which is why I say live life regret free. It happened and it's done. Sure, we've done terrible things; everyone has. In the words of the Beatles, let it be.
That's kind of become my mantra. "It's in the past. Learn from it, and let it go." Do you ever get high? You probably won't admit that with your father sitting right here, but I was curious. I used to go into psychotic episodes where I would scream obscenities for hours on end when I got high. I learned how to use that as a therapy (Hence, (Doing Therapy)) If you get high and scream obscenities, I'd want to know about it.
It's funny that we were talking about not regretting things this morning. I left my phone in a deli when I was breaking a bill to get change for my bus trip to work. Did I regret it? nope. I just borrowed a co-worker's phone and called my fiancee to let her know to go to the deli and get my phone asap before someone else did. I wasn't able to post to my fun game thread all day. Do I regret that? nope. I would rather have, but I didn't and that's how it is. I did get high before; both of my parents know I did. I don't know what I did before my tolerance was built up, but I eventually got to a very "bad" point when it became all-encompassing and I had to do it all the time to feel normal; also, I couldn't remember anything that happened when I was high if I wasn't, and vice versa. The last time I did it, I got so paranoid that it wasn't any good for me. A wise person once said to me on the subject, "There are two rules. One, don't be stupid about it. Stupidity gets people caught. Two, enjoy it. You're doing it to enjoy it, so don't let anything else interfere with that." I didn't enjoy it, so I have no further interest in it at this stage of my life. As for screaming obscenities, I was doing that on the bus this morning on the way to work when I realized I left my phone in the deli. I don't really care how people look at me, dressed in casual business wear and yelling vulgarities at myself; I was mad and they knew it.
Bipolar disorder and psychosis are often misdiagnosed. My doctor thought I was the highest bipolar she had ever seen, turned out I was the lowest-grade psychotic she had ever seen. I wouldn't have known the difference if not for the screaming fits which my doctor identified from a recording I made. That's why I was asking.
(Doing Therapy)
I was diagnosed as "ultraradian cycling Bipolar I disorder with psychotic features" at a time when ultraradian cycling Bipolar disorder was not a widely accepted diagnosis. In order to be diagnosed with Bipolar disorder, someone needs to show at least four prolonged changes in affect and general mood over a year long period; ultraradian cycling is at least 12 in a month; the psychiatrist who diagnosed me claimed to have witnessed 12 in a day with me, and highly recommended medication, which I took for a time and stopped ... 8 years ago? Self medicated until ... 3 years ago? Unless you count nicotine. Today I would say I exist in a state of what I would consider normalcy; it may not be what most people consider normalcy, but normalcy is in the eye of the beholder.
Unless you count nicotine. Today I would say I exist in a state of what I would consider normalcy; it may not be what most people consider normalcy, but normalcy is in the eye of the beholder.
Nicotine is a natural anti-psychotic. That's why people spazz out when they quit smoking, they don't have the anti-psychotic anymore. Normalcy is in the eye of the beholder. I really like that. When I was in high school, people used to ask me "Why aren't you normal?" I would generally respond "Define 'Normal'" No one ever tried to define it.
(Doing Therapy)
One time a therapist in a group setting asked me, "What is it like for you, being Bipolar?" I responded with a question, "What is it like for you, not being Bipolar?" "That's an unfair question, Kyler." "I don't see how. If I'm Bipolar, I have been all my life and I don't know anything else. Provide me with a basis of comparison, and then I'll be in a position to adaquately answer your question."
Reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend of mine who was gay:
Me "How do you know you're gay?"
Him "How do you know you're not gay?"
Me "I just know."
Him "Exactly."
Then of course he said:
Him "Did you ever try gay sex? How do you know you wouldn't like it?"
Me "You ever been kicked in the nuts by a guy wearing size 13 combat boots?"
Him "Uh, no."
Me. "How do you know you wouldn't like it?"
