Upside Down Man/Great Evil Beast revisions

[Sandman31]

Wait, no. Lucifer 2018 especially the later parts take place after lucifer has created his bar, saved Michael and such.

Starting as I meant that the bar is still in its "early days"

Not that he hasn't built it yet. Also, is there any indication that this happened after he saved Michael? That these events are at the same time frame as the 2000 run? Because I seriously doubt that. Plus the writer apparently said in twitter that this took place before the 2 other Lucifer solo and Lucifer saved Michael in Mike Careys solo. Lots of stuff happened between Lux and Michael being saved

 

[Malomtek]

I'm referring to the original scan that I posted. Where you said that Michael was not shown or mentioned. Michael was the one speaking there so you're wrong. I'm not confusing anything, you're the one who's confused here.

So was the hooded dude Michael, if was it the armored dude (the one who the hooded dude referred to as "Michael" when the hooded dude himself spoke as well in that scan)?

None of what you said have proofs and are merely theories, "what ifs" argument are nothing when it's backed by nothing. If it's "easily explained" then drop the scans proving it. Because nowhere in the series was it implied that Michael was an "avatar" or anything of that sort.

The same scans that showed that Lucifer has avatars are proof enough that Michael has them too. Avatars are the most credible explanation for any supposed discrepancies between any version of Lucifer, Michael, Sandalphon, etc. There's not much reason to assume that Lucifer is somehow unique in his avatar-creating abilities, when both he and his brothers come from the same transcendent realm.

Also, if you have read the comics then it's obvious that it's meant to take place after Sandman and not after the other Lucifer series. Luxs was just starting, the Presence is still the God that is the foundation of Creation etc
Plus the writer himself said that it take place before the other a Lucifers solo.

@Amakasu already took care of this.

 

[Y3kthunder]

In regards to malos second point i must say its highly unlikely that this version of michael has avatars. Lucifer was specifically singled out for being different from his siblings. An he has those because again he is more than simply lucifer morningstar he is the concept of dark an those are well ive already said what those are as of now there is no evidence that Michael have them to. Unfortunately careys run is not canon

 

[Sandman31]

So was the hooded dude Michael, if was it the armored dude (the one who the hooded dude referred to as "Michael" when the hooded dude himself spoke as well in that scan)?

Michael's not the hooded one. Where did I claim that? Nowhere. Do you even know what Michael looks like in this series?

Im referring to the the first scan you replied to. Where you said Michael wasn't even shown or mentioned when Michael was literally shown in the two panels as the guy with the spear and was the one explaining why they're dissappearing.

Here's the scan again together with the pages before and after that .Michael is the one with spear in front. Hes the one explaining whats happening to them due to the dissappearance of Presence/Lucifer

There's not much reason to assume that Lucifer is somehow unique in his avatar-creating abilities, when both he and his brothers come from the same transcendent realm.
As Y3KThunder said, Lucifer was literally stated to be apart from the other angels including Michael. He's not just an angel but is the dark counterpart of the light that is the Presence and is the "cornerstone" of the existence of Michael and the other angels so there's tons of reasons to assume that that's unique to Lucifer

Before you said "Michael isn't even mentioned or shown"

Michael is the angel mazikeen is talking to, the angel with the spear

I already replied to to Amakasu's comment

And again. You provided nothing. What ifs are nothing if there's no evidence backing them.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that @Sandman31 has done a very good job of proving his points, and that we should go with his solutions, instead of continuing to argue in circles forever, as he is one of our most knowledgeable members in this area. @AKM sama seems to like his posts as well.

 

[Amakasu]

Isn't kali an aspect of Michael?

 

[Antvasima]

I think that he appeared as Kali to The Spectre once at least, but may misremember.

 

[Amakasu]

I think that he appeared as Kali to The Spectre once at least, but may misremember.

Yeah, I remember. When Michael smashed the primal force Spectre it was stated that kali was one his aspects. So there's possiblity of him having aspects.

 

[Y3kthunder]

I think that he appeared as Kali to The Spectre once at least, but may misremember.

