's an example:

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Ukko_(Myth)

Not a single link to any story or mythology or commentary that displays the feats claimed, and I certainly am not seeing where Ukko has "higher-dimensional existence" (unless we start taking mythological descriptions and/or epithets of deities as literal face-value truths instead of mostly hyperboles, in which case quite a few gods need to be upgraded to 1-B or even 1-A).

TL;DR The state of mythological profiles in here is dreadful, and someone should go and fix that.
 
You should ask the currently active wiki members listed in the Mythology verse page to comment here, as it is unlikely that anything will get done otherwise.
 
Given that these are myths nowadays, as opposed to religions I could understand the idea of compositing the myths. I'm only knowledgeable on Greco-Roman with a bit of Egypt though. I'm not good with Norns, which iirc is Norse (Digimon actually taught me something).
 
@Matthew

Yes, probably true, but it is very hard to coherently organise a revision, given that it isn't a single cohesive continuity that is comparatively easy to analyse.
 
I think we should start by linking citations to feats and powers, and getting a standard of how to interpret the descriptions and epithets of mythological figures.

We should also create keys for "mainstream" and "non-mainstream" conceptions of deities, like so for Dionysus:

Hellenistic Dionysus | In the Bacchae (could probably be mixed in with Hellenistic Dionysus) | Orphic Dionysus | Mycenaean Dionysus | In the Dionysiaca
 
This seems like a rather big project. I'd be more than happy to help, but I won't be able to take a strong involvement until I get back home in a few days.

However until then I'll work on finding justification for the mythologies that I am most familiar with (Polynesian)
 
Bumping this thread, because the state of mythology profiles is still terrible, and we still need a massive revision at this point.
 
First and foremost we need more cosmology explanations for various mythical figures. I cannot begin to tell you people how much 4-B Norns grate on me without proper, detailed explanation.
 
I am sending every active and semi-active mythology supporter and expert here this message:

Massive mythology revisions needed

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/3279049

The mythology profiles on VBW are all unreliable garbage without exception. To fix this, we need:

1. Citations for every supposed feat, description, or ability in mythology, from reputable sources on ancient or modern mythologies (primary sources, of course, being the best). If we're quoting primary mythological texts (such as the Iliad) directly, then the specific translator of the text should be noted as well. The citations should obviously have links.

2. Detailed explanations for the cosmology of each mythology. I don't want to have to hear about 4-B Norns or the High 1-B Hindu-Buddhist multiverse without a proper explanation as to why.

3. The separation of "normal" and "abnormal" conceptions of various mythological figures into multiple keys (e.g. no conflating Hellenistic Dionysus with Orphic Dionysus and Dionysiaca Dionysus, as the character profile does)

4. A standard of dealing with the various names, titles, and epithets of mythological figures. In ancient cultures, such names, titles, and epithets were extremely important theologically speaking.

5. A standard of dealing with various "high-concept" descriptions of deities (I.e. descriptions of them being "exalted beyond the heavens" or "infinite and eternal" or "spaceless and timeless"). Should we take them at face-value (as the ancient cultures most likely did, for the most part), or should we consider them as mostly hyperbole, or should be try to "contextualize" them in a modern philosophical context?

6. A standard of dealing with ancient theologies, especially for mythologies without a specific "canon" (like classical mythology). I don't understand why we should have to consider Amaterasu as equal to Amenominakanushi based on an unnamed and unsourced old Japanese religious text that doesn't even seem to exist.
 
Due to the nature of theology and mythology, it makes it very hard for people to ever want to create any reasonable Respect blog or any reliable sourcing due to how large it is, as well that there's so many interpretations and versions of each character, namely the Greeks, makes them inconsistent.

Merely look to Aphrodite who doesn't even have a concrete origin, either the Foam from the castration of Uranus, while in the Iliad, she's said to be the daughter of Zeus and Dione.

For the Greeks, I recommend on having the Theogony be the basis/canon for the Greeks, as it is basically a composite at the time.

For the others, I do not know, I don't believe they were as into their own mythology like the Greeks and didn't write a composite.
 
I support these revisions, I think some of the creator dieties can be considered 1-A.

Also, Since Sun Wukong is partially tied to buddhist elements, why can't we add buddhist characters like the Buddha for the VS wiki, Buddhism isn't as controversial to discuss like the abrahamic religions.

In my opinion, buddhist characters should be added to this wiki because there will most likely be no controversy
 
I'm Blue daba dee daba die said:
I support these revisions, I think some of the creator dieties can be considered 1-A.
Click to expand...
While they can be, I don't think should be based on the idea they're Creator deities, after all, this is a meritocracy, and profiles are awarded their rank not on title but on merit.

I'm Blue daba dee daba die said:
In my opinion, buddhist characters should be added to this wiki because there will most likely be no controversy
Click to expand...
While I agree, as a Buddhist I find no issue with scaling Buddhism, same with Sera when we spoke about aspects of the religion, the only problem is, is that once we allow the door to be opened, people will demand they add Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and so on.

