ArenaSnow

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

The weather is absolutely horrible here. Like, wtf.

Persistent World

That's the idea to just have it rewritten as opposed to gotten rid of. I don't RP there so my comments about it have come from players who have RP there and the player Normie said that the persistent world had an overarching story that all participants were writing under. This is what led me to believe that it wasn't a multiverse because a multiverse has multiple stories than just one.

@Holy Soldier

Normie gives you what it 'should' be. In practice, there is no overarching story (though they may be working on it) and only a couple threads exist to do their own thing. There simply isn't enough content. In future posts, it may be best to split EH from the multiverse idea, as they are different concepts. I'd be willing to do that if you are.

The purpose of the broad, unrestricted multiverse is to appease all types of players and all characters they would ever want to create. The multiverse is called the multiverse because it is multiple universes that "interact." All conflict and drama that happens is cross-dimension. Players who want their own personal story can RP that out and if someone tries to barge in on it, then just like regular RP etiquette, they ask them to step out.

This is literally the main sections in a nutshell.
- Main sections cater to all forms of characters with their own worlds/verses
- GMs can cross interact if they wish (important point)
- Players do their own personal stories without risk of being barged in if they don't want to
- If they want to cross concepts, the PM box is freely accessible for GMs to communicate.

If the player designed their swordsman to be able to deflect gunfire with his sword or have the armor to guard him against sci-fi genre weaponry, then they would do just fine. Again, this is all dependent on the players and how they design their characters. The Multiverse combines genre like a high fantasy/final fantasy universe. You could play a Medieval Knight versus a fleet of space ships and have him use magic to wipe them all out. It puts no restriction on the imagination of the writers.

Which (besides the sheer ridiculousness of it which people can explore in their own threads without bringing that absurdity to a larger community) can be done as is. If people feel like it. Probably in the free section.

No one is ever too powerful in the Multiverse. Also, I forgot to mention. The rules and structure are decided by those who join those kingdoms, nations, clans, factions, armada, etc. Those who don't join are lawless, literally. Whether they become vigilantes or terrorists or just sellswords, hired gun, etc. is up to the writers.

Such an atmosphere of no structure I believe should be reserved to the free section. It may sound elitist, but I simply do not want to see this, nor would I ever give my support to people being able to go in without rules and do whatever they want. It may work on other forums, but I cannot see a degree of success happening on this one.

The Multiverse was just to spare the EH from being deleted and to instead, broaden it.

Broadening it would only serve the purpose of making it even less relevant. Barely any structure now, becoming no structure, would leave zero acceptable room to maintain it as a unique section. Also, it does not need to be deleted, as the appropriate, active threads could be merged into the main sections or put into an archive.

Persistent World

Will keep this short - Don't think it will work

Would like to see - Nation RP redone to "Developing Universe" Section with multiple sub sections: World, Nation, Other & Checks. Just combine bascially combing the areas of E.H., NRP, and WB and leave it open to a larger versatility. Might actually give a single section the numbers it is looking for to succeed.

@Lady Amalthea

While Nation RP surviving as a concept is debatable, given its low use at the moment, I wouldn't agree with merging it into a 'developing universe' on any basis that suggest that they're actually a fit. NRP roleplays have their own canons. 'Developing Universe' (done in a way to justify being split from the main sections) would be too universal.

Persistent World

Persistent World ideas are tricky things, and in this case, I must disagree again.

One thing that was slightly useful to me in the first place, and part of why I didn't raise a shit on the first suggestion of EH (though I never really supported it, either), is the fact it had structure. Everything was connected and could be connected, there were limits, there was a general thing going on. The suggestion is now literally what exists at the moment, because EH no longer has the structure. All the things you mention could be done with the current structure. While it may come out better if the entire PW forum was rewritten to make a clear indication (if that route was run through), that this is what the people there want.

But even if it is rewritten, I still would not be in favor. Because what you suggest is effectively what exists now, and I fundamentally disagree with a broad, unrestricted multiverse. It serves no purpose. In a sense, the current forums are literally the same thing. If a couple GMs want to link and create a multiverse, they will do that. If they don't want people to interfere with their canon/multiverse, they can, and will do that too. If they want to make a true Persistant World, which is distinct from a multiverse, then the GMs can link their canons. None of that justifies the creation and maintenance of a unique forum.

