User talk:The Holder Of True Omnipotence

https://discord.gg/TfQMH

No it cannot.

It cannot slice through reality, time, space, omnipresential entites or dimensions.

It literally says right on the wikia that all it does is give you the ability to kill gods. There is nothing at all the states it can cut through everything.

Sorry, but it doesn't count.SageM (talk) 22:39, October 18, 2017 (UTC)SageM

When you add to Users, series should be in italics. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:52, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

On the right side of Edit area is Add features and media, first icon on left is photo. It's pretty clear after that. --Kuopiofi (talk) 05:23, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Alphabetical order. --Kuopiofi (talk) 18:56, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Its not considered an attack
Undoing actions is not considered an attack. its considered a form of defense.

Attacks are considered moves that actually harm the target. All that GER does is bring actions to 0. His form of attack is simply a normal attack, its not considered absolute in any way.

So no, he is not a user of absolute attack.SageM (talk) 03:43, October 20, 2017 (UTC)SageM

ending or stopping a process is still not considered an attack.

An attack actually has to actually cause a form of physical harm, preventing something from happening isn't considered harm, its the exact opposite of harm.

GER is an absolute defense stand, end of story.SageM (talk) 04:02, October 20, 2017 (UTC)SageM

The first limitation pretty much covers that already.SageM (talk) 19:29, October 22, 2017 (UTC)SageM

it doesn't matter.

I am the one that made the page, and I don't believe it counts as a limitation as the first one basically covers it.

Talk with Kuo on the matter, as he has final say on everything, as he is the main admin not Imouto.SageM (talk) 19:34, October 22, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Are you basing this idea of "Truth" on something actual or is it just something you made?

Sorry if that comes out bluntly/unclear, pretty late here so I'm getting fuzzy. --Kuopiofi (talk) 20:10, October 22, 2017 (UTC)

Thats not what the power is based on.
Thats only one definition of a principle, the other is the original foundation or basis for something. Which is what the power is actually based on.

Your thinking of the Principle as the foundation for a system of belief. Which is not what the power is based on.

Principles in Principle Manipulation are based on the foundation and basis for something, not the fundamental truth. that is Axiom Manipulation.

So no, its not an accurate limitation.SageM (talk) 23:38, October 22, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Did you explain to Imouto how you defined that before she said yes?

That said, I have to agree with SageM about Axiom Manipulation. --Kuopiofi (talk) 04:18, October 23, 2017 (UTC)

Greetings
Hello! How Are You Doing? David (talk) 16:50, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

Their the exact same power, the only real difference between the two is the number of attacks one can evade.

Other then that, there is no major difference between the two powers.SageM (talk) 04:00, November 9, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Aside the little detail that DE wasn't even on the WE page? As a rule, no adding Embodiments, Lordships and few other powers as Sub-powers of other powers. That's why I added them into Associations. --Kuopiofi (talk) 22:02, November 11, 2017 (UTC)

Omnipotence = Metapotence. MP is just simplified version of OP. --Kuopiofi (talk) 08:55, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

No its not. Stop changing the definition of the powers.

You are changing the powers based on your opinion of how they work, which is against the rules of the wikia.

They would have been changed back even if I didn't do anything.

Your making the powers more powerful then they actually are. Don't do it again please.SageM (talk) 18:50, November 14, 2017 (UTC)SageM

It doesn't matter what you think on this. Thats how its defined as. And if you changed it, it would only be changed back in the end.

It might be your cup of tea, but your just going to have to live with it because thats simply how it works. Some powers are defined differently then others and the admins and the page creators have final say on the matter, and thats simply how they decided to make the page.

So try to keep that in mind in the future.SageM (talk) 19:42, November 14, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Series isn't optional in Gallery/Users.

Links go to Users, not to Gallery. --Kuopiofi (talk) 20:33, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Explain that to SageM. --Kuopiofi (talk) 06:26, November 15, 2017 (UTC)

They don't embody their aspects.
The gems do not embody their aspects. And there is no mention anywhere that they do. You are making stuff up.

I checked both the marvel wikia and wikipedia and the word embodied or representation is never used once.

They are not embodiments.

