The Multiversal Undertale CRT

[Deleted member 16409]

Twitter statements are generally unused, but that's derailing.

Twitter isn't canon long time ago.

 

[Eficiente]

what if suddenly Toby confirm that UT is a multiverse?

Taking the bait, I fear anyone can just harass him with the question, but even if he said so he can't just leave it at that with no more context. Why doesn't his own game bring this up? Why Sans says that LOADs & Resets cause leftover timelines to stop/everything ending for them if there is a multiverse? Why does Chara refer to the game as "the world" when Asriel uses "the world" to refer to the timeline? I would think those 2 "kids" raised together to be in line with the meaning they have for it, especially when Flowey talks about his plans for the world to Chara. If other universes have other same versions of the events of the game then how the hell can they copy things that should be unique like the anomaly, that 1 being from outside the game making Frisk mess with time, and Flowey messing with the game for us to see. Other universes can't have their own anomaly and so they can't have their Frisk be able to SAVE & LOAD, other universes can't have Flowey mess with the game as we saw as it would have closed & sh*t at random while we were playing it.

I'm sure Toby can say UT is a multiverse, but there is context to consider there; UT being a multiverse or not isn't a notable part of its story & lore, and UT's fandom abuses the idea of alt. universes for fun and other reasons, so it would be pretty easy for Toby to not keep in mind the implications of the work he did and do say that it's a multiverse out of sheer social pressure.

Also Deltarune exists, "Undertale is a multiverse" now can just mean that it exists in one, rather than the game alone having one that ends within itself.

I'd make the verse still 2-C (100 FUNs) as an absolute minimum based on what Charmander said tho.

I replied to all things related to it already, but what comment do you mean?; Can you quote it? I only remember him already starting with the premise of those being alt. universe w/o the why and how of it.

 

[StrymULTRA]

I replied to all things related to it already, but what commet do you mean?; Can you quote it? I only remember him already starting with the premise of those being alt. universe w/o the why and how of it.

So, I was revising evidence for my reply, and I changed my mind entirely.

Not because of your guy's arguments, they were sprout of confirmation bias imho, and didn't do a great job at proving Multiversal Chara.

I, however, accept that "world" in Chara's context does mean multiverse and all the timelines in it, not due to Frisk not accessing other timelines, or because Toby used world in a certain way in an interview, no, these are silly.
But because, if you beat the Genocide Route twice in a row:

• ...
• But.
• You and I are not the same, are we?
• This SOUL resonates with a strange feeling.
• There is a reason you continue to recreate this world.
• There is a reason you continue to destroy it.
• You.
• You are wracked with a perverted sentimentality.
• Hmm.
• I cannot understand these feelings anymore.
• Despite this.
• I feel obligated to suggest.
• Should you choose to create this world once more.
• Another path would be better suited.
• Now, partner.
• Let us send this world back into the abyss.

[Erase]

• Right. You are a great partner.
• We'll be together forever, won't we?

[Do Not]

• No...?
• Hmm... This feeling you have.
• This is what I spoke of.
• Unfortunately, regarding this...
• YOU MADE YOUR CHOICE LONG AGO.

Basically, this conversation tells us, directly, that the term "World" is encompassing all the paths the player can choose, and said paths are within the world. Paths are timelines. Meaning Chara was saying the world as in, "The World of Undertale" rather than "The World we are in right now".

I now find myself in agreement with the CRT.

.

 

[Eficiente]

I replied to that comment already and it doesn't bring up fun values. So, again, my issue with him is that he already has the premise of fun values being alt. universe w/o the why and how of it, meaning that a comment where he doesn't bring up fun values does nothing.

 

[RethPo]

Yes, this is covered in one of the first parts of the blog right below the image of Sans talking about this.