And most of all with that last one, some people don't want them to be touched, and while I'm against "My feelings overwrite your freedoms and expressions" it's gonna cause more drama than it's worth and so I say stay away based on purely avoiding drama.
 
"...profiles are awarded their rank not on title but on merit."

Except in certain cases the titles are most definitely relevant, since in practically every religion the titles and epithets of any given deity are fundamental to understanding their true nature, or at least which aspect in which they are worshipped.
 
Malomtek said:
"...profiles are awarded their rank not on title but on merit."
Except in certain cases the titles are most definitely relevant, since in practically every religion the titles and epithets of any given deity is fundamental to understand their true nature, or at least which aspect in which they are worshipped.
Click to expand...
Not really, Gods/Rulers of things doesn't gain the AP of the thing they are Gods of, not unless they're shown/stated to control that which they rule over, like Poseidon, he rules and can manipulate the Seas, that is valid, but if he says never shown to do so or have the energy to do so, we wouldn't give him a rank like High 6-A.
 
Udlmaster said:
While I agree, as a Buddhist I find no issue with scaling Buddhism, same with Sera when we spoke about aspects of the religion, the only problem is, is that once we allow the door to be opened, people will demand they add Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and so on.

And most of all with that last one, some people don't want them to be touched, and while I'm against "My feelings overwrite your freedoms and expressions" it's gonna cause more drama than it's worth and so I say stay away based on purely avoiding drama.
Click to expand...
Exactly. This is a slippery slope that we don't want to travel on.
 
Titles were still very important theologically speaking, and were considered valid in understanding ancient deities.
 
In fact, let's compromise.

Every ability or attack potency level implied by a specific title gets added in with the caveat of "possibly" before it. If a god is given the title "the World-Destroyer" and "the Bringer of Storms", then (assuming that such titles aren't explicitly backed up in the mythologies proper) he should be put as "possibly at least 5-B" and given "possible Weather Manipulation".
 
Udlmaster said:
I'm Blue daba dee daba die said:
I support these revisions, I think some of the creator dieties can be considered 1-A.
Click to expand...
While they can be, I don't think should be based on the idea they're Creator deities, after all, this is a meritocracy, and profiles are awarded their rank not on title but on merit.


I'm Blue daba dee daba die said:
In my opinion, buddhist characters should be added to this wiki because there will most likely be no controversy
Click to expand...
While I agree, as a Buddhist I find no issue with scaling Buddhism, same with Sera when we spoke about aspects of the religion, the only problem is, is that once we allow the door to be opened, people will demand they add Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and so on.

And most of all with that last one, some people don't want them to be touched, and while I'm against "My feelings overwrite your freedoms and expressions" it's gonna cause more drama than it's worth and so I say stay away based on purely avoiding drama.
Click to expand...
Well, my reasoning for some creator dieties to possibly be 1-A is that if the myths say they transcend the concepts of time and space.

I do get your reasoning why we shouldn't add Buddhism. But I don't think Hinduism will be too much drama as well, the main problem are the Abrahamic religions, those are far too controversial to be discussed without the threads to turn into a religious war.
 
It would be interesting talking about tier placements of abrahamic characters, but while most of us here would be civil, it would most likely light up a legion of internet trolls like in the old days
 
We will not add any major modern religions to the wiki. It would severely offend too many people.

I would appreciate if we immediately drop this subject so the discussion does not get out of hand again.
 
Antvasima said:
We will not add any major modern religions to the wiki. It would severely offend too many people.
I would appreciate if we immediately drop this subject so the discussion does not get out of hand again.
Click to expand...
Sorry about that, I wasn't meaning to bring it out of hand
 
Antvasima said:
We will not add any major modern religions to the wiki. It would severely offend too many people.

I would appreciate if we immediately drop this subject so the discussion does not get out of hand again.
Click to expand...
What about Shintoism? It's still practiced in Japan, and yet we have Shinto gods on our wiki.
 
Antvasima said:
@Malomtek

Please read our Site Rules and Editing Rules pages. I think that this is covered in one of them.
Click to expand...
Found it. Thanks. It was in the Editing Rules.
"The exceptions to this are ones with an incredibly small amount of current followers, such as the Aesir faith, and ones for which the followers are agnostic, such as Shintoism."
 
Speaking of Shinto, I'm still not seeing where the old Japanese religious text equating Amaterasu to Amenominakanushi comes from.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Half_Shiny
Skul Dark Mirror/Mythology pack massive upgrade (4-A)
Replies
29
Views
3K
Half_Shiny
Half_Shiny
CallMeWiertz
  • Locked
Tensura Cosmology L1A likely 1A
Replies
2
Views
2K
Shiraito983
Shiraito983
Weaver261
Small Genshin Cosmology Update with New God tier suggestion
Replies
37
Views
4K
Weaver261
Weaver261
DontTalkDT
  • Locked
On a Godless Planet: Confusing History With Senpai and Me
Replies
26
Views
4K
DontTalkDT
DontTalkDT
Yereks
Dexter's Laboratory Cosmology: 1-A | high 1-A upgrade
Replies
0
Views
356
Yereks
Yereks
Back
Top