This is correct it was spectre of 1990 something if i remember correctly. he did appear to primal spectre as kali an said they were an aspect of him. But i think the point sandman is trying to make is this michael seems a lot different than previous versions. Unlike the spectre version we have no idea what his occupation is but it doesn't seem he guards heaven nor is his weaponry the same he wasn't credited for helpingwith creation an hasnt even been mentionedas the demiurgic . And sandman is correct michael was present when maze told them Lucifer simply wasn't like them rest of them he was in fact wearing a hood. This is something he eventually accepted

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, @Sandman31 makes sense. He is likely the most knowledgeable member here, so we should try to follow his advice.

 

[Amakasu]

So I read a tok of comics, especially dematties stuffs as he is writer that references the Presence and have to say my theory was correct about the Presence.

Firstly I want to explain how the Presence is neither the light shown in the swampthing, or that is bound by Duality at all. In DR fate #6, It's shown that the Presence is the one who created creation, he is the smile behind the Universe and the one beyond mahapralaya. And that from his oneess duality came into being, good and evil, light and darkness, order and chaos, these are all duality. So the Presence is basically non dual, he is beyond any duality so he's not the light. In the same comic it's stated that the Presence is not someone with opposites but that he trancends it. He is beyond the notion of god and devil, mother and father, order and chaos, he is a god without opposites. So it's pretty concrete that the presence is not the light as he is someone who trancends the justification of light and darkness. He is simply without opposites, he is not the light for the darkness.

All of these are you know fine and all, but even in swampthing it's shown that the Presence is not the light.In Swamp Thing #75, it is stated that beyond mortal, demigods, gods, the war between light and darkness (referring to Swamp Thing #50), matter, all obstacles, there is God, one with the Void.

So this should prove that light ≠ the Presence. But I'll definitely argue it's one of his lesser aspects

 

[Antvasima]

Well, as stated previously, DeMatteis tends to insert his own obscure religion into everything that he writes, regardless if it fits with what other writers have established or not.

 

[Amakasu]

Well, as stated previously, DeMatteis tends to insert his own obscure religion into everything that he writes, regardless if it fits with what other writers have established or not.

I also used swampthing, plus I don't particularly care if it's dematties or not

 

[Y3kthunder]

So I read a tok of comics, especially dematties stuffs as he is writer that references the Presence and have to say my theory was correct about the Presence.

Firstly I want to explain how the Presence is neither the light shown in the swampthing, or that is bound by Duality at all. In DR fate #6, It's shown that the Presence is the one who created creation, he is the smile behind the Universe and the one beyond mahapralaya. And that from his oneess duality came into being, good and evil, light and darkness, order and chaos, these are all duality. So the Presence is basically non dual, he is beyond any duality so he's not the light. In the same comic it's stated that the Presence is not someone with opposites but that he trancends it. He is beyond the notion of god and devil, mother and father, order and chaos, he is a god without opposites. So it's pretty concrete that the presence is not the light as he is someone who trancends the justification of light and darkness. He is simply without opposites, he is not the light for the darkness.

All of these are you know fine and all, but even in swampthing it's shown that the Presence is not the light.In Swamp Thing #75, it is stated that beyond mortal, demigods, gods, the war between light and darkness (referring to Swamp Thing #50), matter, all obstacles, there is God, one with the Void.

So this should prove that light ≠ the Presence. But I'll definitely argue it's one of his lesser aspects

One problem with everything youve said here he light. The light refers to his avatar. Not actually him

 

[Xearsay]

Sooooo. Is there going to be any progression of this?

 

[Antvasima]

I do not know.

@Zensum @C2_of_Omegon @Eficiente @Qawsedf234 @Sandman31 @SuperAPM @Firestorm808 @EmperorRorepme @LuciferDC099 @Ehnkr2beboh @Deagonx @Elizio33

What do you think that we should do?

 

[Deagonx]

I think that we should either give TGEB a post-retcon extra key scaled from TUDM, or strictly focus on Hecate's and TUDM's own personal feats for their scaling.

This solution seems sensible to me.

 

[Sandman31]

This solution seems sensible to me.