• Your premise is that it's somehow already proven that "jumping left and right" means time travel/moving time backwards and forwards, hence Frisk's actions need to fit within that, but that is not the case as that is made up. We never see "the timeline" from outside of it, or how a reading of a timeline would look like, I can absolutely argue that "left and right" isn't literal because even in your take of it being time travel to the future & past/moving time backwards & forwards "left and right" is still poetic as the whole timeline isn't moving that way but the "last part".
  • If we take a LOAD as a timeline jumping left due to "going to the past" (the timeline going in the same way as that drawing in Back to the Future) then time on its own moving to the present/future can be seen as jumping to the right, thus it makes perfect sense what Sans said.
  • Right after saying that Sans elaborated on the meaning of what he said on how they start and stop. There is no "My take fits the starting and stopping bit but not the jumping left and right bit" situation here, it fits both because both mean the same.

I dont have much time to respond to the goner kid stuff yet, but i am leaning to support possibly 2-C like james suggested instead of flat out 2-C from it.

The second bullet point is why i said immediate action. Because going forward in time isnt exactly making an immediate jump in time, its just going normally.

Also gonna need someone to help me out with the reasoning for 2-B here because i dont get it. Wouldnt sans statement if we interpret it as multiple timelines also work even if we take fun values at alternate timelines? Charmander did make that point earlier. Im unsure why were taking sans statement the old timeline always branching off as a stopped one every time you load if that wasnt explicitely implied.

 

[Eficiente]

I dont have much time to respond to the goner kid stuff yet, but i am leaning to support possibly 2-C like james suggested instead of flat out 2-C from it.

I know that was mentioned, but it would be a case of a "possibly" being asked without it being earned as the reasons that make it impossible are still there. A compromise isn't good just because it's a compromise. Another points from my blog that I kinda forgot are

• the whole deal with Sans' reasoning for his laziness and depression; he goes over how he knows how everything everyone does can simply amount to nothing on a LOAD or Reset sending them all back in time with no memory of their actions, thus fuelling his decision to not put all his best effort in his own actions, but then all of this is bs if he's saying in the very same conversation that there are many timelines, as this would mean nothing is pointless and everyone always gets the results of their actions, only the current timeline being the one where this isn't the case. You would need to pretty much edit out Sans' dialogue here and there for it to be more accurate on the idea of there being multiverse and how he still has roughly similar reasons for his laziness in that scenario, but as it is his dialogue is made for a world where there is always 1 timeline.
• Flowey at the end of the true pasicist run says something similar, that that timeline will NOT remain as it is somewhere in a multiverse, but that it will be modified at your whim if you want to, doing so making pointles everything everyone fought hard to achieve because they're being sent back to the start.

It would have been so wonderful if someone had reminded me of this points I myself made by maybe quoting them and arguing against them, I gave room to it, and I got neglected.

The second bullet point is why i said immediate action. Because going forward in time isnt exactly making an immediate jump in time, its just going normally.

It doesn't make any sense to argue that he was being literal with those words that he elaborated right after, because even in the take of many timelines, timelines don't "jump" either, meaning that he has to be a bit poetic. We can only assume that "left and right" refers to the "past and future", so as Frisk can't make time go forward or time travel to the future, timelines going left and right means the same under any interpretation, and so it doesn't score any point to the idea of multiple timelines.

Also gonna need someone to help me out with the reasoning for 2-B here because i dont get it. Wouldnt sans statement if we interpret it as multiple timelines also work even if we take fun values at alternate timelines? Charmander did make that point earlier. Im unsure why were taking sans statement the old timeline always branching off as a stopped one every time you load if that wasnt explicitely implied.

As said in a comment before, everyone isn't going off the same idea for the same stat, they have their own interpretations of things and mechanics in mind. I'm waiting to see if somebody notable catches in on this, aside from the general idea of how maybe it isn't 100% certain that UT has a multiverse.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

The previous two messages seem to imply that I was considering the argument about Sans' statement, but that's not the case. To clarify, I only suggested that the people who want to upgrade the Undertale top tiers attempt a possibly Low Multiverse level rank based on the statement from Alphys alone, and not because I'm in agreement of the idea nor because I want to make a compromise, but because I want to make the goal of this thread more realistic. The suggestion was my open-mindedness in addition to my disapproval of the thread's original idea of a Multiverse level upgrade that outright replaces what was previously established, although ideally to me there just shouldn't be a change at all. So, if we're keeping track of opinions, don't put me as in agreement of a possibly Low Multiverse level upgrade, since I'm at most neutral of it.

