MotherFcker Ultimate
Illustrious
how do you treat feats and statements that would be considered higher D? do you consider them unquantifiable and ignore them? do you equate them to your tiering system?
so if dimensional scaling doesnt exist on here then
- Thread starter MotherFcker Ultimate
- Start date
They can't mean anything because the entire concept of "dimensions" varies from fiction to fiction. Dimensions in real life =/= dimensions in Marvel =/= dimensions in Dragon Ball =/= dimensions in Fate =/= dimensions in God of War, and so on. Someone in one fiction who is considered 11 dimensional or whatever can have nothing but street level feats, and as such should be treated as such. You can't increase a characters stats based on how many dimensions they affect if they don't actually do anything with their power.
The short answer I use? Look at dimension manipulation like magic. Like magic, it varies from fiction to fiction, and in fiction is often used in ways similar to magic. You can't apply dimensional tiering because fictional dimensions are not like real life dimensions, hence why they're fictional. Just like magic.
The short answer I use? Look at dimension manipulation like magic. Like magic, it varies from fiction to fiction, and in fiction is often used in ways similar to magic. You can't apply dimensional tiering because fictional dimensions are not like real life dimensions, hence why they're fictional. Just like magic.
Also, just realized this should be moved to Meta-Battledome
MotherFcker Ultimate
Illustrious
can i do that or do i need a mod to do it
short answer is most of the time we go off of sets of universes, this is mostly based in the fact that this hobby piggy backed off marvel's terminology but ultimately our own shit ended up diverging from that too
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com.../13-general-obd-terms/80-destructive-capacity
multi megaverse is just considered omniverse now though
this system is flawed in different ways from dimensional tiering but nobody who has ever proposed a restructuring ever actually finished what they're doing
there are times when we do accept what VSB would consider "dimensional tiering" eg their conclusions for the Elder Scrolls series are pretty similar to our own, but for us it's because of the levels the Aurbis and Clockwork City were shown to deal with not just because they're higher dimensional.
Their A Wild Last Boss pages are a good example of why we don't just go off dimensions. You have an "infinite dimensional" character debatably being able to even affect an infinite set of universes (their multiverse is referred to with finite terms more often than not)
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com.../13-general-obd-terms/80-destructive-capacity
multi megaverse is just considered omniverse now though
this system is flawed in different ways from dimensional tiering but nobody who has ever proposed a restructuring ever actually finished what they're doing
there are times when we do accept what VSB would consider "dimensional tiering" eg their conclusions for the Elder Scrolls series are pretty similar to our own, but for us it's because of the levels the Aurbis and Clockwork City were shown to deal with not just because they're higher dimensional.
Their A Wild Last Boss pages are a good example of why we don't just go off dimensions. You have an "infinite dimensional" character debatably being able to even affect an infinite set of universes (their multiverse is referred to with finite terms more often than not)
We don't do dimensional scaling or tiering at all here. This stuff is even more nuanced, annoying to standardize, and quantify then the issues of dealing with timelines or the cosmology of multiple universes and parallel worlds. I know VSB has a hard on for this kind of stuff but in general its so superflous, with little to no substance, and makes zero direct impact with destructive capacity/energetic output we don't bother with it.
Every tier list is flawed in some way but alot of dimensional tiering obfuscates a person’s actual power output.
The terminology is easy to abuse too. A character has can be easily considered to be above a certain other character just by virtue of being in a “higher dimension” despite not showing a greater arrange of feats to back it up.
Closest thing we’ve done to tiering is probably the labels we give to characters like “Herald Level” to “Cube Level” and “Skyfather Level”, but that’s basically using mainly some Marvel terminology. Even that can be flawed because certain character like Silver Surfer and such dance around the labels of “Herald Level” too much.
it is not even consistent within the same series most of the time letalone trying to use it as a standard for all of them
Maddie
Acclaimed
So here are my opinions on the matter:
- To begin with, we need to consider what we even base attack potency/destructive capacity on. This number is energy, or the ability to exert a force over a certain distance. Force is mass * acceleration. We have certain benchmarks of what amount of energy can actually destroy what. This energy can go all the way to infinity, which is universal+. You can't get actual "normal" energy above that, it's literally impossible. Whenever fiction goes above universal+, it is dealing with energies fundamentally and ontologically different from the energy we think of coming from a bullet or bomb.
- Keep in mind spatial dimension 4 =/= the "fourth" dimension of time which is its own separate category unrelated. This isn't the case always. In Xeelee Sequence time is an illusion of Phase Space. However for the most part you need to understand time =/= 4th spatial dimension.
