Mythology Feats and Cosmology

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Ok now, does existing before existence and dimensional space qualify you as 1-A.


And also, how do we define if the mythological texts of a diety being "beyond space and time" to be High 2-A,Low 2-C, not a factor, or 1-A

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

Let me guess:


Well that's part of it but there's more too it. Ultima says 1-A orphism is possible.

 

[Udlmaster]

Ok now, does existing before existence and dimensional space qualify you as 1-A.

No, existing prior just means you predate said thing, prior to existing in a dimensional space you'd (by default without further information) be existing in a dimensionless void, which isn't considered 1-A.

And also, how do we define if the mythological texts of a diety being "beyond space and time" to be High 2-A,Low 2-C, not a factor, or 1-A

"Beyond time and space" is considered 4-D, which would make them Universal+, unless Time is stated to be the 4th dimension which then would make them 5-D, Same goes for space, if space has a statement of being Higher-D, then said being would be 1 dimension higher.

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Ok then, how about transcending space and time

 

[Mindovin]

Ok then, how about transcending space and time

Needs more context and info. Transcending space and time could be 5-D.

Basically the higher the tier there must be more info and context about it especially after tier 3-A.

 

[ZacharyGrossman273]

I heard Mayan mythology is 1-A

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

I support the revisions, Also a Greek Mythology Buff?, can they even reach 2-B?

I could argue for 1-A orphism

Yeah, which 1-A now since we now have low 1-A,1-A,and High 1-A

 

[Uninown]

near-necro bump

 

[Malomtek]

Almost forgot about this.

In light on our tiering system revisions, I would like any revisions to the Mythology pages, specifically concerning their tier and AP levels, to be conservative at first, with the bigger revisions coming after the new tiering system is settled.

 

[Malomtek]

I had also completely slacked off on researching Chinese mythology, for which I deeply apologize.

 

[Malomtek]

I need to get on the Jade Emperor's stats fast

 

[Jackythejack]

I'm gonna be following this and saying I'd love to be able to help in any way I can.

 

[Malomtek]

I'm gonna be following this and saying I'd love to be able to help in any way I can.

Well, what are you knowledgeable in?

 

[Jackythejack]

I know a bit about Norse mythology. A bit more than the average person should at least and I know a bit about Greek mythology. My knowledge on myths is admittedly not the greatest but I'm willing to learn.

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

This is about to revise the Bahamut Page. On the Bahamut page it says he is 3-B because it is thousands of times larger than the observable universe. But isn't the observable universe 3-A? Also, in the myths it was said he held the WHOLE universe, not just multiple galaxies.

I think we need to buff Bahamut to 3-A

 

[Malomtek]

I think that's fine.

 

[Creaturemaster971]

I had previously said I can help with Aztec mythology, but I should specify that I may not be able to provide sources and my information may be faulty at times. While I studied it in the past, it's been several years

 

[Antvasima]

We use the observable universe as a lower border for 3-A, yes, so if Bahamut is larger than that, he should qualify.

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Ok then, who will update his page and buff him to 3-A?

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Also, what religions are banned for discussion/pages on this wiki? I know that Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and ESPECIALLY Islam are off limits. But how about religions like the Bahai Faith? some religions like the Bahai faith have very few followers but they have inspirations from the abrahamic religions.

This gets me to my next question, what is the follower limit to see if they have a place on this wiki or if they are banned.

Also, final thing, are philosophies like gnosticm and kabbalism allowed? They aren't religions and not too many people follow them so I think they can work on this wiki

 

[Antvasima]

I am not sure where exactly to draw the line. We just don't want any major controversy.

 

[Malomtek]

Ok then, who will update his page and buff him to 3-A?

I just did it.

 

[Uninown]

bump 2

 

[Antvasima]

So does anybody have a plan for how we should improve on the reliability of our Mythology pages?

 

[Malomtek]

So does anybody have a plan for how we should improve on the reliability of our Mythology pages?

My list from before should still apply.

 

[Antvasima]

Can you cite the list again please?

 

[Malomtek]

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.

 

[Cropfist]

I don't think 1, 4 and maybe 3 are reasonably feasible.

 

[Antvasima]

I don't think 1, 4 and maybe 3 are reasonably feasible.

I do not think that we remotely have the resources for this either.

 

[Malomtek]

Why not? It is somehow to hard to find, say, a copy of the Odyssey or of Edith Hamilton's Mythology?

Is it too hard to note when a certain depiction of a mythological figure radically differs from a more common one?

Is it too hard to list and explain all the titles and epithets a deity has been given?

 

[Antvasima]

Our members do not have enough time, interest, and knowledge for in-depth thorough mythological reasearch. Sorry.

This is not a wiki that specialises in the area. It is one that usually uses moderate hobbyist knowledge of a wide variety of diverse fictions.

 

[Malomtek]

Most members may not, but if that neopagan guy earlier in the thread (Edenstar) was any indication, some do.

We need to get the ones that do, like Uldmaster.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Feel free to use their message walls, but I do not think that you are being remotely realistic.

 

[Cropfist]

We can not cite every single feat because there are thousands of sources, and with stuff like Midgard Serpent it would be common sense to anyone with basic knowledge that he's planet-sized. It's like demanding every single fight in Dragon Ball be linked as evidence for their stats.

Also, their various names are just included in the normal names stat, and different version of the same mythos might not be different enough for keys.

 

[Antvasima]

Agreed.

 

[Sera_EX]

We shouldn't have mythology pages in the first place, but I guess that's a debate for another time.

 

[Antvasima]

You do have a point. They may be too hard to tier properly due to the many different versions of the myths.

 

[Sera_EX]

Yes, there's various sources and just as many interpretations of those sources. It's incredibly difficult and honestly not worth the effort to try and revise.

 

[Antvasima]

That may be correct, yes.

 

[Malomtek]

I disagree. I think we can figure out a standard on the use of sources and their interpretations.