 

[FoxySonicMaster108]

I’m fine with possibly 2-C I guess, although even with the characters being 2-B currently, I don’t think Low 2-C should’ve gone to waste, could’ve been more like “At least Low 2-C (or just Low 2-C), 2-B at most” or something along those lines.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

I’m fine with possibly 2-C I guess, although even with the characters being 2-B currently, I don’t think Low 2-C should’ve gone to waste, could’ve been more like “At least Low 2-C (or just Low 2-C), 2-B at most” or something along those lines.

Indeed the Low 2-C definitely shouldn't have gone to waste since it's the most concrete option for a tier 2 rank by far. Universe level+ rankings should be brought back no matter how this upgrade goes.

 

[Eficiente]

The previous two messages seem to imply that I was considering the argument about Sans' statement, but that's not the case. To clarify, I only suggested that the people who want to upgrade the Undertale top tiers attempt a possibly Low Multiverse level rank based on the statement from Alphys alone, and not because I'm in agreement of the idea nor because I want to make a compromise, but because I want to make the goal of this thread more realistic. The suggestion was my open-mindedness in addition to my disapproval of the thread's original idea of a Multiverse level upgrade that outright replaces what was previously established, although ideally to me there just shouldn't be a change at all. So, if we're keeping track of opinions, don't put me as in agreement of a possibly Low Multiverse level upgrade, since I'm at most neutral of it.

It's not wrong to say it's the more realistic approach, but it more so just has the least issues. To go over them:

• As we know she didn't state other universes to be a thing in any reliable way, her research was in her free time where she's proven to be extremely casual and imprecise, hence Mettaton compares this to the time she said anime was real. Mettaton taunts the idea of other universes being a thing and the matter ends as a joke. The point of Mettaton's comparison was the unreliability of her claim. This would hypothetically be the type of universes that would have things like an ideal partner for her (not Undyne), not actual parallel timelines similar to the main UT timeline; this new concept comes out of nowhere and is never referenced anywhere else in UT.
• Even IF this universes do existed, there is no reason that they would do so inside Undertale rather than outside it.
• Deltarune is implied to be a different universe from UT, "different" not in the sense of some events here & there being routed in new ways, but in a much wider, unintuitive way; Deltarune is its own game(s), outside of Undertale, fitting to the idea that, should other universes do exist, they would not be inside UT.
• Chara says that they would move on from that world and move on to the "next", which also fits the idea of UT being 1 timeline. Flowey uses "the world" to refer to the timeline as proven when he's Asriel and Flowey & Chara likely use the word in the same way.

As such, this is not worthy of a "possibly".

I’m fine with possibly 2-C I guess, although even with the characters being 2-B currently, I don’t think Low 2-C should’ve gone to waste, could’ve been more like “At least Low 2-C (or just Low 2-C), 2-B at most” or something along those lines.

No one's against Low 2-C but I assume you meant 2-B. Please don't propose stats on 2-C or above w/o having both the full mechanics that would lead to it in mind and the counters to the issues against UT being a multiverse. It's not like I can think "Well someone else proposed answers to those issues and he's just agreeing with them".

 

[Roachman40]

I replied to that comment already and it doesn't bring up fun values. So, again, my issue with him is that he already has the premise of fun values being alt. universe w/o the why and how of it, meaning that a comment where he doesn't bring up fun values does nothing.

hopefully these answer your question.

Because you don't fabricate timelines out of thin air when you reset. You simply travel to a new timeline, there's no reason they can't repeat, and in fact, you may repeat a FUN value when resetting (Start at FUN 88, go to FUN 52 then back to 88 is possible). However many times they reset won't affect the total number of timelines.