(Doing Therapy)
For some reason, I bet MJ doesn't even check this forum anymore. I just realized something that I thought was really significant. Either you're reading it or you're not. For the record, I am NOT upset in the slightest. I thought this was quite intriguing. A long time ago, MJ wrote:
Thanks, John. I think that's the real point: who wouldn't want to save the lives of hundreds of people, and prevent the worst naval disaster in American history? Apparently, the answer is John Cross, who takes a broader view, sees those who will die as already dead (a time traveler's viewpoint for certain) and is concerned that lessening the impact of the Japanese surprise attack might so alter the future history of the world that everything would be far worse.
This was said in response to me asking why you thought I would want to save the base. I just realized why it irked me so badly that you expected I would warn Pearl Harbor because it's what every other player you know would do. How many of those other players were avid fans of the Temporal Anomalies website and regularly wrote to you asking questions about Time Travel? How many of those other players would have any understanding not only of possible temporal paradoxes, but also the Link of Casualty between events? That one event triggers another triggers another triggers another? How many of those other players you know would see preserving the timeline as their top priority? And not just your temporal theory. How many of those other players you know would give a moment's thought to the possible changes this could have on the future? Changing the past is changing the past, no matter how you do it.
I can't believe that you never even considered EIGHT YEARS of emails about Time Travel, in lieu of the assumption that I knew about the attack. If you had considered that, you would have known without doubt that Pearl Harbor, or for that matter, ANY historical world would be terrible for me. Can you please try to shed some light on this? Like I say, I'm intrigued and confused, not upset.
(Doing Therapy)
I do check this forum.
--M. J. Young
Well, can you please try to shed some light on what I asked? I mean that's a completely valid point. It's seriously confusing to me. I'm not upset with you in the least. Well, not any more than you would be about something that was confounding you to no end.
(Doing Therapy)
Sure.
I don't have the proper equipment at hand for pummeling deceased equines.
O.K., let's look at it this way. I was at that time running about a dozen players in various games, and seriously overburdened, and I had almost no idea either where I was going to send anyone if they versed out or how I was going to reduce my workload without chasing players away.
I had a flash of an idea. You were yelling about how versers should never interfere with the world because it's not your world. I wondered whether you were serious about it. I thought that if you were dropped in Pearl Harbor, that might help; and I thought that I could find someone better able to run Pearl Harbor than I. I asked a few people, one volunteered, and that was the last I thought about where you were going to go--I had almost a dozen others about whom to find such answers.
Sometimes I pick worlds with careful consideration. Sometimes I pick them at what seems like random. Most of the time it just comes down to a sudden thought that a particular world might work well for a particular player. Usually it does, because most of my players are pleased for the opportunity to play and know that if a world is not particularly interesting to them there will be another one eventually. In your case, it never works, because no matter what world is chosen you can find fault with it and want it to be something different. I never once found a world you liked the way it came to you. The fact that you are still arguing about Pearl Harbor is only the tip of the iceberg--you didn't like the way I handled Terminator, you didn't like the entire setup in Dancing Princess, and in Columbus you very nearly killed another player character because you didn't like the way everyone else was playing in that world. Role playing games are a social hobby; you seem to be the most antisocial player I've ever had in one of my games. I'm not going to try again.
--M. J. Young
In your case, it never works, because no matter what world is chosen you can find fault with it and want it to be something different.
Let's clarify that. YOU can't seem to choose a good world for me. Eric, on the other hand, has yet to have that problem. I thank him on a regular basis for taking me over.