Double check your facts next time you post something. Because its not true in this case.SageM (talk) 07:14, November 15, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Read the marvel page on the infinity gems, not once is it mentioned they represent there aspects.

And just because they were originally Nemesis, doesn't mean that they embody anything now.

They simply control the aspects they are named after, they don't embody them and they never did.

If they truly embodied them like you say, then their destruction during the Incursions should have wiped out their aspects from existence.

They only control them. Sorry but they remain off the embodiments page.SageM (talk) 08:26, November 15, 2017 (UTC)SageM

No, the mind gem doesn't have Omnipathy. Its limited to only a single universe. Omnipathy is the power to be telepathically connected to infinite minds across all universes.

Omnipathy- The power read, sense, communicate with, and control an infinite number of minds across all universes, planes and dimensions

Cosmic Telepathy- The power to read/sense, communicate with and/or affect minds on a cosmic scale

When has the Mind Gem ever been shown to effect minds on a multiversal or omniversal scale?

Its nothing but cosmic telepathy. no more, no less.SageM (talk) 20:57, November 15, 2017 (UTC)SageM

You can't restore something that has ended.
Once something has ended, it can never be restored. As there is nothing left to restore. Conclusion Dominace trumps Absolute Restoration.

After all, if something has ended then what is there left to restore?

Absolute Restoration is not a limitation and it never will be.

And that limitation is already covered by the existing limitations. So there is no need for it.SageM (talk) 02:36, November 21, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Its right here-

"Users of Conceptual Attacks and Reality Warping may be able to affect the user.

Certain substances/energies may be un-phasable"

As you can see its unnecessary.SageM (talk) 02:39, November 21, 2017 (UTC)SageM

i'm not going to argue about this anymore. The limitation stays. Don't remove it again.SageM (talk) 04:39, November 22, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Also stop adding unnecessary limitations to the various powers. As most of them not only don't fit the power, but they are either already covered by existing limitations or they are unnecessary.

Meaning its totally unnecessary to add omnipotent beings as a limitation, as thats already considered a limitation for every power on here. So adding it every power is not only pointless but also against the rules.SageM (talk) 04:42, November 22, 2017 (UTC)SageM

The power doesn't work on an omnipotent scale though. As Protege didn't actually become the new AAO.SageM (talk) 20:27, November 27, 2017 (UTC)SageM

The official position on the beyonder as described on the Marvel wikia doesn't list him as Omnipotent.

In fact the only true omnipotent being in marvel is the One-Above-All, and he has always been the only true omnipotent.

Thus the edit is not valid. It would only be valid if he truly had the powers of the One-Above-All.

Also Ultipotence would already be covered by Nigh-Omnipotence, so there is no need for ultipotence at all.SageM (talk) 05:15, November 28, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Transcending all concepts means that you transcend everything by definition.

Without concepts to define you, you are beyond everything. Concepts are how everything that exists is defined, without them you are beyond anything and everything.

So yes, its completely unnecessary.SageM (talk) 02:54, November 30, 2017 (UTC)SageM

It doesn't matter, thats how the power is defined. And it will remain that way.SageM (talk) 05:33, November 30, 2017 (UTC)SageM

And you are wrong.

Everything is defined by a concept. Nothing could exist without concepts.

Time is considered a concept and without it nothing we know of would be able to exist, as everything would exist in a single moment or everything would happen all at once.

Without the concepts of boundaries everything would exist as a single object, and thus we would no longer exist as separate beings.

So you are wrong when you say concepts don't define everything. Because without them, we wouldn't even be here.

Without any form of concept, perspective or logic to define you, how would you truly exist?SageM (talk) 05:38, November 30, 2017 (UTC)SageM

Think about this for a second, if all concepts disappeared from the universe, then how would the universe function?

Answer- It couldn't. there would be nothing left to define anything. It would be the same as total non-existence.

You couldn't recognize anything nor recognize yourself, you wouldn't be able to say this is "Me" or say that is "Mine" or anything else along those lines. Because nothing could be defined any longer.

Sorry, but when you get down to it. Without any concepts nothing could or would exist.

And Principles only apply to certain things, not everything has them. So it wouldn't matter in the end.SageM (talk) 05:51, November 30, 2017 (UTC)SageM