Overworld: A Multidimensional RP

[Zero Hex]

@Lmpkio
Congrats on your passive-aggressiveness, accomplishing nothing instead of, you know, popping up to say "hey I think your criticisms/concerns/questions aren't valid because of X or Y" at the appropiate time. Day late and a buck short. BTW, you say you have no shame in calling people out but apparently you do or you'd tag, like so. This isn't really directed at you @jynmi88 because you actually talked and interacted and raised your points on what you liked about the game, like anyone capable of basic discussion.

Having said that, I still don't see an answer to my very simple question of how the multiversal aspect that the game sells itself upon is relevant, when nothing in the setting even makes it clear that it has crossover elements beyond the character sheet telling you that you can be whoever. Even forgetting how characters would or wouldn't be handled, I think that asking how the multiverse aspects work or what they even are and how they're present in a multiverse game is rather relevant to the setting. Don't you?

In simple abstract terms: if your setting hinges upon something then that something needs to be detailed on some level and presented as relevant to engage readers/players. By way of a simple, easy example, The Lord of the Rings was called that for specific, important reasons to the story that the reader is informed of.

[ArmorPlated]

@Lmpkio
Congrats on your passive-aggressiveness, accomplishing nothing instead of, you know, popping up to say "hey I think your criticisms/concerns/questions aren't valid because of X or Y" at the appropiate time. Day late and a buck short. BTW, you say you have no shame in calling people out but apparently you do or you'd tag, like so. This isn't really directed at you @jynmi88 because you actually talked and interacted and raised your points on what you liked about the game, like anyone capable of basic discussion.

Having said that, I still don't see an answer to my very simple question of how the multiversal aspect that the game sells itself upon is relevant, when nothing in the setting even makes it clear that it has crossover elements beyond the character sheet telling you that you can be whoever. Even forgetting how characters would or wouldn't be handled, I think that asking how the multiverse aspects work or what they even are and how they're present in a multiverse game is rather relevant to the setting. Don't you?

In simple abstract terms: if your setting hinges upon something then that something needs to be detailed on some level and presented as relevant to engage readers/players. By way of a simple, easy example, The Lord of the Rings was called that for specific, important reasons to the story that the reader is informed of.

@Zero Hex

You write like you're wound too tight. You should chill...

If you're enthusiastic about the idea, use guesswork and lay out what you think @joiedxvivre intends to do with the multiversal bits, then ask him how close you were. 's a better starting point than bluntly asking how everything is supposed to work, no hook.

P.S. betting the check is meant to span the course of a week, considering it was posted on a weekend. 1-4PM on a Sunday, if it's US time.

[jynmi88]

@Lmpkio

@jynmi88 (That quote regarding Archmage was a jab at him specifically).

What you just said however can be true depending on what the RP wants to be. Not everything will be included, but it all depends on the idea, how it is done, etc.

@Lmpkio

Ahhh. Sorry about that. I already took my melatonin for the night, and was a bit loopy when I read that *.*;

[Zero Hex]

@ArmorPlated
Consider you're quoting my answer to someone who's spent a few posts passive-aggressively trying to call me out without actually calling me out. If you don't have a problem with me I don't have a problem with you, I put up my views and provide reasons as to why I hold them and why/how I think they can improve upon something. Having setting discussion isn't difficult, everyone does it all the time.

On that note, here's the thing: why do guesswork on basic setting function at all when the person in charge of the setting can/should be able to provide the information? This seems counterproductive to me, like trying to guess at what specific things a ruleset allows or doesn't and asking how close you were instead of just having the rules available.

I'm not asking how everything is supposed to work, I don't want endgame spoilers, I'm asking how it even begins to work because there is nothing to go by. I'm also saying that usually the central aspect of a work (multidimensional in this case) tends to have a fair bit of focus and development around it to justify why the setting hinges upon it.

[CaptainSully]

@ArmorPlated
Consider you're quoting my answer to someone who's spent a few posts passive-aggressively trying to call me out without actually calling me out. If you don't have a problem with me I don't have a problem with you, I put up my views and provide reasons as to why I hold them and why/how I think they can improve upon something. Having setting discussion isn't difficult, everyone does it all the time.

On that note, here's the thing: why do guesswork on basic setting function at all when the person in charge of the setting can/should be able to provide the information? This seems counterproductive to me, like trying to guess at what specific things a ruleset allows or doesn't and asking how close you were instead of just having the rules available.

I'm not asking how everything is supposed to work, I don't want endgame spoilers, I'm asking how it even begins to work because there is nothing to go by. I'm also saying that usually the central aspect of a work (multidimensional in this case) tends to have a fair bit of focus and development around it to justify why the setting hinges upon it.

