[@Cyclone]
Respond
[hider]
[quote]It's clear that you've made substantial effort here, as is attested by the emotion and detail. I really do appreciate that, but I'll be blunt and say that there are still major issues with the sheet itself and with the design that need to be addressed.

I'll start off with the grammar. As a way to jokingly lighten the mood of an otherwise serious review whilst also trying to help by pointing out the errors I see, I usually have a 'mandatory nitpicking' line that I put in these reviews. But in your sheet, there are just too many grammatical mistakes to list. Normally I can just brush off typos or grammatical mistakes (I'd be a hypocrite not to; I hate editing and proofreading my own stuff, and I'm sure that sometimes it shows) but in the case of your sheet there are so many that it became distracting. This is troubling because it is indicative of what we might expect from your IC posts, and I'm sure you're aware that this RP is going in the Advanced Section. RPGuild's own description of the section spares me the words, "Must make a dedicated effort to minimize typographical errors and to use good grammar."

Now, if you didn't proofread, then obviously doing so would be a start. If it's still a struggle, there are programs like Grammarly that some people have had great success with. Double Capybara in particular has stated that Grammarly was a great help; maybe Capy can tell you about it on the Discord.[/quote]

No debate here. Must admit, grammar was never my strong point. 

[quote]That aside, I'll now move on to the Portfolio. A god of Time/Possibilities/Fate is extremely difficult to pull off. In Divinus we had one guy make a god called Vowzra that was a god of Time that saw the future, but this only worked because Vowzra saw many possible futures, was incredibly cryptic, and the guy who wrote Vowzra was the GM. As you have it, Possibilities seems incredibly vague and I truly don't think you'll be able to make it work. If You have ideas then by all means we GMs will hear them and provide more feedback, but for now I would strongly suggest changing your Portfolio to something more manageable and concrete like Luck or Probability. [/quote]
Actually, I was originally planning for her to go after for Imagination. But GoldenEagle took dream. And yes, I am planning for her to go after luck right now. So yeah, point taken.

[quote]This leads us into the Sphere. I clearly see the imagery between a spider's webs, N'Chaera's arachnid appearance, and 'threads' of Fate or possibility. The metaphor there is nice, but this falls apart in terms of practicality when you say that it's less than an atom thick; you can elaborate more upon your intent by that phrase, but it seems like it may as well not even exist. And for effects it's the source of meteorites and supernovae--what? Why? How? I don't even see how such things connect at all to Possibilities, a spiderweb, or N'Chaera. One of my fellow GMs pointed out that you spent more time describing what Noc [i]isn't[/i] rather than what it actually is; perhaps that's the problem. Maybe you need to start with a more concrete idea as your foundation for a Sphere, and then build up a god and Portfolio from there.

I hope you don't take this personally or feel that I'm unfairly harping on you. All three of us GMs would be more than willing to continue working with you or to give you further feedback on new ideas or any changes, but for now the sheet has to be rejected.[/quote]

Yeah, actually, the word choice in there is all intentional. The realm itself is model after quarks and gluons, particles that shouldn’t be even 1/10th of an atom, hence the “less than an atom thick.” And yes, I do intention for Noc to be almost unrealistic for its meddling with the alternate universes. I my mind, alternate universe are like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle] particles [/url]that popping in and out of existence, exist for a few nano of a second before smashed by another antiparticle. Thus, in this way, the Galbar universe is at least equivalence in term of physics and chemistry. But because it is based on gluons and quarks, something that are still very limited in  understanding, I found it is much easier to define Noc as what it is not rather than what it is. 

Next in line, supernova. Now, don’t quote me on this, if anything blame my professor, but I guess in some extreme case, where a particle would popped out into existence near an extremely large black hole, the gravitational attraction of the black hole would be strong enough to pull the antiparticle away from the particle, thus, I guess, in someway, violate the law. But hey, it ain’t fantasy if you can’t interpret the mechanic. And from here is where I pull my bullshitery. Noc, in a way, act as a mean to stop these alternate realities from their miniscule lifespan. And when these particles don’t get destroy, they released energy. Due to itself being a world yet pounded into something so small, the energy is mainly released in light, hence the supernova. Meteorites, on the other hand, are also alternate realities. But what stop them from being a supernova is because of the whole lotta bullshitery that I am working on. But yeah, I can understand how it cause confusion. 


Overall, point taken. 
[/hider]