The fact that you are still arguing about Pearl Harbor is only the tip of the iceberg--
You HAD to pick the one and only scenario that would do this to me, didn't you? Need I remind you that you KNEW I knew a lot about the attack? You didn't suspect maybe I knew about it. You KNEW I knew about it. On your evidence, I could understand if you suspected maybe but you were a long way from KNOWING. And despite my telling you several times that I DIDN'T know about it, it took me YEARS to convince you that I didn't. If not for my incessant arguing, you would probably still KNOW that I knew the attack. In a way, it's been a good thing.
you didn't like the way I handled Terminator,
As much as I appreciated the gesture, that was your fault. Sending a Terminator superfan with a penchant for arguing to the Terminator world...... You should have seen that coming a mile away.
you didn't like the entire setup in Dancing Princess,
No, I absolutely LOVED the setup in Dancing Princess. That was my favorite world that you and I ran together. YOU didn't like the fact that I had the ability to think for myself and do my own thing. You will NEVER persuade me that I made a bad character decision learning to blacksmith instead of saving the princesses. I thought that was why RPGs were better than video games in your eyes. Players can find creative solutions to problems that would never be programmed into the original scenario. Then you get annoyed with me when I do exactly that.
Besides, since Eric took me over, learning to blacksmith has proven more valuable to my character than all the gold the Dancing Princess world could have possibly contained. How do you think my character got the name "Magehammer"?
and in Columbus you very nearly killed another player character because you didn't like the way everyone else was playing in that world.
At least I played my character accurately. Scott applauded me for that. You were the one that had a problem with it.
I am not the only referee who found you difficult as a player. I am not sure whether Eric is the only referee who didn't--in fact, I don't know that he didn't find you difficult, only that he managed to find ways to make the game work for you. I'm not going to get into a debate about that.
Certainly your confrontation in Columbus made for some interesting play. It put me in an awkward spot, though, because I had two player characters in that scene whose players were absent (I expected one to return and the other not to return, and I got them backwards), so I was going to have to play them true to players I never met based on limited play in a life-and-death situation. So I was unhappy that it had come to that, but that was not entirely your fault.
--M. J. Young
I am not the only referee who found you difficult as a player.
And I'm sure I'm not the only player who found you difficult as a ref.
I also couldn't help but notice that you ignored 90% of what I said.
Eric thinks outside the box. I wish I would have gone to him sooner. I also wish he posted more often, but oh well.
It never once occurred to you that it was just a coincidence that Final Countdown was about Pearl Harbor, did it?
Two
I am not the only referee who found you difficult as a player.
By the way, that sadistic SOB you sent me to for my second world doesn't count. He's in control of the whole GD scenario, but that wasn't good enough for him. He had to try to be in control of me too. And he didn't even have the intelligence or human decency to learn to spell correctly.
And somehow, the whole debacle was my fault.....
I wasn't going to address this, but then--as I recall, Eric took you because you were a difficult player, and he thought he could manage you.
So I don't think you can claim that Eric doesn't think you're a difficult player; he just thinks he's a more effective referee for the difficulties you present.
--M. J. Young
I wasn't going to address this, but then--as I recall, Eric took you because you were a difficult player, and he thought he could manage you.
Ah, but was the problem because I was a difficult player or was it because you were a weak, ineffective referee? Just exploring all of the possibilities is all. I think it was a combination of the two.
So I don't think you can claim that Eric doesn't think you're a difficult player; he just thinks he's a more effective referee for the difficulties you present.
He's never given me any indication that he thought I was any more difficult than anyone else. You've never read a single one of our games. What basis do you have to make any kind of assumptions to how difficult he finds me? Baseless, unfounded assumptions are becoming kind of habitual for you it seems.
(Doing Therapy)
The problem was you're a problematic player. MJ is one of the better refs I've had the pleasure of playing with, both in person and online. His primary weakness in my opinion is not knowing when to cut the chord for disruptive or problematic players. Every game master (maybe besides MJ due to his almost inhuman patience) would ask you to leave the table if you were at a gaming convention, which is not something gms do lightly.
And as far as I've seen Eric doesnt regularly give out of character opinions in game, in one direction or another. And the fact that other refs would be resistant to picking you up in a game supports the fact that you are a difficult player that most refs wohld rather just not have to deal with.
