Creating a Kardashev scale for superpowers

So I recently took a stab at creating a somewhat scientifically minded scale to rank superhumans that I'm planning on implementing in a setting where science = superpowers. I thought I'd share it and see if I could get anyone's opinions. Comments on what you think/ways you think it could be approved are appreciated!

Ignore the references to numbers and "Archetypes", those are just setting details I didn't feel like taking time to edit out.

edited 20th Apr '14 5:36:40 PM by KSPAM

The only thing that strikes me right off is "what do you mean by "tactical value?" Because you don't seem to be using it in any consistent manner.

It's not entirely consistent because after 5, comparisons that would make sense according to modern sensibilities begin to break down (since we as a species have not yet met or exceeded a value of 6). Basically, think of 7 as meaning that, in a war between multiple post-singularity societies, an individual with powers on this scale would have the military value of an entire society. They would be a faction unto themselves.

edited 20th Apr '14 8:43:56 AM by KSPAM

Ha. Dr Krieger.

I tried implementing a power scale for my superhumans. Eventually did away with it for general use. Kept it for the government paper pushers.

Class 1-10, with there being only three living and one deceased Class 10s. Two of the living and the dead one are just absurdly powerful super-strength and applicable secondary superpowers. The last one has a passive power that only really affects himself, but is of literally astronomical scale. It's a Blessed with Suck kind of power.

edited 20th Apr '14 1:11:33 PM by Eagal

How do they check for these superpowers? At the high end, using them once will set off red flags and get you marked - but at the low end? The numbers given just make me think this was written to describe the One Piece or Giant Robo (OVA) worlds, with someone like Captain America still falling under Level 0 (as he typically does not have superhuman powers, but 'physically peak human' will trump superpowers in a wide variety of circumstances).

There is also a sudden leap between the comparisons given for levels 5 and 6 - it goes from something we'd understand in real life, to fictional. I think 6 could be toned down to 'planetary strategic defense value', 7 could be 'local space strategic defense', 8 could be 'solar system strategic defense', and so on. 'Tactical value' is a meaningless phrase past a certain point - what possible tactics would they need to employ, other than showing up and saying 'Hi y'all, I'm a Level Seven', when they can fight a world war single-handedly?

(Oh, and someone let Worlder know about this. Between this and the 'Spark of Aquarius' categorization system, it covers the whole gamut.)

do you have any additional scales to go with this?

like, i assume for scientists aiming for accuracy, as long as they arent single-mindedly focused on the military applications and/or threats of each category, i'd think they'd use a series of scales to properly categorize these superheroes.

something like scales for versatility, mundane vs fantastical, large scale vs small scale, the calculated ease in which they can be taken down in a worst case scenario...

as deus said, someone actually capable of taking out the heavy weights of the setting while remaining a more or less unaltered human (which, as far as i know, isnt exactly unheard of in superhero verses) would end up firmly on the low end of the scale, meaning the scale is not really telling the reader a lot of useful information. as far as ranking goes, i think it would work better if the various superheroes were ranked in multiple aspects, rather than one, single scale.

This is true, but the same can and is often said of the Kardashev scale in that it only judges a civilization by its power output rather than level of technological advancement. That being said, the reason this chart is primarily military is the scientists who designed it were (a) primarily in the employ of someone who was and is secretly a wannabe dictator and (b) currently subject to the same miserable living conditions as everyone else at the time i.e. not knowing when titanic alien gods from another universe were going to go under the radar using technology and scientific principles we're not even close to understanding and then slide into our solar system to destroy everything we know and love, up to and including the final line of defense separating us between life and extinction. So they kinda have a right to be militarily-minded.

That being said, I think I will take the suggestion and change categories 6-10 so the description is less oblique. "Planetary defense" and "solar system defense" seem a lot more matter-of-fact and to the point then comparing them to the military power of a society whose capabilities are, by definition, unknowable.

