UHRP Player Information

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
[b]There is nothing directly illogical about what has been said, so it can not be that which irritate you. I take it you have read the profile for Xanatos character, though, which puts you in a better position than me on what is logical and not.

According to what has been said, however, Xanatos character gives no indications to be illogical. [/B]

If you can end all existence if you stop trying to suppress yourself, then 99.999% of your power surpasses existence end. After the end of existence, there is nothing because if you can destroy everything then there would be nothing. If not, then he's less powerful then he claims but if so then it is as so. Being even 1% higher in power then the power required to end existence means that 1% of your power is pointless to possess as you will never be able to use it. When over 50%, this gets pretty illogical but that means you have to actually push yourself half way to your maximum to be able to do that. Xanatos claims that he is beyond that which is why to me it seems illogical.

You are missing a very vital point. The character is making an effort to not end all things. This means it is not a strenght of his, but a weakness. Not that it has anything at all to do with logic, what I just said. So here is about that: Not being able to use an ability does not make it illogical. It is just something you rather not use, because, well, it will end all things. Besides, making an effort implies he is actively trying to prevent it from happening.

I repeat. There is nothing illogical about the powers. Just because they can not be used, does not make them illogical. Putting an effort into not ending the universe is no less logical than conjuring a fireball in your hand. It all comes down to how, but the act itself is not illogical.

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
[b]There is nothing directly illogical about what has been said, so it can not be that which irritate you. I take it you have read the profile for Xanatos character, though, which puts you in a better position than me on what is logical and not.

According to what has been said, however, Xanatos character gives no indications to be illogical. [/B]

Honestly, my character sheet does little to explain how he came to be, but that's because a majority of his RP career was very combat oriented, so there was little need to detail more than his combat capabilities.

Originally posted by MadMel
I must be tired, I just saw the woman in SM64's avy move. doh

'Night, all.
To those who know wtf I'm talking about - HOTD game please? 🙂

I don't honestly know if we could do it justice. Besides, I have a dedicated zombie RP area that I intend to return to that's ****ing awesome.

Originally posted by Phoenix3068
If you can end all existence if you stop trying to suppress yourself, then 99.999% of your power surpasses existence end. After the end of existence, there is nothing because if you can destroy everything then there would be nothing. If not, then he's less powerful then he claims but if so then it is as so. Being even 1% higher in power then the power required to end existence means that 1% of your power is pointless to possess as you will never be able to use it. When over 50%, this gets pretty illogical but that means you have to actually push yourself half way to your maximum to be able to do that. Xanatos claims that he is beyond that which is why to me it seems illogical.

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
[b]You are missing a very vital point. The character is making an effort to not end all things. This means it is not a strenght of his, but a weakness. Not that it has anything at all to do with logic, what I just said. So here is about that: Not being able to use an ability does not make it illogical. It is just something you rather not use, because, well, it will end all things. Besides, making an effort implies he is actively trying to prevent it from happening.

I repeat. There is nothing illogical about the powers. Just because they can not be used, does not make them illogical. Putting an effort into not ending the universe is no less logical than conjuring a fireball in your hand. It all comes down to how, but the act itself is not illogical. [/B]

Honestly, both are good points. It does seem a bit ridiculous to have power quantum leaps and bounds over others, but as I've always tried to do, it's always been through a progression of a character's story, not a random, "Oh look, I'm this powerful a hur hur derp."

Edit: Also, http://xat.com/AllIsSmashMovement

😄

Well it doesn't have to be HOTD, just any teenage zombiepocalypse that doesn't have Chris Redfield knockoffs will be fine. 😉

Silly Mel, there will always be Chris knockoffs.

Noooo!
My character will personally kill any steroid munching military man that comes into the game! 😠

Originally posted by Phoenix3068
Marie is no where in this discussion. The morality of the two examples was not what I meant. Marie is the one following with the laws while the rebels are the ones who go against them breaking the laws set in order to get their way. They are fighting a pointless battle and if you want to go from a judgment of good and evil that's your choice. I'm going by a judgment of what goes with the rules and what goes against it. In this case, Jacope is in the wrong while Marie is in the right as she is following the rules. Care to keep against me on that matter?

I care to do so. The Empire is by definition evil. They hunt and kill any that oppose their position and they lead through fear. They destroyed a populated planet to prove a point. Their leader has embraced the dark side of the Force and is actively searching for those who has done the same. He at the same time is very insistent on purging the galaxy of those who follow the light side of things. They are not only the stereotypical authoritative evil of any story, easily comparable to the Third Reich and more, but they are also a military rule that actually made the rules. So while it is true that they follow the rules, they are following the rules that they designed. So in truth, they are not following the rules. Simply making them up as they go.

On that note as well, following the rules does not always put you in the right. So even though the Empire is following the rules, they are hardly the correct choice between the Rebels and the Empire, given the fact that the Empire do mass murders regularly and without regard for the human rights factor. The Rebels fight for a free galaxy, and a galaxy without the Galactic Empire, who is not so much a leader as a tyrant and a bully. If you manage to obscure the view of the Galactic Empire and the Rebel Alliance, so that the Galactic Empire are the good guys, and the Rebel Alliance the bad guys, then I applaud your devotion to your cause. Though from where I am seeing it, it can never be considered a compliment, of any form, to compare another to the Galactic Empire. The Rebel Alliance however, they are as good as it gets.