I think MJ's problem is he expects all players to be more or less the same, in spite of whatever evidence he has to the contrary. All players who like guns know military history, in spite of the fact that I had never once mentioned an interest in military history. All players who land in Pearl Harbor will have a desire to change history, in spite of the fact that we had spent years talking about why changing history is a bad thing. All players who land in Dancing Princess will want to rescue the princesses, in spite of the fact that I had already indicated a non-involvement philosophy. He misses the blatantly obvious cues that would tell him he's wrong until it's too late to do anything about it. Then, when he realizes the player isn't like all of the others, he gets scrambled and doesn't know what to do. That's part of the reason why I called him a weak, ineffective referee.
Like I said, I'm just exploring all of the possibilities.
What basis do you have to make any kind of assumptions to how difficult he finds me?
That would be the basis that when I was running you in Terminator he said that it was obvious you were a difficult player but he thought he knew how to handle you and I should let him take over your game for a while. I said no, but he did it anyway.
As for your assertion that I think all players are the same, having run hundreds of players I know 1) every player is unique; 2) many players show similar tendencies; 3) every player will surprise you sometimes.
The problem we had was not that I made faulty assumptions about you. I make faulty assumptions about every player, because in order to act I have to make guesses and I don't always guess right about anyone. Someone once said, long before the game was on paper, that Multiverser was not so much a game as the way E. R. Jones "psyched" people, that is, discovered who they were and what made them tick, how to manipulate them into doing what he wanted, what buttons to push to get them to respond in predictable ways. I put people in situations, and from their responses I learn who they are and try to find better situations the next time.
The problem we had was that any time things did not go the way you wanted or expected them to, you blamed your referee.
The other problem we had was that I overestimated myself and broke one of my own rules. I had long ago said that it was a mistake to run a role playing game for someone who was not mentally normal. I knew you were psychotic, but because you were a friend of mine and an intelligent and kind individual I thought you would be fine. I was wrong. You were not fine, and I never should have put you into a role playing game, because you become too fixated on what happens in the game worlds and let it take over your life and relationships. I failed to anticipate that. It was my mistake, because I knew better. Generally, I'm the person who says that role playing games are perfectly safe for normal people, and no one should be afraid of them; but I think you might be the one person in a thousand who should never play.
--M. J. Young
I took the time to read your post in its entirety. I ask for the same courtesy.
That would be the basis that when I was running you in Terminator he said that it was obvious you were a difficult player but he thought he knew how to handle you and I should let him take over your game for a while. I said no, but he did it anyway.
No, I said what reason do you have to think that Eric finds me difficult as a player. I'm well aware of the fact that he thinks Mr. Young found me difficult as a player. You have no reason to think Eric finds me difficult as a player.
The other problem we had was that I overestimated myself and broke one of my own rules. I had long ago said that it was a mistake to run a role playing game for someone who was not mentally normal.......... Generally, I'm the person who says that role playing games are perfectly safe for normal people, and no one should be afraid of them; but I think you might be the one person in a thousand who should never play.
Let me clear this up. That was a series of one in one thousand events. The one in one thousand opening to the one in one thousand world that would screw up the one in one thousand player. Any other opening, any other scenario, I'd be fine. No other world has had that kind of effect on me, aside from asking questions about the world sometimes when it's over. I don't think that's unreasonable, since we are here to learn to play and ref. I mention old worlds, but only as an example for something else.
It was just a coincidence that I had, years before, sworn that I would never warn Pearl Harbor. I believed that it would certainly cause the US to lose WW2. That's the kind of oath you expect to never be put to the test. I think those exact circumstances would have screwed up just about anyone. Maybe not as badly as it did me, but I really think even a lot of "normal people" would have been screwed up by that.
Besides MJ, aren't you a clinical depressive? That's hardly mentally normal. Shouldn't you take your own advice and not play? You don't want to risk some poor referee being responsible for you committing suicide over the one in one thousand opening to the one in one thousand world that would have that effect on you, now do you? Best for all mentally ill people (including you) to just not play at all. Isn't that pretty much what you're saying?