This^

 

[Amakasu]

This solution seems sensible to me.

^^

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you. Then it is decided that we should use that solution then. I would greatly appreciate if you can all help out to work out the best tiering based on it.

Also, to everybody else here, no derailment from that purpose please. Thank you.

 

[Qawsedf234]

What do you think that we should do?

Honestly I'm with Deagon here. He's explained the points I agree with better than I could.

 

[Xearsay]

Honestly I'm with Deagon here. He's explained the points I agree with better than I could.

What points are those exactly? Just asking as I feel like this thread got distracted from my original post.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Again, you are misunderstanding my argument. There are two options for scaling.

1) GEB = Presence. If this is the case, scaling UDM to GEB is incoherent.

2) GEB =/= Presence. If this is the case, scaling UDM to GEB does not indicate a specific power level. The entire purpose of scaling is to determine a power level.

Both are problematic. Neither are the core reason why connecting their profiles is problematic. That has more to do with the various ways in which the Otherkind's story is incompatible with American Gothic.

Everything here for the most part. In general since the start I've leaned towards his interpretation as well.

 

[Xearsay]

I see. Well I guess we can ignore the GEB scaling for now and focus on their own feats which are still 1-A.

 

[Deagonx]

Their feats are not 1-A. The only argument you have made for that is the notion that they were capable of destroying the Source Wall, which has been debunked. Likewise, they scale well below 1-A beings.

 

[Xearsay]

You didn’t debunk anything. Your only argument was to complain about the consistency of an illustration which means nothing in the fact of consistent direct confirmation statements.

Being less powerful than another 1-A being doesn’t mean you can’t also be 1-A.

 

[Deagonx]

Your only argument was to complain about the consistency of an illustration

What on earth are you referring to?

which means nothing in the fact of consistent direct confirmation statements.

Sure, but you didn't have consistent direct confirmation statements. The notion that the barrier was the Source Wall was never supported by a single direct confirming statement. The notion that the Otherkind are capable of destroying the Source Wall was also never confirmed by a single direct statement.

It's one thing to argue on behalf of your interpretation, but the notion that you have "consistent direct confirmation statements" is just a blatant misrepresentation of the quality of your evidence, whether or not you think you're right or whether your interpretation is the correct one.

 

[Xearsay]

Lol I didn’t misrepresent anything. The evidence I gave directly confirms what I’ve been saying. And no opinion of yours is going to change that.

 

[Amakasu]

Okay. Thank you. Then it is decided that we should use that solution then. I would greatly appreciate if you can all help out to work out the best tiering based on it.

Also, to everybody else here, no derailment from that purpose please. Thank you.

I think we should give them two keys. 1C and 1A

 

[Amakasu]

1C for the normal upside down man as It's stated that the form we see is just a form he's taken so beings like John Constantine and others can see him. 1A for the true upside down man who's beyond the initial geb who was stated to be capable of destroying all of creation.

 

[Antvasima]

What do the rest of you think of Amakasu's suggestion?

Also, should we give TGEB a post-retcon key as well?

 

[Deagonx]

I didn’t misrepresent anything. The evidence I gave directly confirms what I’ve been saying.

You are either misrepresenting the quality of your evidence, or you aren't familiar with what "direct" means. If it said "they can destroy the Source Wall" that would be direct. "They can destroy the barrier! [input convoluted interpretation that the barrier is the Source Wall despite contradictory evidence]" that is not a direct confirmation.

So, again, you have no direct evidence, just theories and interpretations that are contested by better evidence.

What do the rest of you think of Amakasu's suggestion?

I would avoid the idea of a "true form" UDM until it's asserted in more clear terms. It's not clear that UDM is somehow weakened by that form, and scaling a "true" UDM to the original GEB is still problematic for the aforementioned reasons.

Also, should we give TGEB a post-retcon key as well?

I think it might be worthwhile, I don't feel strongly one way or the other.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for the evaluations.

 

[Xearsay]

That’s not what the evidence was direct about. The evidence was direct and implicit about the Dark Multiverse being outside of the Source Wall. And there’s much more evidence carrying this notion than whatever you tried to present against it.