Don't try to say "If they return, the timeline will be in the same state as they were when they left", the reset also rewinds time. We have 100 timelines max.

"You have to be creating new timelines because you'd go to a new one where Frisk exists".

Resetting stops one timeline and starts a new one, and rips everyone from the current timeline to the new one. There wouldn't be a second frisk or a second anyone in these timelines because they are removed from the previous one. It does not fabricate timelines out of thin air.

Again, do not use the "other sans-es" line as evidence, as it refers to Sans himself with different memories from another path, which is still him.

One timeline whose events change at random regardless if things and paths Frisk takes are the exact same? How does that work? No, FUN Values are a clear indication of different timelines, it's how you encounter the Goner Kid who even talks to you about different worlds where he doesn't exist, aka, the different FUN Values, meaning they are evidence, in conjunction with Alphys' and Sans' statement.

100 Timelines is the bare minimum, and there is no evidence that there is any more.

And you don't answer any of the questions the blog leaves open in that scenario: It makes no sense for there to be more than 1 timeline yet only 1 Frisk as all characters would be pretty much talking to nothing and all of Frisk's actions would be done by nothing as they're not there. If they all have a Frisk then they would all have a player, which they can't given what the player is, which there is only one. How does this fit with timelines stopping/ending? (ie why do we say there are many timelines existing when we're told those don't exist anymore.) Why do Chara and Asriel use "world" in conversations together but then one uses it as in "the timeline" and the other as in "the game", is the game not the multiverse? Since you didn't elaborate that whole part I don't get to know the mechanics you picked up aside from the nobility of claiming there is possibly a multiverse somehow.

I suppose charmanders quotes above give a reasonable interpretation on the first question, and even then, the player isnt really a objective canon character either, but that is a discussion for a different time, perhaps. Timelines stopping doesn't only have to mean that they would stop existing. you can stop a running car, but that doesn't mean the car suddenly ceases to exist because you stopped it, y'know? for the third question, just because a character uses a word in a particular context, doesn't mean they are always using it in that context.

Otherwise, I can settle with a possibly 2-C, yea.

 

[Roachman40]

my apologies if it's taking me a long time to respond btw, admittedly kinda busy, but I will try to respond to everything, my friends

 

[FoxySonicMaster108]

No one's against Low 2-C but I assume you meant 2-B. Please don't propose stats on 2-C or above w/o having both the full mechanics that would lead to it in mind and the counters to the issues against UT being a multiverse. It's not like I can think "Well someone else proposed answers to those issues and he's just agreeing with them".

I was just saying Low 2-C shouldn’t have gone to waste (it got removed when 2-B was added to the profiles), even when the verse got upgraded. And I said “possibly 2-C” is fine, doesn’t mean I mean I fully agree with it, if anything, I’m pretty neutral in all of this, as I’ve just been watching the thread for almost all of it. I wasn’t really purposing anything, I was just saying how it could’ve gone instead.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

It's not wrong to say it's the more realistic approach, but it more so just has the least issues. To go over them:

• As we know she didn't state other universes to be a thing in any reliable way, her research was in her free time where she's proven to be extremely casual and imprecise, hence Mettaton compares this to the time she said anime was real. Mettaton taunts the idea of other universes being a thing and the matter ends as a joke. The point of Mettaton's comparison was the unreliability of her claim. This would hypothetically be the type of universes that would have things like an ideal partner for her (not Undyne), not actual parallel timelines similar to the main UT timeline; this new concept comes out of nowhere and is never referenced anywhere else in UT.
• Even IF this universes do existed, there is no reason that they would do so inside Undertale rather than outside it.
• Deltarune is implied to be a different universe from UT, "different" not in the sense of some events here & there being routed in new ways, but in a much wider, unintuitive way; Deltarune is its own game(s), outside of Undertale, fitting to the idea that, should other universes do exist, they would not be inside UT.
• Chara says that they would move on from that world and move on to the "next", which also fits the idea of UT being 1 timeline. Flowey uses "the world" to refer to the timeline as proven when he's Asriel and Flowey & Chara likely use the word in the same way.