I haven't had any problems like that from any other world. In one of Eric's worlds, Magehammer got 6 people killed through stupidity and arrogance. In another world he was transformed into a zombie knight. Please note, we're not still talking about it. Eric answered a few questions for me, and that was the end of that. What I'm saying is I think this would have been perfectly safe, even for me, except for a run of really bad luck. The problem was caused by at least three consecutive 30 rolls. It was caused by the one in one thousand opening to the one in one thousand world that would have this effect on the one in one thousand player.
Fantasy is awesome. I love Fantasy. I don't have a problem with Fantasy. Pearl Harbor wasn't Fantasy. Pearl Harbor was Real Life.
You had no reason whatsoever to think that I knew a damn thing about the attack, and every reason in the world to think that I wouldn't want to stop it. Yet, you still assumed that I knew it and would want to stop it. That might well be another 30 roll there. Either that or a botched intuition check.
For what it's worth, I can honestly say I feel just a little bit better each and every time I (Do Therapy). It's been almost two months since I said anything about Pearl Harbor on the forum, although I doubt MJ bothered to notice.
(Doing Therapy)
I took the time to read your post in its entirety. I ask for the same courtesy.
I understand why you think this is an equal courtesy situation, but you are mistaken. This is, as it were, your phone call, your appointment. You've cornered me at the party and chewed my ear off about a subject that is of interest to you but of no interest to me, which I consider a serious infringement on my time and an abuse of our friendship when I'm trying to get to the punchbowl and you're standing in my way. I keep extending you the courtesy of acknowledging that I saw your post instead of ignoring that you posted, and hoping that you will drop the subject and let me leave, and you keep grabbing my arm as I try to walk away and complaining that I'm being rude to you by not listening while you continue to regale me with your complaints about me.
I haven't had any problems like that from any other world.
That's only technically true. You have not had that type of problem with any other world, but you had a lot of trouble with Terminator and were complaining about it still just recently.
It's been almost two months since I said anything about Pearl Harbor on the forum, although I doubt MJ bothered to notice.
In this I will admit that I have a cognitive problem with time. I can usually (but not always) identify those memories of events which happened earlier today, and I can distinguish events that have happened within the past month from those which happened when I was a child. However, I cannot connect memories with time absent some specific marker within the memory that tells me the time--e.g., knowing that something happened at a graduation ceremony for a particular person, or that a particular child was a newborn, or that someone was involved whom I only knew while I was in a particular school or at a particular job. Absent that I cannot easily distinguish memories from last week from those from last year, or those from last year from those from a decade ago. Thus what I remember is that you have repeatedly raised the subject many times over a long period of time that extends from sometime before today to sometime since I published the game in 1997. I would have to do some research to narrow it down more specifically than that.
So no, I did not notice that you haven't mentioned it in any particular period of time. I also don't know how long it has been since Eric took over your game, or since Adam took over your game, or since Shawn last posted to his game, or Eric was left in Why Spy and stopped playing, or Graeme has been missing from the forum. "How long has it been?" is a question I lack the cognitive ability to address without some kind of evidence I can examine and time to examine it. I just know that it has been recently and frequently enough that I remember it, and your reminders keep it fresh in my mind.
--M. J. Young
That's only technically true. You have not had that type of problem with any other world, but you had a lot of trouble with Terminator and were complaining about it still just recently.
Just another reason I'm glad Eric took me over. If there exists another scenario that could have that effect on me, it was probably being zygoted in as John Connor into the Terminator world. And you have a funky definition of complaining. I was peacefully discussing an old scenario in a thread that you started. A thread in which the Terminator world was a completely valid topic for discussion. I didn't start the thread, and likely wouldn't have said anything further about the Terminator world had you not started the thread. It was a thread about Player Preferred Worlds. That's the Terminator scenario. If you didn't want to talk about Player Preferred Worlds, then why did you start the thread in the first place???????????????
