Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

A fellow player believes that there is a contradiction in the rules of The Multiverse. "You can't ignore another players actions" vs. "Your reality can have his actions not ever having occurred". I believe that this is not a contradiction, but how can this be?

share|improve this question
I've never heard of the Multiverse RPG and my searches turn up nothing, so my curiosity is piqued. Can you provide a link that would enlighten us about this game? –  SevenSidedDie Mar 4 '13 at 3:34
We could also use some citations on this question to help it make sense. Can you expand on the rule in question, how it came up as an issue, and the consequences of ruling it one way or another? –  Lord_Gareth Mar 4 '13 at 6:52

1 Answer 1

I'm assuming this is relating to The Multiverse (of which I am the creator and a current game master), so my answer will be referring to how this works in the context of the Multiverse's rules.

First, we must make sure to understand three things;

  1. A single player writing for a single character can have one or more universes associated with this character. New universes can be created for any number of reasons, including the player changing their mind about the character's history or direction. For the sake of simplicity, let's start with the assumption that every character has but one universe with a linear history.

  2. When a second player is introduced, the newly introduced universe may or may not be congruent with the first player's, and conceptually a third universe (called a multiverse, with a very importantly lowercase "m") is created. The player is required to roleplay along with whatever is happening in that new multiverse, but is not required to incorporate what happens there in their own personal universe.

  3. When subsequent players are added, the number of multiverses increases factorially. The set of all possible multiverses is the very premise of the roleplay in question, The Multiverse (uppercase "M", because this is a proper noun), which is defined as a collaborative fiction.

This third concept is very important, because it is the crux of the issue. The very spirit of The Multiverse is such that we wouldn't have a roleplay without our willingness to collaborate, and moreover to offer our creations up for shaping by the often unexpected forces of other players' universes.

Your universe might not incorporate certain events as having happened, but the universe in which they are "ignored" is outside of the Multiverse, which is again defined as the set of all possible multiverses. That's the firm line drawn by the rules.

Now, as for the trust that the Game Master has in your participation, it is exactly the same type of trust that each player must exhibit for each of his fellow players: if we didn't count other players' actions as meaningful and having lasting impact on our own characters, we wouldn't have much of a roleplay, now would we?

share|improve this answer
This answer seems pretty well thought-out, but can we get any links or book citations to back it up? I'd gladly upvote something of that nature. –  Lord_Gareth Mar 4 '13 at 6:55
I'm actually the creator of the game in question. –  martindale Mar 4 '13 at 8:15
That's wonderful, but we still like citations in the answers; it helps clarify things (and by all means, include your credential therein as well!) and it also encourages others to do the same. –  Lord_Gareth Mar 4 '13 at 8:25
@martindale I should clarify that some of us like citations. Quoting a rule from the book is a pretty solid reinforcement in a rules discussion, for instance. Take it or leave it, and add citations if you feel your answer really needs it. If you disclose that you're the game's creator at the beginning of your post, I doubt many people will expect citations - you've already established all the credibility you need. Some people might be curious about stuff you're referring to and want to read more about it, but that's a bridge to cross when we get to it. –  doppelgreener Mar 4 '13 at 10:39
Thanks, @Lord_Gareth and @Jonathan! I've gone ahead and added a link to the rules and some mention to my answer. –  martindale Mar 5 '13 at 0:23

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.