Talk:Omni-Creator/@comment-25716369-20170428053635/@comment-4867780-20170510222222

Omnipotence is always in-universe because it runs on pure Plot Power. Put an Omnipotent in the story of another writer, and suddenly it isn't Omnipotent anymore - because it no longer has the writer's backing. Omnipotence is in-universe because for all intents and purposes, it simply cannot be anything else.

The point of Omni-Creator is the reflection it inspires in readers, as explained before. It doesn't claim undue dominion over other people's works like Patapotence would, it suggests the idea that different entities may actually be the same. Which can be freely rejected by any writer, just by saying "my Omnipotent is an independent being", at which point Omni-Creator is contradicted and crumbles for the wild theory it is.

Patapotence is basically throwing "my character stomps all yours and runs your place people". It would essentially use Omnipotence's "screw logic" motto to invade other readers/writer' fictional privacy and psychologically oppress them into submissiveness, except this time witout any kind of credible justification (Omnipotence relies on the writer's backing, Patapotence can't since you don't write others' stories), making it as internally incoherent as it is externally toxic.

No matter how you look at it, it's just a bad idea ^ ^;