@Zero Hex

If you haven't gotten the answer you wanted, why are you still here?

[ArmorPlated]

@ArmorPlated
Consider you're quoting my answer to someone who's spent a few posts passive-aggressively trying to call me out without actually calling me out. If you don't have a problem with me I don't have a problem with you, I put up my views and provide reasons as to why I hold them and why/how I think they can improve upon something. Having setting discussion isn't difficult, everyone does it all the time.

On that note, here's the thing: why do guesswork on basic setting function at all when the person in charge of the setting can/should be able to provide the information? This seems counterproductive to me, like trying to guess at what specific things a ruleset allows or doesn't and asking how close you were instead of just having the rules available.

I'm not asking how everything is supposed to work, I don't want endgame spoilers, I'm asking how it even begins to work because there is nothing to go by. I'm also saying that usually the central aspect of a work (multidimensional in this case) tends to have a fair bit of focus and development around it to justify why the setting hinges upon it.

@Zero Hex

Fair enough, @Lmpkio is being pretty snide. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't let it get to you. You're both interested enough to post here, and @joiedxvivre's silence is making both of you worried, and that worry is bad enough that you two are jumping on each other. I've only talked to you because you were the only one on at the time.

Moving onto a bigger point though, you two are worried a lot more than you should be. it's an Interest check, not a fully formed RP yet, just a setting with some unique hooks and the smell of a plot. If this were an OOC setting up to open, worry would be warranted.

Another reason for there to be a gap in the "multiverse" portion is... there's about a million degrees of "how". the inevitability of things "just happening" because of infinitely branching posibilities, doomsday cult, interdimensional police. Maybe he wants to leave it open-ended to adapt to whatever characters are thrown at him. Maybe he expects us to contribute to the setting. (I've seen that last one work brilliantly.)

TL;DR: When he Lmpkio pops up, I'll tell him to chill too. no point in fighting when everything is this early. things might not be set in stone for a reason, and there's no telling if Joiedxvivre was run off or is just taking his time letting the check cook.

<Snipped quote by Zero Hex>
If you haven't gotten the answer you wanted, why are you still here?

@CaptainSully

Because no one's got any answers yet? Read the backlog.

[Sierra]

@ArmorPlated I will dare say that this ...

On my end, I'm also the opinion that the crossover aspect ultimately feels forced and tacked on one way or another, like you haven't given it enough relevance. Nothing in the setting given leads to or justifies multiversal interactions in any real way beyond you saying they can be a thing OOC, it reduces what you're using to pitch your game ("A Multidimensional RP") to a gimmick character select screen whereas usually dimension-hopping is kind of a big deal. It's a shame because I do think you might have something with the setting (cult trying to accelerate multiversal collapse/singularity) and more controlled non-sandbox structure.

@Zero Hex

... doesn't leave a lot of room for interpretation. While the concern expressed does have some merits, it would be very difficult to argue that the delivery wasn't off-puttingly blunt. And said delivery completely overshadows any validity to the point where I find it rather justified to be dismissive of it.

[jynmi88]

Wait, isn't the whole point of the multiverse aspect supposed to be a mundane, everyday type thing? I ask, because that's how most multiverse rps I've been in have been played.

[Zero Hex]

@ArmorPlated
Like I said if you say something to me I'll respond, for both good and bad. I'm not really worried so much as, trying to determine whether I should bother? Limited time and all, I'm sure everyone's been there, so I like knowing what I'm getting into or not and that does involve asking questions and seeing where the GM is going with this.

Here's the thing, as I see it, on your infinite possibilities multiverse: even when it's done like that it is actually defined and presented to the reader/player in some way. There's an acknowledgement of the setting as such, a way to frame the narrative within this and make the particular focus point relevant, usually even some level of defining how multiversal travel/interactions happens so the setting isn't just making new things up whenever. Michael Moorcock's moonbeam roads, RIFTS' holes in spacetime, etc.

Maybes don't have to be maybes because the GM is/should be in the position to define on some way the basic structure of his setting (you yourself say the given information as an OOC looking to start an IC would be cause for worry), and doing so does not mean it wouldn't be open ended for a huge variety of characters or that it wouldn't work with player contributions to the setting.

@Sierra
Okay but you acknowledge that there's merit to the points I brought up? Why would I be roundabout about a question or how I see a potential issue? I don't expect a GM to be roundabout in telling me things in their game are gonna be a specific way or another, but reasons are nice so I can understand why and how the game ticks and how to play to it. Again, setting/worldbuilding discussion. Ignoring my post for a moment, you would ignore valid concerns, questions or advice if you don't like how they were worded?