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
[b]You are missing a very vital point. The character is making an effort to not end all things. This means it is not a strenght of his, but a weakness. Not that it has anything at all to do with logic, what I just said. So here is about that: Not being able to use an ability does not make it illogical. It is just something you rather not use, because, well, it will end all things. Besides, making an effort implies he is actively trying to prevent it from happening.

I repeat. There is nothing illogical about the powers. Just because they can not be used, does not make them illogical. Putting an effort into not ending the universe is no less logical than conjuring a fireball in your hand. It all comes down to how, but the act itself is not illogical. [/B]

No Marie, you're misunderstanding me which you proved with your last post on this matter.

The peak of strength is the absolute end of all existence. If existence ends there is nothing more to go from there. Nobody would be alive, even Xanatos himself would cease to exist as that is "Existence". If he has to actively try not to end it, that means that even at a lower estimate of power he can end existence. If you have power beyond the end of existence, that's power that cannot be used because before you reach it "Boom, everything including yourself is gone". That's why to me it seems "illogical". It's like a number that surpasses Infinity. Infinity is a continuation that will never end, so there can be no number that passes an infinite number since that number will never reach an end. Xanatos has worked many years on his character creation and he deserves to have a very powerful being I agree. I just don't understand the illogical stand from it and all that you're doing instead of helping me to understand it is telling me how I'm wrong for saying that it doesn't make sense. So can we stop discussing this unless you plan on helping me understand it and not telling me I'm wrong for not understanding it?

Originally posted by Obsidian Fury
I care to do so. The Empire is by definition evil. They hunt and kill any that oppose their position and they lead through fear. They destroyed a populated planet to prove a point. Their leader has embraced the dark side of the Force and is actively searching for those who has done the same. He at the same time is very insistent on purging the galaxy of those who follow the light side of things. They are not only the stereotypical authoritative evil of any story, easily comparable to the Third Reich and more, but they are also a military rule that actually made the rules. So while it is true that they follow the rules, they are following the rules that they designed. So in truth, they are not following the rules. Simply making them up as they go.

On that note as well, following the rules does not always put you in the right. So even though the Empire is following the rules, they are hardly the correct choice between the Rebels and the Empire, given the fact that the Empire do mass murders regularly and without regard for the human rights factor. The Rebels fight for a free galaxy, and a galaxy without the Galactic Empire, who is not so much a leader as a tyrant and a bully. If you manage to obscure the view of the Galactic Empire and the Rebel Alliance, so that the Galactic Empire are the good guys, and the Rebel Alliance the bad guys, then I applaud your devotion to your cause. Though from where I am seeing it, it can never be considered a compliment, of any form, to compare another to the Galactic Empire. The Rebel Alliance however, they are as good as it gets.

A clause of morality, once more. It doesn't matter how you compare to it.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
an individual who resists authority or control

A Rebel is someone who goes against the authority/control set in place. Rather you see them as Good or Bad doesn't matter. Maybe it's just because you insist on following the path of "good" and the "righteous" but not everybody see's something "Dark" as just being "Evil" and "Murderous". Yes, the Light side of the Force was the Heroic side while the Dark side was the Villain side. However, people still had their reasons for doing what they did on either side and to them believed it was Right. Morality is something that can't judge rather something is Right or Wrong, only Good or Evil. To sacrifice a country to save your family would be considered "Evil" despite doing it for something you believe to be "Good". If you want to be a complete zombie to the fact and blindly follow under the impression that my example was referring to Morality only then go ahead but don't keep arguing about it with me here.

My point I was making was simple. The Empire was the force of power who made authority and rule, the Rebel Alliance were the ones that broke the rules in order to stand for what they thought was right. A complex yin-yang theory, yet not so complex in itself. Of course, the further it goes the less different the two sides become. Soon it wouldn't be like an Empire vs. Rebel and then it would just become a civil war between two people who choose to argue rather then just standing for what they believe in. If you're looking just to get an insult out of my comment, keep going if you want but message me in private to do it. UHRP is the only thread that remains open where we can talk freely and arguing about stuff like this will just get it shut down.

How in the world did you succeed in making that post of mine about you? I do not care about your childish bickering and who implied what how. I wanted to talk Star Wars. I thought my signature alone would give that away, if not the fact that my post was 100% about it. You on the other hand seem entirely uninterested in that, so I will leave the matter be and let you go on with your sour perspective of things. A real shame, too. I like talking about Star Wars.

Not everyone on the internet are out for a fight. Remember that.

Sorry -_- I took it personal, that was my fault.

Edit. Incomplete.

Originally posted by Phoenix3068
No Marie, you're misunderstanding me which you proved with your last post on this matter.

