Is dimensional travel a prerequisite to reach the DBT?

[Zergplex]

Very random thought to interject into your discussion, I apoligize if it's irrelevent.

...and I already invalidated my theory before I even finished typing it. I'll still post it though, if only because something salvageable might come from it.

For the Dream Devourer to exist Lavos must have been killed in a timeline somewhere, even if it's not the current timeline you are in. The gate to 1999AD is a temporal gate that drops you directly in front of Lavos. A major event to the time stream must happen for dimension travel to exist. Could the bucket gate have taken you to 1999AD but across the dimensions, to 1999AD after Chrono and his crew kill Lavos in that dimension. The death of Lavos would provide be the textbook example of a 'significant event' in the timeline, allowing for the second gate to the DBT to appear. We appear outside of the 'Time's Eclipse' 1999AD gate in what appears to be the 'pocket dimension' Lavos uses (I hate saying pocket dimension as I am not a fan of the theory, but it's an easy way to describe Lavos and the Mammon Machine's combat background).

Now to refute my theory: Why the heck could we travel dimensions using the bucket gate. I'm adding needless complexity where it isn't needed. I still think the first gate must be leading to the 'pocket dimension' where Lavos is already dead to take the second gate. There has to be some significance to the second gate you have to take, otherwise they would have just ported you directly to the DBT.

[chrono eric]

If I'm following where you're going with this; wasn't the Magus in the DBT a different instance than the one in the CT party? If so, then whether Amulet and Pendent are the same is somewhat irrelevant -- Magus[2] was already in the DBT to begin with. Not to mention, Magus[2] mentioned that Crono and co. may not be from the same dimension as them, so, in that case, the two Maguses may not share the same experiences. Which includes whether Magus[2] had Schala's pendent or not.

It is somewhat relevant. If it is somehow shown (either through some future Kato interview or whatever) that DBT Magus is indeed future Magus from the party, then it would be relevant.

However, on the flip side of things, if we are to consider the fact that DBT Magus is from another dimension from the party then whether or not he has Schala's amulet on him is unknown. However, we could assume that he doesn't since he was searching for Schala all along and finally found her in the DBT. Since she has her own amulet with her in the DBT, where would the second one come from?

[BROJ]

Since she has her own amulet with her in the DBT, where would the second one come from?

The same way there are two in Crono's dimension(i.e. one with Marle and one with Schala).

[Eske]

Aha!  The amulet Magus wears IS NOT the same as the Pendant.   Remember that she gives him the amulet in his room - and then opens the sealed door with her own pendant in front of the party.

Schala's Amulet and Schala's Pendant are two different objects. One is a key item and the other is an accessory that prevents status ailments.  There is no evidence in the game whatsoever to suggest that Magus "found" the pendant on his own - especially now that we know Schala was pulled into the DBT and the new pendant is with Kid.

Schala's pendant is not a necessity.

If I'm following where you're going with this; wasn't the Magus in the DBT a different instance than the one in the CT party? If so, then whether Amulet and Pendent are the same is somewhat irrelevant -- Magus[2] was already in the DBT to begin with. Not to mention, Magus[2] mentioned that Crono and co. may not be from the same dimension as them, so, in that case, the two Maguses may not share the same experiences. Which includes whether Magus[2] had Schala's pendent or not.

It would make sense for him to be the Magus from the original party the player uses to complete the game.  But I suppose it could be any Magus.   Perhaps this Magus somehow got the pendant.  But then again, that is purely speculation.

Do we really have to cast aside the Magus example because we can't prove that he didn't have the pendant?
If so, we could be just as strict with Compendium theories, citing in game events that violate their properties.  That would bring us right back to square one.    The game doesn't say that he has the pendant, nor does it imply some need for the pendant.      It's like saying that Magus could rule the world in his dimension, or might have the Rainbow sword as a backup -- I can't prove that he doesn't but I don't have to.  It isn't stated or implied so the burden of proof is on the person who suggests it.  Coincidences between other events do not count as proof because our dimensional travel sample size is too small (not to mention too many variables).

[chrono eric]

The same way there are two in Crono's dimension(i.e. one with Marle and one with Schala).

Well, to clarify, there is only one in Crono's dimension but it can exist at the same time as a past version of itself, therefore giving the illusion that there are two.

In the original timeline, Schala likely escaped the palace with her pendant and it was passed down through the Guardia royal family to Marle. Marle travels back in time and meets Schala - now you have a future and past version of the pendant existing side by side in the same time period.

Now, because DBT Magus says that "in your dimension, we may never have travelled together" (or something along those lines) this suggests that in his dimension they did travel together. But it doesn't matter. If they didn't, why would he have Marle's pendant? And if they did, why would Marle give him her pendant?

Because we don't know whether or not he has it, we can't assume that he has it and use DBT Magus as another example of pendant related DBT travel.

[BROJ]

The same way there are two in Crono's dimension(i.e. one with Marle and one with Schala).

Well, to clarify, there is only one in Crono's dimension but it can exist at the same time as a past version of itself, therefore giving the illusion that there are two.

In the original timeline, Schala likely escaped the palace with her pendant and it was passed down through the Guardia royal family to Marle. Marle travels back in time and meets Schala - now you have a future and past version of the pendant existing side by side in the same time period.