I would instead consider it viable if the idea was approached with more unity and structure, not only in general rules and "what you do here might affect something elsewhere", but also in genre. A balance should be achieved. Yes, players need flexibility. That's the core of the idea. But it also requires structure and unity, not only in terms of timeline, but also in things like power level and technology (in my opinion and based on how the site works, especially the community base). A specific fantasy PW would make it easier to avoid a fairly average swordsmen being absolutely obliterated by a sci-fi grunt with a gun and heavy armor. It would make more consistency at large, making it easier for plots and characters to connect (in a way, like a roleplay MMO, only with more flexibility). It would allow easier maintenance and judgements as to what is too powerful and what is not, because you can look to fantasy stereotypes to make more balanced decisions when accepting characters and making judgements should a conflict arise (as compared to cowboi supagunslinger vs Archmage of Canterbury or something, and a drama potentially arising from that combination when the two entities meet). Repeat a similar philosophy with modern and sci-fi settings, and in the future, add more if there is enough popular demand. Finally, my main, short term revision idea would be to put the PW section in line with other sections so it does not somehow get standing over all the regular forums despite having an abysmally small fraction of the activity and relevance seen in the three sections below it.

As it is now, and as the idea seems to propose, there's just not enough to bring things together. It becomes clutter that might as well go into the regular sections anyways.

It's not an easy overnight solution, but I think you're more likely to find the answer in structure and a degree of unity, not in making divided verses that don't even need to exist in the same forum.

And as for existing games, they would not have to be deleted. I believe they would work just fine dumped into the casual section, as they're largely independent entities anyways.

In short: Sure, have a multiverse. But it does not need its own forum. Not as it is described, and not as the EH operates right now.

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

>TMW a person has no problem spending forever getting together a characters skills and history and possessions but god forbid they spend more than ten seconds on their characters personality.

So, during this life of honing such "remarkable" skills and surviving their "tragic" backstory they never once developed a personality? None of these things affected them in the slightest and they are a completely clean slate for you to develop in RP? Right.... Yeah, not buying it. That's just lazy. Sorry, not sorry.

@Lady Amalthea

While it may well be an act of laziness, which I couldn't judge without context, you don't need to spend forever to make an equivalent length personality. I build functional personalities for roleplay characters from a selection of words to make the core and from backstory/specific events to determine a character's biases and experience. And that is all I need for a solid character.

Some trigger words, biases that influence decisions, and the character's experiences. All I need.

Also, why am I not surprised that this thread is the most immediately accessible outlet for a prior thing.

World-Building Section

That fact you are insinuating that you plan to make this into a flame war proves my point. lol

@Holy Soldier

I will once again request the moderators to lock this thread before it can escalate into a real flamewar.

How do the sentences connect, exactly? You plucked a single sentence out of the post and connected it to him starting a flamewar. How?

World-Building Section

@PoiIt's not actually a surprise since the same people who argue and troll the Rp Lounge are doing the same thing here. If you were surprised by that, I'm not lol. But it would be nice if those people weren't commenting here because then a normal discussion would be able to occur as it did for a few pages before they brought their dirty laundry.

@Holy Soldier

No need to rewrite history. The tone of the first few pages, starting with my post (where exactly did I become negative and hostile between my first post and now, beyond disagreeing and questioning your means of debate) has not shifted, I have simply replied to arguments. If you don't refer to me, what specific examples can you give that other people's tones somehow changed between the first few pages and now?

I was helping organize the site. The truth here is, if the Moderators decided to implement this idea, the people who are bemoaning it happening would still continue to write on this site regardless. It doesn't affect them in any way. As for the writers, it gives the people who "actually" world-build and who actually role play on this site a section for their drafts, ideas, and where they can place their concepts without having to choose from multiple different sections that really aren't meant for world-building. We're literally just "making" it a world-building thread because there's no real place to put the ideas. So you have world-building appearing in multiple sections for no reason. All you have to do is make a section for it.

@Holy Soldier

It was you who stated 'bemoaning' and escalated the topic in the first place, as Poi quoted above.

World-Building Section

I'm still waiting on evidence that anyone else actually wants this.

We still have none.

@Raddum

@PoiI've given you counter-points to your points and you've not read them but continued to post your misunderstandings. Then you get upset. As the OP says, if you get upset, then you don't need to be in here and that no one should entertain you.