As such, this is not worthy of a "possibly".

Don't worry, I've already seen your arguments against a "possibly Low Multiverse level" rank. I pressed the like button on some of your messages about this to signify agreement. I was expecting other people to continue discussing this with you if they disagree.

 

[Eficiente]

hopefully these answer your question.





I suppose charmanders quotes above give a reasonable interpretation on the first question

It leaves a bit more clear what's the premise you buy into, so from then on I can have other questions. So, you're saying

• All timelines already exist in UT
• There are up to 100 of them
• LOADs and Resets change the characters from 1 timeline to another and they may end up in the same timeline more than once
• There is only 1 of every character

This is functional as a thing to say and it covers some issues that can't apply to it, which is nice, but we quickly run into some of the same issues as well as new ones:

• As said before, what Alphys hypothetically said would be the type of universes that would have things like an ideal partner for her (not Undyne), not actual parallel timelines similar to the main UT timeline; this new concept comes out of nowhere and is never referenced anywhere else in UT. Meaning that what Alphys said doesn't support this, only what Sans said would.
• What Sans said could fit this idea, but it's a stretch; Timelines don't jump left and right as they stay the same and only the characters are moved, tho we don't know what them "jumping left and right" means. Timelines don't "stop" or "start", the events in them do; you could say it's the same for a timeline and all the events in it to "stop", but to say that a timeline "starts" more so sounds like the timeline itself it's being created, not that the events in it now start. Everything doesn't end for a timeline, but for the people in it, which is still everything ending. It's a very odd way to say all this.
• All the other takes on what Goner Kid said still apply, most of them not meaning there is a multiverse and taking less speculation
  • Particularly: "another take on "a world where everything is exactly the same except you don't exist" may also be that the world/timeline can be the same except Goner Kid doesn't exist just like it can be the same with him existing, both cases may switch from each other in the same timeline via unknown means (the fun values we don't know about), which still makes what he said make sense. So what he says would refer to something real while there is still 1 timeline. As in, if someone you know talks you hypothetically about a world where they themselves are 5 cms taller then sure, they may be talking about alt. universes, but they may also simply mean this very same universe with that small change implemented." Should this be the case, a timeline changing itself makes abundantly more sense than there being many wasteland timelines for characters to occupy on a LOAD/Reset, simply because the latter is completely absurd.
• Wasteland timelines legit don't make any sense. The world gets shaped, destroyed and has things built on it because of the living beings (and ghosts) in it, all of this can't happen via nothing. If all the timelines were things as simple as many empty chess boards with 1 board having its pieces on it, and LOADs & Resets move those pieces into another board, that would be perfectly logical. The timeline in UT is a whole universe with a human world and a monster world, asking 1 of the hundreds of questions that could be made, how do houses get made with nobody to make them? It doesn't make any sense, this "wasteland timelines" theory isn't a thing because it can be followed, but because it dodges the more amount of issues with the idea of UT being a multiverse and it somewhat fits with some information given.
  • Think about what information the game gives us about the idea of wasteland timelines; you only know about the fun values by editing the game, the most generous take on what Goner Kid said doesn't fully do it yet, and then at last we have how Sans & Flowey refer to LOADs/Resets as everyone being ripped from the timeline back in time with no memory...which is clearly poetic, all the living beings in the universe aren't being warped into another universe, it's just a dramatic way of saying "turning back time, thus others won't remember their actions". I cannot understate how much this was blown out of proportion.

, and even then, the player isnt really a objective canon character either, but that is a discussion for a different time, perhaps

It is by the topic you're dealing it, tho the player isn't an issue for your take. If it was, we would need to be talking about it.