Now, because DBT Magus says that "in your dimension, we may never have travelled together" (or something along those lines) this suggests that in his dimension they did travel together. But it doesn't matter. If they didn't, why would he have Marle's pendant? And if they did, why would Marle give him her pendant?

Because we don't know whether or not he has it, we can't assume that he has it and use DBT Magus as another example of pendant related DBT travel.

I'm not saying anything of the like -- for me to take that position conclusively would be begging the question. What I said was that it was one of the possibilities. My aim is that it is ultimately inconclusive.

[chrono eric]

My aim is that it is ultimately inconclusive.

Agreed. Until we know more, DBT Magus is pretty much useless for our theory unless we assume that he doesn't have Schala's amulet - which is actually a very fair assumption I think since there would be no reason that he would.

EDIT: God damn I just realized something! I was wrong to say that in Chrono Cross Schala's pendant is present when you access the DBT. It doesn't have to be! Kid's amulet is not the same thing as Schala's pendant. She keeps Schala's pendant on her at all times and it never becomes a Key Item in the inventory - only her amulet does. The Astral Amulet is important for dimensional travel, yes - and Schala's pendant itself has temporal power to it, yes - but you don't need Kid in your party when you travel to the DBT and fight the Time Devourer.

This I think is a nail in the coffin right here. Schala's pendant is not necessary to access the DBT.

Which is funny, because right before I realized this I thought of another instance of DBT travel that involved Schala's pendant - when Kid appeared in Guardia Forest presumably from the DBT with Schala's pendant around her neck. But I think that above example shows the pendant is unnecessary.

[utunnels]

I'm confused.
But does Time Egg has more than 3 different effects in 3 different games?
Gee, we even don't know what it is made from.

[Zergplex]

Well we don't even know if the Time Egg is the same thing across all the games. We know it has a similar effect, but not if Gaspar's Time Egg and Balthasar's Time Egg are the same thing (or Lucca's incomplete one for that matter). Visually they are very differant, but art has been changed before so that not the best of proof.

[chrono eric]

Yes, but for the sake of our argument we can treat the Time Egg's as if they are similar since they all do have some power over time.

So we can say that in  the 3 main instances of Time Travel to the DBT, a Time Egg was used in only one of those (Chrono Cross). So it's likely not a requirement to travel to the DBT. In Cross it only opens the Gate to the DBT after all. Perhaps a Gate Key could have done the same thing?

Similarly, as I showed above, Schala's pendant is present in two of those cases (but not in Cross as we originally thought) so it holds more favor as being necessary to travel to the DBT.

Likewise, dimensional travel occurring beforehand happened in two of the cases of travel to the DBT, so it has an equal probability as Schala's pendant of being important.

Now, if the Time Egg that Belthesar gives the party in Cross is actually made out of Dreamstone, then one could say that some Dreamstone artifact was present in all three instances of travel to the DBT. Perhaps it has a similar effect as Schala's pendant, which is also made from Dreamstone and also has power over time.

EDIT: I just realized that in the New Ocean Palace incident, Schala uses the last of her Pendant's energy to warp the party away to safety, which leaves her Pendant drained and worthless. Can it even be considered as being "present" during her travel to the DBT then, since it is a non-functional artifact at that point?

[Zergplex]

I think you are missing a very important point. Could the pendant and the time egg both be fulfilling the role in dimensional travel, and one of which is necessary for travel to the DBT.

Or we could conclude that different methods of traveling to the DBT require different things. You have to move between time and dimensions to get to the DBT. The dimensional anomaly in CC combined with the Time controlling Time Egg allows travel to the DBT. Could a Time Gate in CT combined with a dimensional artifact (not sure how the pendant would be one, but go with me on this for the theory for a moment) be the method that you go to the DBT in CT:DS. In this theory it would require something that allows you to skip between time and dimensions, not simply one or the other.

Of course the major hole in this theory is that the CT:DS team doesn't have a dimensional item (as the Lost Sanctum is not a prerequisite, toehrwise I could count that).

[chrono eric]

I think you are missing a very important point. Could the pendant and the time egg both be fulfilling the role in dimensional travel, and one of which is necessary for travel to the DBT.

This is what I brought up above, on the possibility that both the Pendant and the Time Egg, potentially both being made from Dreamstone, having similar properties.

Or we could conclude that different methods of traveling to the DBT require different things.

This would make this unnecessarily complicated I think, and we would never be able to establish some theory about what is required to access the DBT. Our best bet is to assume that all travel to the DBT has the same requirements, except perhaps in Schala's case since the Ocean Palace incident was anomalous.

[Eske]

Is my earlier explanation for Schala's entry unacceptable?  I saw that Radical Dreamers has its version of what happens to Schala - but in CC, Lavos does "pull" her to him as he is being shunted/after he is shunted to the DBT, right?  (hopefully)

[chrono eric]

No, your answer is acceptable which is what I was trying to say - the Schala case shouldn't count as "true" entry to the DBT because of it. And because Radical Dreamers is an alternate universe, it can't be considered as canon for these purposes.

So we have three main examples of entry to the DBT and one that is an exception (Schala's case).

The other three are - 1) Entry in Cross, 2) Entry in Trigger, and 3) Entry by DBT Magus in Trigger which we know next to nothing about (for now).