@Holy Soldier

>Poi wonders who else supports this
>Holy Soldier goes on about counter points that were never mentioned, getting upset which was never mentioned
???

World-Building Section

You're not adding more by posting lol.

@Holy Soldier

What exactly have you been adding by your nudges that people haven't been contributing to the discussion when this thread, if anything, has been one of the best examples to date of people staying on topic?

Your failing to reply to my post is not a failing of mine.

You feel attacked because I pointed out how you have been repeating the same comments and haven't really evolved your discussion? Since you were getting so offended and upset, I said maybe you should ignore this conversation since it offends you so much.

- Quote the statement that indicates that I am attacked. No, really. If anything, I'm ignored. Please, indicate where I have actually been attacked. >.>
- You have not answered legitimate questions, such as "who else actually cares about this?" which I would think is pivotal to a discussion about something that, even if you would call it a small and simple change, would change the structure of the sight. In terms of active users giving their replies, you're badly outmatched here, and again, the iota is on you to prove that there is actually support for anything you are saying. Ignoring me only tears the carpet out from under your argument.
- Every post I have made in this thread has been logical, analytical and, I believe, distant from ad hominem. Until this very sentence, it is a stark contrast to what you have done across the entirety of this thread and the last couple pages in particular (and really, I'd consider you trying to make an echo chamber of yes a fact, but sure, lets call it ad hominem to give you a point here).
----> To get to the point of above, I'll tie it to my first point - how is presenting a counter argument and asking you to back yourself up when suggesting a change for the forum 'being offended'? Am I being offended by presenting a counter argument to your points? If that's the case, your chance for logical discussion on the guild is likely to be exactly zero.

I rather like debates of this nature. I can go on all day, and I'd be happy to do it, because I like to debate when I have a full handle on the topic. Especially since this thread is turning into a heavy anchor that drags your request down to oblivion, as you have no supporters in this thread. Absolutely none. Plenty of opponents, though, and plenty of reasons why what you ask is not necessary. The logical destruction of the thread's premise will remain even as the thread itself is devolving.

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

This right here ^ is about you feeling like you're contributing to the conversation when you're trying to destroy it because you don't agree with this discussion even existing. Therefore, I offered that you not bother with it since you're clearly now just talking about how you are "replying" and not how you are replying to the topic "World-Building."

>looks at the title of the thread
>reads own posts that have all addressed the topic stated in the title
>looks where I'm putting all these posts

Okie

The supporters have refused to enter this thread because of the hostility you and the other players who normally troll the discussion forums have shown. They do not want to get involved. So when I was saying they would because it seemed like they would post, they chose not to because of the negative atmosphere. I am trying to get rid of that negative atmosphere to turn this back into a pleasant discussion whether people agree or disagree. Even with the former writers disagreeing, they were able to do so civilly. The people who have left so far were not civil and I'm glad they left. If you're the next one, then that just puts more positivity back on this discussion.

- Trolling = countering your points, agreement = logical debate. Is that true? It's a yes or no question.
- [Citation Needed]
- Negative Atmosphere^TM is not a valid excuse. We will have to agree to disagree, I guess.
- People who have left so far posted their own arguments and points, and left when you attacked them after not finding a way to prove your own points valid. They knew they were punching a brick wall, and they reasonably left because of it. I have an iron fist. I'll punch the proverbial wall all day, because for whatever reason, I have time to waste doing so until you give me a proper response. And guess what? When someone comes in with support, I will challenge them to back themselves up too, and address the points made so far. And if they're reasonable, perhaps I'll even agree. If that is trolling, then yes, I am going to troll this thread right until it gets locked.

But I'm not going to continue to "entertain" you if you are offended. If I choose not to respond to you, then I'm sorry. It's something you'll just have to deal with.

I don't care. I'll still reply, and I'll still wait for you to make this a logical debate. Yes, I'm immortal.

@Ruby can we close this as the OP has become increasingly hostile and the thread is just running circles at the moment and is/has already breached the point of hostility

@Odin

Probably for the best.

World-Building Section

Hopefully now, we can get back to making this thread an echo chamber of yes.

@Holy Soldier

...instead of an echo chamber for disagreement from more or less everyone who posted so far.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

And while doing so, address my points, as without doing so, you prove yourself invalid and the premise of this being a reasonable discussion a farce. Am I being blunt? Yes. I tend to be when you flat out ignore people's points.