EDIT: @Deus Denuo: As for how these individuals have been classified... the answer is they haven't, and in the cases where they have, very carefully. Generally speaking anything beyond a Category 7 doesn't exist on Earth, no Category 9s are known to exist, and the entity classified as Category 10 is entirely hypothetical, as there isn't even enough information surrounding it to confirm its existence. The only twelve Category 8s, who are by default the most powerful things this scale has been able to reasonably measure, are the aforementioned alien gods.

edited 20th Apr '14 5:30:02 PM by KSPAM

The Kardashev scale is actually quite nifty because it simply says you have to be high-tech, it doesn't limit what sort of technology you have, f.e. it doesn't say you have to have space-travel to get to type 1, since you could quite easily make the jump by tapping the forces of continental drift, which requires a whole different set of technologies.

Indeed. It's also how TTGL can have humanity be a Class IV civilization and still have a final battle where giant robots punching each other are relevant

I see. Yeah, that makes sense.

Moving on...

Even if you can't make comparisons for them, Levels 9 and 10 could be explained as happening so far above the ability of anyone using the scale to confirm (this was used as the explanation for why Humans hadn't noticed the Time War). The ability to move galaxies and star systems, and the ability to shift an entire universe - or straight-up destroy them, would also qualify I think. Otherwise there's really no difference between them, and if there's no difference then there's no reason to have a 10-point scale. So... Is bumping everything up a Level an option, such that Level 0 or 0.5 becomes Level 1?

Further justification: This is a scale for superhumans with superpowers, not whether one has superpowers or not. Simply being on the scale at all denotes that one has superpowers, or is on the same level as those who do, so there's not actually a huge need for a zero-level 'no powers' classification when the examples given are generally in terms of combat worth.

Ah, I should clarify on that. The text for 9 and 10 are intentionally vague because there aren't any possible comparisons you can make without resorting to fiction. That and no one in-universe has ever actually measured or witnessed something with that much power.

But from a meta-perspective, what a Cat. 9 actually means is a superhuman with powers capable of affecting, manipulating, or destroying an entire universe (to clarify, someone capable of causing a false vacuum collapse would not be a Cat. 9, mostly because they're not affecting the entire universe simultaneously and are only capable of recreating the trigger event which alters the universe, not actually altering it themselves). You could consider them a threat to numerous universes. A Cat. 10 is a threat to all universes. A superhuman so powerful they're capable of affecting an entire multiverse, and even collections of multiverses.

You see how comparisons begin to break down without resorting to fiction?

edited 21st Apr '14 8:41:45 AM by KSPAM

Not really. Everything 0.5 (maybe 1) and above are fictional by definition; if there can be real-world comparisons for the first few, it should be possible to make it hold for the last few. The trick, I think, is to find a description that will sound 'real' even in a fictional world, or at least one that doesn't sound like funding ran out as the scientists creating the list got to the end.

'Capable of simultaneous attack on all space and time' and 'Capable of instigating simultaneous reality collapse of the/all universe(s)' aren't too hard to follow as descriptions. The problem that I see here - the only one left, I should stress, as it seems otherwise complete and practical to me - is that the descriptions aren't 'scientific' enough. The whole point of a classification system is to assign language to a thing or concept, and that's not happening sufficiently in the later levels.

On a slightly different note, there's 'immeasurable' in Level 10. The size of the universe is generally given as a radius of 45-6 billion light years, but that's phrased as "the size of the observable universe" - we take the fact that there's a limit to what we can measure in stride, and only note what we can and do know. Since 10 is supposed to be continuing rather than limiting (Level 9 is pretty much 9.0 to 9.99999 in comparison), 'limitless' might be a better word. There's no Level 11 or 12 because it's already encompassed by Level 10, if I'm understanding it correctly.

Forgive me for dropping this ball but isn't the problem with creating a Kardashev scale for individuals that the Kardashev Scale specifically measures the energy output of entire civilizations? I mean, a superpowered character could easily outmatch a Type 1 or higher civilization with innate or aquired powers that aren't even technological in nature. Seems like superpowered individuals should be on a totally different scale. Otherwise it's like trying to judge the sociological and cultural evolution of a society based on one individual.

edited 13th May '14 6:38:08 AM by fulltimeD

Also "God like" is a very relative cultural term. The Greek Gods' attributes for example were nowhere near the omniscience ascribed to the Abrahamic God.

edited 14th May '14 12:08:16 PM by fulltimeD