You didn't really touch on anything of any importance. I mean, tell me MJ, honestly. In the situation I described, having sworn that you would never do something, then dropped into a game scenario of it. Circumstances come such that you do the very thing you swore you would never do. And not only that, it's something you perceive to be of global importance that is going to shape the future of the world forever. Look me in the eye and tell me that wouldn't bother you just a teensy bit!!!
"How long has it been?" is a question I lack the cognitive ability to address without some kind of evidence I can examine and time to examine it.
You mean something like the date stamp on the last Pearl Harbor thread which clearly reads "2 Months" and takes about 2 seconds to examine? Honestly, that's the only reason I know how long it's been.
(Doing Therapy)
No reply. You must not want to admit that the situation I described would have scrambled even you.
Just don't ever forget you brought this whole mess down on yourself. I probably would have lived the rest of my life without ever watching Final Countdown if not for you. Suddenly, I'm an expert on the bombing and rip-roaring to stop it.
If you had given that even a moment's thought, you would have said "Gee, John just wrote a 5,000 word essay explaining why stopping the bombing would be a disaster, and we've been talking for years about why changing history is a bad thing. Better not send him to any historical worlds."
You brought this whole mess down on yourself. You could have avoided it completely with just a little careful consideration of what you were doing.
For the love of God, do not reply!!! Let's see how high I can get this date stamp.
No reply. You must not want to admit that the situation I described would have scrambled even you.
Actually, I was so eager to get out of this discussion that I overlooked your reference to the situation.
I have never done anything in a game but what I was content to have the character do. I'm sorry you felt that you did. Apparently you thought it the lesser evil. I suppose the question is, would you have suffered so much over it had you chosen otherwise?
--M. J. Young
I suppose the question is, would you have suffered so much over it had you chosen otherwise?
I didn't make a leap of faith. I warned them because I was afraid of landing in the next world like that. You have no idea how much it hurt when you told me versing out would have healed my injuries. If I had made a leap of faith, everything would have turned out fine. I didn't make a leap of faith.
When did you jump to the conclusion that I knew the attack? Was it when I did the analysis? Was it when you decided to send me there? You probably couldn't answer that even if you remembered.
I don't think I was ever certain how much you knew; but I thought you probably knew more than I did. The evidence was that you were into military hardware and thus probably into military battles in which tactics, strategy, and hardware each had a purpose; and that you had offered to do the analysis of Final Countdown which was a Pearl Harbor story, so even if all you knew was the dates and times of the critical events you were ahead of me, and I had no way of knowing how much more than that you knew.
It struck me, though, that you were familiar enough with Pearl Harbor that given the chance you could prepare the Americans for the attack before it came, and that would make a big difference; or if you didn't warn them, you were armed well enough that you could probably take out a few Japanese planes yourself and make a difference that way. I wanted to see whether you were really non-involvement dedicated or simply spouting some kind of nonsense because you didn't want to play the way the others were playing.
It's really kind of pointless in retrospect. I had made the decision around when the Architect left, and once Godzilla appeared on the scene you started becoming very involved entirely on your own choice, so I knew; but I'd already made arrangements to put you in Pearl Harbor and I was having enough trouble figuring out what I was going to do with everyone else so I certainly wasn't going to cancel the one arrangement I had made. In that sense, the test didn't matter--I already knew that you were not committed to non-involvement--but Pearl Harbor was as good a place as any to send you, and I had someone willing to run it, so I went with it.
--M. J. Young
Pearl Harbor was as good a place as any to send you
Oh the irony..........
I'm surprised you didn't say anything about not taking the leap of faith. Wish I had.
(Doing Therapy)
Two
I wanted to see whether you were really non-involvement dedicated or simply spouting some kind of nonsense because you didn't want to play the way the others were playing.
If I hadn't crashed the jeep, I wouldn't have warned them. What would you have thought then?
What would you have thought then?