The peak of strength is the absolute end of all existence. If existence ends there is nothing more to go from there. Nobody would be alive, even Xanatos himself would cease to exist as that is "Existence". If he has to actively try not to end it, that means that even at a lower estimate of power he can end existence. If you have power beyond the end of existence, that's power that cannot be used because before you reach it "Boom, everything including yourself is gone". That's why to me it seems "illogical". It's like a number that surpasses Infinity. Infinity is a continuation that will never end, so there can be no number that passes an infinite number since that number will never reach an end. Xanatos has worked many years on his character creation and he deserves to have a very powerful being I agree. I just don't understand the illogical stand from it and all that you're doing instead of helping me to understand it is telling me how I'm wrong for saying that it doesn't make sense. So can we stop discussing this unless you plan on helping me understand it and not telling me I'm wrong for not understanding it?

You want it explained? Fine.

As I understand it, the lack of logic as you find it, is in the fact that his ability implies power beyond the absolute end. That it is larger than the totality of existence. For this explanation of mine to make perfect sense, I will be using a number of examples, so that you understand the concept of it all.

1. Let us say that you suffer from severe depression. The world as you see it is cruel and merciless. When you find no purpose in things, suicide is to you a valid topic for consideration. What suicide is, in this example, is the ultimate end. You take your life, thereby ending yourself. It is the conclusion of the totality that is you. Now, this is a parallel to ending existence. To you, your life is your existence. Once it is through, it is no more. Now, it is easy to think that suicide is the end of it, because it ends your totality, but what it truly is, is the ability to affect the world after that you have ended it. This is speaking in the same terms as your perspective of going beyond what is a totality.

If life is a totality, which it is, then death is the conclusion of that totality. The end of it. Let us say, then, that you die. You take your own life and you end this totality. What happens next, is not nothing. Despite having executed this act of absolute, this conclusion of your totality, despite being no more, your suicide becomes a tremor that affect the world around you after your death.

That is, according to yourself, illogical. Because it is power beyond what you have the power to do. It is, according to you, illogical to affect something after you have died, because you have ended the totality that is your life and therefore your direct influence on the world. Now, I will allow you to argue the fact that there is a difference between "having power beyond the end" and "having power beyond the end", but that is for you to do. I am moving on to the next example.

2. Another example of a totality that is being violated, is Schrodinger's Cat. I love Schrodinger's Cat, and if you are uncertain of what it actually is, I will explain that before explaining why it is a totality violated. Schrodinger's Cat is an experiment that goes as followed: You place a living cat into a steel chamber, along with a device containing a vial of hydrocyanic acid. There is, in the chamber, a very small amount of hydrocyanic acid, a radioactive substance. If even a single atom of the substance decays during the test period, a relay mechanism will trip a hammer, which will, in turn, break the vial and kill the cat.

The idea of the experiment is that the observer cannot know whether or not an atom of the substance has decayed, and consequently, cannot know whether the vial has been broken, the hydrocyanic acid released, and the cat killed. Since we cannot know, according to quantum law, the cat is both dead and alive, in what is called a superposition of states.

Now, the reason this example is one of going beyond totality, is because both life and death are absolutes. No thing can be both, either it is alive, or it is dead. Sure, there are various definitions of being alive or dead, but that is a philosophical discussion that is virtually irrelevant to this discussion. SO, Schrodinger's Cat is a totality violated for the very simple reason that physics demand that the cat is considered both alive and dead. What this means, is that the cat has gone beyond the absolute concept of living, or being dead. Therefore the Schrodinger's Cat experiment has power beyond the end of things. Even if the cat is dead as stone, we do not have the power to assume that it is. Even if the cat is as live as you and me, we do not have the power to assume that it is not. Yet, it is one of the two.

In short: Life OR death = Totality. Schrodinger's Cat = Both.
Same note: A paradox is exactly the same thing. A violated totality.

I was actually going to bring up more examples, since I imagine this might not suffice to explain to you why it is not illogical to have power beyond what is a totality, but I am running out of time. So here is the short story of my conclusion:

Existence is not infinite, it is not without numbers. We simply do not have them. In addition to that, you who cherish logic should have already considered the fact that if Xanatos has power beyond existence, then Xanatos himself is beyond existence and therefore has the power to be, when existence is not. He becomes existence, should he wipe it out. What making an effort not ending existence truly means, is that Xanatos powers are growing out of control and he is having trouble keeping it all together. He is becoming part of that which is all things and I can only assume that the reason he is making an effort not to end all things, is because he has taken on more than he can truly handle. Existence is a big thing, and if anything, should you have the power to end it all, you sure as Hell don't want to fumble. So you make an effort not doing so, because you are not a hundred percent confident in your abilities.

I think she's looking for the story behind it, Marie. I'll orate that with her at a later time.

Thank you Xan. Thank you for trying to help me as well Marie.

Originally posted by XanatosForever
I think she's looking for the story behind it, Marie. I'll orate that with her at a later time.

Not really, but I will let it rest.

God..

At your service.

Careful now. I wouldn't want to see you smote. 😛

Originally posted by Super Marie 64
[b]At your service. [/B]

Good thing Matt's not here. I predict if he was, there would be a comment of God's Gender and the impossibility of it being such due to ideals =P But that's just my idea based on what I know of him lmao.

lmao so funny