Timelines stopping doesn't only mean that they would stop existing. you can stop a running car, but that doesn't mean the car suddenly ceases to exist because you stopped it, y'know?

This bit is correct by your take as I wrote above.

for the third question, just because a character uses a word in a particular context, doesn't mean they are always using it in that context.

Well, Asriel and Chara were raised together, fused together, Flowey inherited his evil views & what he wanted to do to the world from Chara, Flowey told Chara what they were doing to do to the world in the Geno run. Asriel/Flowey does use it always in the same context as he has done many times, if he even once didn't and meant "the multiverse", his actions as Asriel would be contradicted because he's not doing to the multiverse what he said he would. Chara somehow didn't mean the same the few times they could say "the world", as such, it is fair to say that it doesn't make sense for Chara to not mean "the timeline" when saying "the world", it's not just a case of this being a bit odd, the dialogue misleading, or "timeline" taking less speculation than "multiverse" when saying "world".

 

[Roachman40]

It leaves a bit more clear what's the premise you buy into, so from then on I can have other questions. So, you're saying

• All timelines already exist in UT
• There are up to 100 of them
• LOADs and Resets change the characters from 1 timeline to another and they may end up in the same timeline more than once
• There is only 1 of every character

This is functional as a thing to say and it covers some issues that can't apply to it, which is nice, but we quickly run into some of the same issues as well as new ones:

I do agree with most of that ye. While I still think 2-B is possible, I just wanted to defend the case for 2-C, and I can settle with a possibly 2-C as i've said before.

• As said before, what Alphys hypothetically said would be the type of universes that would have things like an ideal partner for her (not Undyne), not actual parallel timelines similar to the main UT timeline; this new concept comes out of nowhere and is never referenced anywhere else in UT. Meaning that what Alphys said doesn't support this, only what Sans said would.

Alphys isn't really specific with what she said, so she could still be referring to these timelines considering the extent of her knowledge on these 'alternate universes' isn't really well explained, you could also consider she hasn't even met these alternate worlds, so she likely doesn't know what's inside em either. Although I agree with rethpo here on that it should be left as extra evidence and not really a main point.

• What Sans said could fit this idea, but it's a stretch; Timelines don't jump left and right as they stay the same and only the characters are moved, tho we don't know what them "jumping left and right" means. Timelines don't "stop" or "start", the events in them do; you could say it's the same for a timeline and all the events in it to "stop", but to say that a timeline "starts" more so sounds like the timeline itself it's being created, not that the events in it now start. Everything doesn't end for a timeline, but for the people in it, which is still everything ending. It's a very odd way to say all this.

The timelines jumping left and right probably refers to LOADing, considering with loading you can change the past and go back to a certain points in time, which in the process causes the timeline to jump (just before the sans fight, flowey converses with frisk/chara about his experience with SAVE and LOAD, and how he did pretty much everything in the underground with it, which should hopefully help solidify this point.

For your timelines point, I could go back to the car explanation again. You can stop a running car, and than start it up again (Like starting at FUN 90, going to FUN 70 or smthn, then back to FUN 90, which is possible) Probably isn't the best example but you get what I mean, yea? RESETs also have the ability to mess with time of course, so the timeline you started up again will not be in the same state as it was when you left it, as mentioned above.

I want to clarify on what I think sans means by "everything ends" btw. Sans says it as if it has happened before, which may imply “everything ends” refers to a reset. However, I feel it could just be that 'everything ends' is a prediction of sorts that sans noticed in the reports, and not something he experienced first hand. He doesn’t seem to be fighting the resets.

heh heh heh…
that’s your fault, isn’t it?
you can’t understand how this feels.
knowing that one day, without any warning…
it’s all going to be reset.

look. i gave up trying to go back a long time ago.
and getting to the surface doesn’t really appeal anymore, either.
cause even if we do…
we’ll just end up right back here, without any memory of it, right?