No one can really be certain of what would have been. As I said, your involvement in fighting Godzilla had already tipped the balance in my mind, and I was pretty sure you did not mean that versers shouldn't become involved in worlds but that you only meant that you wanted to be able to have fun doing whatever came your way in the world and thought your companions were all spoiling it by trying to fix the problems. I think you might have surprised me, but I don't think I'd have changed my view. But then, getting into my mind from back then is not so easy. Maybe I would have thought, "He thinks we're testing his non-involvement resolve and so is pretending that he's serious about it to mess with our minds." Maybe I would have thought "That's funny, I would have expected him to attempt to mitigate the disaster; I wonder why he was content to fight Godzilla but not the Japanese?" Maybe I would have thought, "I guess I was wrong, and he really is trying to go for a Prime Directive view, and the Godzilla thing was an aberration."
The fact is, I can't know what I would have thought; I can only experiment with what people actually think and do.
--M. J. Young
"That's funny, I would have expected him to attempt to mitigate the disaster; I wonder why he was content to fight Godzilla but not the Japanese?"
It REALLY surprises me that you thought I would want to, given that the subject of most of our conversations was that changing the past was a bad idea. Maybe it would have clicked then. John has an aversion to changing history.
(Doing Therapy)
This is why I don't like having these discussions with you. You really don't see what you did, do you?
You asked me what I would have thought.
I answered:
- There is really no way that anyone could possibly know what he would have thought;
- I might possibly have thought any of these widely diverse and even opposite things;
- so there is no way I can answer that question.
What did you do? You picked the one from the list that was, from your view, the egregious one, the one that would prove that I was completely unreasonable, and you criticized me for the idea that I would have thought that, when I very clearly and repeatedly said that I have no way of knowing what I would have thought.
I don't know, John. It feels like you just want some reason to be angry and upset, so you're going to keep looking for one.
--M. J. Young
I think this is like when I used to say you sounded annoyed when I emailed you about time travel. That will become explained if you read to the end.
This is why I don't like having these discussions with you. You really don't see what you did, do you?
No, I think what happened is /you/ are reading in something that I /didn't/ say. You've admitted to having done that many times. What /I/ did was pull out a quote from your page and respond to it. It surprises me, after all those years of talking about why changing history was a bad idea, that you would think I would want to change history. That's it and that's all. That's all I was saying. I wasn't arguing or expressing anger. I was expressing surprise. /You/ are once again reading in something that /isn't/ /there/. Let me say this loudly to make sure you hear me:
I'M NOT UPSET ABOUT IT ANYMORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I don't see what I did, then maybe it's because what you saw me do wasn't what I was doing???????????
I don't know, John. It feels like you just want some reason to be angry and upset, so you're going to keep looking for one.
Who's angry and upset? Am I not allowed to be surprised that you didn't factor in the years that we spent talking about time travel? You said I was the only person to ever discover Multiverser from the Time Travel site. That in itself should have told you that I'm not like most other gamers.
We spent /eight/ /years/ talking about why changing history is a bad idea. Why /shouldn't/ I be surprised that you thought I would want to do it???? I'm surprised that you didn't think of all those time travel discussions when you sent me there. How was I supposed to know stopping the bombing wouldn't cause an infinity loop? That's all I was saying. Am I not allowed to be surprised at that?
I'm also surprised that you replied at all. That seemed to me to be a good place to leave it sitting.
All right, point for you, because I don't think of parallel dimensions as time travel so the idea that you were "changing history" by interfering in Pearl Harbor didn't enter my mind--you were creating history in another universe.
I apologize for not recognizing that you might not see it that way.
In Multiverser, it's only time travel when it is, not when it isn't.
--M. J. Young
I apologize for not recognizing that you might not see it that way.
I don't think the apology was necessary. Truth be told, I'm a touch embarrassed by it. I just can't help but think that if you had factored in all of the time travel discussions, you would have realized that any historical world would be terrible for me. Changing history is changing history. No matter how you do it.
In Multiverser, it's only time travel when it is, not when it isn't.
