- 2,512
- 261
So while I was writing an article to document the current regulations regarding in which case a feat is universe level and in which case not I thought some more about the topic and had a change of mind, I guess.
To summarize the current stand of things: A Character is universe level exactly then, if it destroyed the universe or observable universe, there is a reliable statement that it is capable of doing so or it itself or its abilities have properties that intuitively imply they are capable of doing so. Examples of the latter include things like being larger than the (observable) universe or being able to create something the size of the (observable) universe. Since calculating an even just approximately correct value for the destruction of the observable universe is not really possible for us (as explained in thread I), a precise border for the energy level to reach universe level is omitted and calculated energy values far above the requirements for Multi-Galaxy level are listed as "at least Multi-Galaxy level".
So the reason for my change of mind basically is the question "which harm does an too low value for the low end of universe level do?".
Essentially we could also have created our energy scale with arbitary borders, for example one level always 100x as powerful as the prior. The only reason our scale has names such as "Building level", "Moon level" or "Multi-Galaxy level" is because this levels have the purpose to enable people, that can not calc, to create profiles with accurate statistics on their own. In other words as long as destroying x falls into x level, the level fullfills its purpose.
So as long as destruction of the universe falls into universe level, everything is fine. And that would also be the case far the low end.
Of course it is true that for a too low value some high end Multi-Galaxy level feats (things equal to destroying a few trillion galaxies) might be calculated to fall into Universe level then, even though they technically shouldn't. Those are basically feats that can only be reached through calculation though, so the intuitive ranking of Multi-Galaxy level souldn't be influenced. Neither would it discredit universe level to much, since any feat equal to destroying the observable universe would most likely be far below what the usual feat for destroying the universe is eitehr way, or in other words universe level is a vast category in the first place.
Lastly the great advantage is that the regulation regarding it becomes absolutely easy to understand for all users and has a way easier reasoning behind it. Additionally we would not have an uncertain border, which is nice.
So summa summarum I would suggest using the high end of this calc as low end border of universe level, like some people suggested before.
Opinions?
(sorry about going a bit back and forth with my opinion regarding this btw.)
To summarize the current stand of things: A Character is universe level exactly then, if it destroyed the universe or observable universe, there is a reliable statement that it is capable of doing so or it itself or its abilities have properties that intuitively imply they are capable of doing so. Examples of the latter include things like being larger than the (observable) universe or being able to create something the size of the (observable) universe. Since calculating an even just approximately correct value for the destruction of the observable universe is not really possible for us (as explained in thread I), a precise border for the energy level to reach universe level is omitted and calculated energy values far above the requirements for Multi-Galaxy level are listed as "at least Multi-Galaxy level".
So the reason for my change of mind basically is the question "which harm does an too low value for the low end of universe level do?".
Essentially we could also have created our energy scale with arbitary borders, for example one level always 100x as powerful as the prior. The only reason our scale has names such as "Building level", "Moon level" or "Multi-Galaxy level" is because this levels have the purpose to enable people, that can not calc, to create profiles with accurate statistics on their own. In other words as long as destroying x falls into x level, the level fullfills its purpose.
So as long as destruction of the universe falls into universe level, everything is fine. And that would also be the case far the low end.
Of course it is true that for a too low value some high end Multi-Galaxy level feats (things equal to destroying a few trillion galaxies) might be calculated to fall into Universe level then, even though they technically shouldn't. Those are basically feats that can only be reached through calculation though, so the intuitive ranking of Multi-Galaxy level souldn't be influenced. Neither would it discredit universe level to much, since any feat equal to destroying the observable universe would most likely be far below what the usual feat for destroying the universe is eitehr way, or in other words universe level is a vast category in the first place.
Lastly the great advantage is that the regulation regarding it becomes absolutely easy to understand for all users and has a way easier reasoning behind it. Additionally we would not have an uncertain border, which is nice.
So summa summarum I would suggest using the high end of this calc as low end border of universe level, like some people suggested before.
Opinions?
(sorry about going a bit back and forth with my opinion regarding this btw.)
