I like this one, yet at the same time acknowledge everyone critiques as accurate and valid. I agree this write up makes no sense and relies so much on the suggestion of information as to be almost devoid of information, yet I think it tells a story and sets a tone. The contradictions (though some them may be typos) and the gaps only help to set that tone and they tell you about what is unknown and as well as known.
Many world views ascribe to the forces of nature personalities. Indeed, some world view personify everything, now that is not the way the actual universe works, but what if it was? <b> What if thought was indeed to the core of existence? Then nothing could exist without thought? </b> If that was the case then everything that is or was could be traced back to a thinking being. I think, and maybe I have it wrong, this is the type of the universe describe here. And if this is the case then the human form is not just a product of evolution (or not at all a product of evolution) but a product of an intellect (in this case existence and the universe that was), and this would explain the human centric nature of the universe and why it is personified as an old man.
I think I understand it I think it is daring and interesting take on roleplaying.
A little more, yep, but only that. Too many unanswered questions. Who and what are the "Conflicted Ones?" Who and what is Lokatt? We get some of the metagame knowledge about Cain here, but what do the PLAYERS perceive? How is it that he remembers nothing about the Shattering (in one paragraph) but has all this pre-Shattering knowledge (in another)?
Beyond that, the presentation looks like a cut-and-paste of bits from several files into this one; no rhyme or reason to the organization. The vote comes from the definition of votes in the 1s: a rough draft not yet suited for public consumption, and a month and a half in, it should be finished or converted into a WIP sub.
I think the problem is that it is too vague and could use more details. I also think the overall theme is a little scattered (is it a creation myth? a tale about immortals?). I would suggest figuring out what the theme is and then going back through paragraph by paragraph, weighing each one against how well it fits/expands/explains that theme. Then cut, reword, and expand as needed until the message is clear.
Just my 2 cents.
This looks more like a first draft than a polished sub, so I will also withhold my vote.
Way back in high school i had a similar idea, well or maybe not, it's hard to tell from the information.
Anyway: Sounds awesome. Right up my alley.
Some Ideas you might find helpful:
Godlike Powers are reversibly relative to the size of the world. Any conflicted one can control a world where only he lives, but it takes huge powers, or long work, to exercise them in a bustling city, that power has to be taken from all the other residents. So if a group of conflicted ones come in a small world which has only one inhabitant, he could have nearly godlike powers, if he is conflicted. Newcomers have to “rip” power from the original inhabitant to battle him.
The “Edge of the World” is a mist, through which sometimes other worlds can be seen, as foggy shadows. The fog lifts or goes at least less thick if two world connect.
Memories (of everyone or the conflicted ones) are also shattered. They can only remember some things or nothing of their past at all. Conflicted Ones can shape new memories with their powers, search the shatters for their original memories or even rip memories from others. (This could be three different kinds of learning new abilities, if any kind of rule system is used).
I'm sure I can come up with some more Ideas...
Quite a torture device. Though I like it, I have to play devil's advocate and ask: why all the scary dreams? If you've already got someone caught in a metal box with multiple sets of claws, why bother with the added torture of nightmares?
I guess what I'm saying is, I like the concept, but I'd like to see a little more with the background.
An interesting idea and a vicious torture device. When you truly want your enemy to suffer.
A conceivable variation might be to allow an outsider to share in the vision in order to gather intelligence. How better to get to know your enemy than to see how he reacts in a sandbox?