And how was I supposed to know that? I mean, seriously, give me one good reason why my character should have thought anything BUT that he had time traveled. It's not like I got a book of instructions when I became a verser....... I didn't get that until years later. Mom got it for me for my birthday.
All right, point for you, because I don't think of parallel dimensions as time travel
Isn't Parallel Dimension a time travel theory? You also forget that, while I do hold your theory in high regard, I hardly think it to be The Bible of Time Travel. Until time travel becomes a reality, your theory is no more or less "correct" to me than any other.
And you keep saying "Take your best guess." My "Best Guess" would be our world survived the destruction of Pearl Harbor, their world will too.
Oh yeah, one other thing. I think the stereotype "Gun collectors like military history" is the exception, not the rule. The stereotype is because guns are used by the military.
I mean, seriously, give me one good reason why my character should have thought anything BUT that he had time traveled.
Indeed, I have one. He began in a world that was his own home city several years earlier when he was alive in it, saw that it was entirely like his own world and entirely different, encountered his very self in that world, and could clearly see that being in the past of a world like his own was not time travel. He then went to another world. If indeed he had traveled to the past, would it not be more reasonable to assume that he had traveled to the past of that other world in which the development of nuclear power and unbridled chemical pollution led to all the mutations predicted by 1950s science fiction filmmmakers, a world whose history he knew was similar but very different from his own, than to believe he was in his own past? For all you knew, warning against Pearl Harbor may have been absolutely necessary to bring about the "right" future in that universe.
Isn't Parallel Dimension a time travel theory?
It certainly is proposed as one; but what it suggests is that it is not really possible to travel to your own past but only to travel to a universe like your own where nothing you do will change your own universe or impact history as you know it. The very essence of parallel dimension theory is that you can't go to the past, but only to a different world that looks like your past.
(I recently commented that it is no different than going to Narnia or Through the Looking Glass, which is true but also funny, because when I send players on adventures in Narnia I often involve them in a temporal anomalies problem related to time travel.)
--M. J. Young
If indeed he had traveled to the past, would it not be more reasonable to assume that he had traveled to the past of that other world in which the development of nuclear power and unbridled chemical pollution led to all the mutations predicted by 1950s science fiction filmmmakers, a world whose history he knew was similar but very different from his own, than to believe he was in his own past?
You just told me why he /should/ have thought he had time traveled. He traveled into the past of that world he had just been in. It would still cause an infinity loop, would it not? The loop would run from my arrival in Pearl Harbor to my death from Eric's botch. You told me why he /should/ have thought he had time traveled.
I asked you to give me a reason to NOT think time travel was involved. All you did was confirm why I should have thought I had time traveled.
For all you knew, warning against Pearl Harbor may have been absolutely necessary to bring about the "right" future in that universe.
Who is to say what is right and what is wrong?
Two
I want to make something /absolutely/ /clear./ I probably would have sent me there too. Inspired by Final Countdown, in a different way. I might even have looked for a referee who knew the attack. Lighten the workload and add some authenticity. Not because I thought the player knew it. Regardless of intent, the result would likely have been the same. I'm /also/ surprised that I didn't see it coming.
I want to make that absolutely clear.
Oh yeah, words that I /do/ /this/ /to/ are the same words that I would have WRITTEN IN CAPS a few weeks ago. I think /this/ is much easier to see and to type than this and doesn't have the implied CAPS SHOUTING. A compromise has been established.
(Doing Therapy)
Glad you didn't reply. I'll just trust that you read it.
To me, interfering in Pearl Harbor would be changing history. Nothing more, nothing less. The world survived it once, it will again. That's good enough for me. I can live with the results of what did happen. God only knows what would happen if you tried to "improve" it.
And yeah, I know it isn't the same as versing. Humor me.
Oh yeah, reply not needed, unless you really want to.
(Doing Therapy)
I was just thinking about something noteworthy here. You said that you did the time travel because you thought it would attract people to the game. So, I guess the lesson to be learned from all of this is that time travel fans should not be sent to historical worlds. Ever.