 

[Deagonx]

The evidence was direct and implicit about the Source wall separating the Dark Multiverse

No, it was not at all. And I assume you mean "explicit" here, and it was certainly neither. In fact, the evidence that it doesn't separate the Dark Multiverse is far more direct, specifically the lack of barrier between Hecate and UDM despite there apparently being a Source Wall between them, and the fact that after the JL first went to the Dark Multiverse it was said that "even greater mysteries" lay beyond the Source Wall, which makes no sense if they had already been past the Source Wall.

Again, this isn't a matter of whether or not your interpretation is correct, it's that you are blatantly misrepresenting the quality of your evidence by pretending it's infinitely more direct than it actually is. Which should be an indicator to you that you need to reconsider your position, if your scans regularly fail to specify your interpretation. It's just like with Michael pretending "Death Metal said the Source and the Overvoid are the same thing, here's 3 scans that say so" except literally none of his scans say anything like that.

 

[Xearsay]

No what you’re complaining about is the equivalent of saying Mandrakk couldn’t have fell into the Overvoid because there was a Source wall around the Monitor Sphere lol. The Source Wall is not a physical barrier. It’s just a limit to the Multiverse.

Wanna know what one of those greater mysteries was? The Dark Gods. Do you know where the Dark Gods come from? The Dark Sphere of Gods.

See how the evidence debunks your own point?

 

[Deagonx]

No what you’re complaining about is the equivalent of saying Mandrakk couldn’t have fell into the Overvoid because there was a Source wall around the Monitor Sphere

The Source Wall was destroyed in Death of the New Gods, which rolled into the beginning of Final Crisis when Orion fell to the multiverse.

The Source Wall is not a physical barrier.

Yes, it is. You can literally go to the edge of the universe and touch it. Likewise, what would be the point of the Source Wall if you could simply circumvent it entirely by going to the Sphere and then to the Otherplace? That's nonsensical.

Wanna know what one of those greater mysteries was? The Dark Gods.

According to what?

 

[Xearsay]

Grant wrote Final Crisis before DOTNG even did that. And even then Mandrakk could have never been able to even discover and explore the Multiverse if there was a Source wall around it. Once again this is what your argument is literally the equivalent of.

It’s supposed to contain Perpetua. That’s the point of it.

According to Dark Nights Metal.

 

[Deagonx]

Grant wrote Final Crisis before DOTNG even did that

He wrote parts of it, sure, but he specifically said he adapted other parts to correspond to DOTNG. There's no reason why the Source Wall can't be included in that.

And even then Mandrakk would have never been able to even discover and explore the Multiverse if there was a Source wall around it.

Mandrakk's origin was retconned entirely, so this is basically moot. However, even in the original storyline we could simply assume his power as an agent of the Overvoid was enough to go through the Source Wall.

Once again this is what your argument is literally the equivalent of.

No, it's not. You've wasted a lot of time pretending it is, but this weak analogy is not going to refute my argument either way.

It’s supposed to contain Perpetua. That’s the point of it.

I'm aware, this doesn't change anything. The Source Wall is considered nigh impenetrable to inhabitants of the Multiverse, and it surrounds the entire multiverse. The Dark Multiverse is just the "flip side."

According to Dark Nights Metal.

Prove it with scans that "one of the 'greater mysteries' was the Dark Gods"

 

[Xearsay]

There’s no reason to assume it would be either.

Whether you think Mandrakks origin was retconned or not is irrelevant. The point is that your argument is literally the equivalent of saying Mandrakk couldn’t have explored the multiverse because of the Source wall. One potentially inconsistent point in a plot for a single story doesn’t retcon the entire cosmology. It just means the plot of that story has a potentially inconsistent point that probably needs further explanation. Also what you’re doing can be considered cherry picking as you’re taking one piece of data over the mountain pile of evidence against it.

The Dark Multiverse being beneath the multiverse doesn’t indicate the Source Wall surrounds it. It actually proves the opposite as the Dark Multiverse is much larger than what’s on the front side of the map.

I already did give a scan. You just didn’t read it.