@CaptainSully
Plated covered what I would've told you.

[Lmpkio]

@Zero Hex
I'll acknowledge the fact that there are definitely details that ought to be ironed out and to be discussed, but it's the phrasing that you and Archmage used which to most of us seems more blunt than helpful. More bashing and forceful, than constructive criticism. Besides, the GM in question appears to be new on this site, so going entirely full hand as you've been doing can be rather off-putting. Perhaps if you guys said more regarding "Maybe you should concentrate on this and that..." or "I suggest maybe going more this route..." one question at a time, could the reception be treated better.

@ArmorPlated
Perhaps what I said earlier may have been a little more aggressive than one ought to like, but nor does a person starting out have to be faced with a heavy hand themselves. That also doesn't necessarily help when there's someone I happen to... not quite like.

Because so far, from what I've seen, as well as from a few others here, ironically they've seemed to be both rather aggressive in your suggestions, good intentioned or not. And I'm not very keen on people with such behavior (blame experiences in other similar situations).

Now could it be that I'm wrong to say that the GM has been discouraged because of this? Perhaps. I did mention he could be busy or he happened to have forgotten about the site, or perhaps something completely unexpected happened. In fact, I want my initial thoughts to be wrong. However, judging from what I've seen, there's enough evidence to place my current concern as a solid theory.

But again, I do acknowledge your concerns and I also agree more information ought to be provided. But don't overwhelm a newer GM with too many questions with a blunt after-taste. I believe the approach that @jynmi88 provided is the better choice in this situation.

[ArmorPlated]

<snip>

@Sierra

Why do you think I told him to chill? He's overzealous for sure, but starting an argument in an interest check isn't going to help anyone.

<Snip because there's too many quotes already.>

@Lmpkio

I agree that Jynmi's approach was the best of the bunch, but you being snide isn't any better than Hex being blunt.

<snipperino>

@jynmi88

No telling without OP laying it out for us all, though he mentions our characters eventually regaining memories of home like it's important, so multiverse characters may well be rare.

<Snop>

@Zero Hex

OK, maybe you're not exactly worried, but you are interested enough to warrant continual posting. Yes, the OP leaves a lot of information hanging, but the only real solution is to wait for more info. Arguments and debates with other potential players is pointless at best, detrimental at worst.

I don't understand Sierra's concerns about bluntness either, but best just to leave it as a weird communication issue.

Edit: Snipped all the quotes to avoid Wall-O-Quotes

[Archmage MC]

@Lmpkio

<Snipped quote by Lmpkio>

Ahhh. Sorry about that. I already took my melatonin for the night, and was a bit loopy when I read that *.*;

@jynmi88

FYi Lmpkio hates me for calling Overwatch a scam at one point and has never let it go ever. So yeah.

And now he seems to wanna stir up something that was mostly settled since someone is biting on his trolling, wonderful. @Zero Hex I'd recommend you just ignore him too.

[Lmpkio]

@Archmage MC That's not necessarily the reason. There's much more legitamate reasons to it. But I will not waste time in explaining them here.

Edit: Must I also add that whole "scam" thing was presented inside an Overwatch Roleplay, with you having absolutely no interest in joining other than giving out a very unpopular opinion. No idea what goal you were trying to accomplish other then stinking the air, or so it seemed.

[Zero Hex]

@Lmpkio
Alright, so it's the wording you've issue with rather than the actual content of the points I raised? While yes, it is dry and straightforward to keep things simple, how was my criticism not constructive? I point out things I feel can be improved upon, explain why I feel the way I do and propose ways I believe it can be worked on, I've even provided a few examples of relevant works. I can't control whether other people have their own questions, I just put down mine. As for the GM being new to the site, this is true, but considering he said he'd had this in mind for five years and implied D&D experience I figured a few questions wouldn't be a problem.

@ArmorPlated
That's fair, but in my own experience it's usually best to just ask? A GM can tell their players what the game they're playing is like/about or they haven't considered this or that and it gets ironed out, or just say that's important for later. I don't think discussion is pointless in that way, at least not as long as the players have a leg to stand on with their points, it can help polish a game or add to its setting consistently if mined for ideas.

@Archmage MC
Eh, if you've got issues work it out with the guy, you know? That's not on me, I'm just here raising and defending my points. I don't think Overwatch is a scam, not really more than any given MMO which for full disclosure I am biased against, but I do think it's creatively soulless as far as lore and character design is concerned.