- Mass is impertinent to dimensionality, rather higher dimensionality affects how much volume its displacing at any given time. There is trippy displacement involved:
Simply put, higher dimensional beings would have higher 3-D volume which added to the density mean more mass to displace.
Using this calculator: https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1223381019
For example, a 4-D sphere that is 1 meter in radius will have a volume of 4.935 cubic meters instead of 4.189 cubic meters. Slightly bigger.
Let's use another example. Warhammer 40k's Black Crusade RP novel has a random 20-D Necron technology. VSB wank aside, let's assume that machine was ~15 meters in radius and a sphere. It's regular volume is 523.599 cubic meters and its area is 314.159 square meters (The latter number matters more for Inverse Square Law so I will only use that from now on). At 20-D, this object's real surface area is 9.845e12 square meters, quite a lot more to actually destroy. No wonder the Space Marines couldn't bust it.
The scaling isn't linear - the larger the object is the more massive it will be given a dimensionality. For example the observable universe is in 3 dimensional space, is 46.6 billion light years, and a surface area of 2.723e22 square light years . According to string theory there are 7 other dimensions folded to planck levels such that they are irrelevant*. Let's suppose the universe is uncompactified and these 7 other dimensions extended as far out as the 3 main ones. Our observable universe would have a volume of 1.23e107 cubic light years or 2.643e97 square light years.
This is a massive jump, needless to say. Both would be universal, but having a 10-D blast that extends across the observable universe would be orders of magnitudes deeper into universal. So higher dimensions do actually influence the amount of energy you displace. You can mathematically prove it through n-sphere formulae.
*Keep that in mind by the way. Any verse going for the "our universe/multiverse is 10/11-D" thing is likely using String Theory in which dimensions are compact.
- As I mentioned prior, you can't quantify above universe+ with joules. However it is clear in so much fiction that they go way above universal+ and deal with higher scope things. Thankfully it can be explained through set theory that higher sets of infinity exists. Higher infinities and sets of infinities must be relevant to tiering or nothing can be tiered after universal+. This is the issue Spacebattles faces. They kinda do whatever because "It doesn't matter it's all infinite anyways," which no. Some sets are larger than others.
- Set Theory can also explain how destroying two separate universes even if finite > universal+. If a universe is dimensionally, causally, temporally, or metaphysically separate from another universe. If you understand that destroying two universes means destroying the actual set container itself beyond just the interior elements, then you can get why.
- I conflate ontological superiority with higher infinities, ergo if someone exists and manipulates his existence on a plane of existence transfinitely higher than our own, he can be said to be ontologically superior to us and at least universal+.
- Higher Dimensions do not equate ontological superiority, for they merely are displacements of movement. I explained that prior
Irradiance
Slightly Above Average
Everything above infinite power is subjective baloney and shouldn't exist. 
The numbers your calculator spit out are in m^11 not m^3 (/ in m^10 not m^2). Just sayin'.
Maddie
Acclaimed
The problem is there's dozens of verses in fiction above infinite universalEverything above infinite power is subjective baloney and shouldn't exist.
The numbers your calculator spit out are in m^11 not m^3 (/ in m^10 not m^2). Just sayin'.
You need to quantify superiority somehow
Higher infinities exist and can be gauged, dimensionality just isn't the way
Last edited:
Irradiance
Slightly Above Average
Abandon standardized systems, return to direct comparison.
(But seriously, that cubic lightyear stuff doesn't work like that mathematically. Bothers the mathematician in me)
Maddie
Acclaimed
Literally explained there is a multiverse, like you can claim it isn't above multiversal, but there is clear constant evidence of multiversal tiering. Parallel universes are a clearly established idea in Twin Peaks. You're just splitting hairs in such a way that a shitton of verses wouldn't count as multiversal as a result.
MotherFcker Ultimate
Illustrious
what about inaccessible and immeasurable speed
yeah we use immeasurable for things completely outside of time and whatnot but I've never seen inaccessible before
MotherFcker Ultimate
Illustrious
inaccessible speed is a thing some people use for moving in zero time, so essentially just for moving in stopped/nonexistent time, i have no opinion on it myself
Maddie
Acclaimed
Immeasurable is simply to explain why characters displace distances that might as well be incalculable, like stopped time, a place with no time, etc. However one is still bound by some space of an arbitrary dimensionality.
Inaccessible/irrelevant is a stage where space doesn't exist because it transcends the total capacity for spatial dimensions to even exist.
Inaccessible/irrelevant is a stage where space doesn't exist because it transcends the total capacity for spatial dimensions to even exist.