Well, souls can cease to exist if God dies. I think they should be in nigh-indestructibility and change the name to souls from ghosts. SeraphLucifer (talk) 15:47, June 3, 2016 (UTC)SeraphLucifer

"End of reality" is not a weakness. At least not for any specific type of being. It's like saying the destruction of the planet is a weakness for humans.

Orion (T-B-C) 15:56, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

It's a weakness and yes, the destruction of the planet is a weakness for humans. There is nothing wrong with it. Lambda1 (talk) 15:58, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Should we also list "end of humanity" as a weakness for angels, since it would render them unable to take on vessels? You don't think that's even a little bit ridiculous?
Orion (T-B-C) 16:02, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
Don't forget what the topic of the indestructibility page is, how an entity can be destroyed, which certainly includes all possibilities, including events. The thing is that souls have not many weaknesses, so it's even more important to enumerate each one they have. Angels have plenty of other weaknesses, you could also add "end of humanity" to the page, I don't mind, but it wouldn't be neccessary. Lambda1 (talk) 16:07, June 3, 2016 (UTC)
My point is that "weakness", in this context, implies weaknesses that are specific to each type of being. You don't say humans are vulnerable to the destruction of the planet, because that would annihilate everything else as well. Nothing can survive the end of reality, because reality is a necessity for everything else to exist.
Orion (T-B-C) 16:11, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

End of Reality

I think we shouldn't list end of reality as a weakness to pages. However if reality ends, souls cease to exist and that makes them nigh-indestructable. SeraphLucifer (talk) 16:12, June 3, 2016 (UTC)SeraphLucifer

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.