As seen here. He is aware of the resets happening, so it is noteworthy that it is only in the genocide route he would try to stop frisk from completing it. This also seems to support the interpretation that “timelines jumping left and right, stopping and starting” refers to loads and resets. Thus, I don't think “everything ends” refers to a reset or smthn.

to be blunt…
it makes it kind of hard to give it my all.
…or is that just a poor excuse for being lazy…?
hell if i know.
all i know is… seeing what comes next…
i can’t afford not to care anymore.

“seeing what comes next” implies that sans saw something in the report that concerned him enough to stop frisk from completing there mission. It’s not merely finishing the game that has Sans worried. He allows Frisk to reach the end multiple times in a neutral run, and even if try to do a genocide route, kill everyone but spare one random monster he will still let you go. Resets seem to be the cause of his depression but it still brings back papyrus and everyone. The destruction of everything, though, is much more dire.

• All the other takes on what Goner Kid said still apply, most of them not meaning there is a multiverse and taking less speculation
• • • Particularly: "another take on "a world where everything is exactly the same except you don't exist" may also be that the world/timeline can be the same except Goner Kid doesn't exist just like it can be the same with him existing, both cases may switch from each other in the same timeline via unknown means (the fun values we don't know about), which still makes what he said make sense. So what he says would refer to something real while there is still 1 timeline. As in, if someone you know talks you hypothetically about a world where they themselves are 5 cms taller then sure, they may be talking about alt. universes, but they may also simply mean this very same universe with that small change implemented." Should this be the case, a timeline changing itself makes abundantly more sense than there being many wasteland timelines for characters to occupy on a LOAD/Reset, simply because the latter is completely absurd.

The gaster take doesn't seem very likely to me tbh, yes he looks like a gaster follower but he dosent exactly have all of their traits, as said above frisk is capable of using the phone in his room, of which you cant in a gaster followers room, nor does goner kid mention gaster at all, of which every gaster follower shown mentions gaster by name). The 'he is a ghost' take and 'this is just what a kid thinks' take doesn't have much backing it as well, me thinks. We cant really go into the mind of goner kid to be completely sure. Goner kid being a ghost im kinda ehh about as well, as rethpo said I don't think it would be very relevant to what goner kid said, and even if 'maybe he is a different kind of ghost' theres not much to really back that up. Otherwise, what goner kid said could mean many things, but interpreting what he said as referring to the other worlds I would think is very much possible, especially combined with the other stuff I brought up.

• Wasteland timelines legit don't make any sense. The world gets shaped, destroyed and has things built on it because of the living beings (and ghosts) in it, all of this can't happen via nothing. If all the timelines were things as simple as many empty chess boards with 1 board having its pieces on it, and LOADs & Resets move those pieces into another board, that would be perfectly logical. The timeline in UT is a whole universe with a human world and a monster world, asking 1 of the hundreds of questions that could be made, how do houses get made with nobody to make them? It doesn't make any sense, this "wasteland timelines" theory isn't a thing because it can be followed, but because it dodges the more amount of issues with the idea of UT being a multiverse and it somewhat fits with some information given.
• • • Think about what information the game gives us about the idea of wasteland timelines; you only know about the fun values by editing the game, the most generous take on what Goner Kid said doesn't fully do it yet, and then at last we have how Sans & Flowey refer to LOADs/Resets as everyone being ripped from the timeline back in time with no memory...which is clearly poetic, all the living beings in the universe aren't being warped into another universe, it's just a dramatic way of saying "turning back time, thus others won't remember their actions". I cannot understate how much this was blown out of proportion.

aye, can you clarify more about what you mean about 'wasteland timelines'? what im getting from this is that a wasteland timeline is a timeline left behind and unchanged, just with the characters completely removed from it, if so I feel my timelines 'stopping and starting' point above hopefully answers that.

One unrelated point that I feel might be worthy of bringing up, somewhat, is that deltarune can contain more than one timeline at once, evidently, and if we consider that deltarune and undertale exist in the same multiverse, whats to say that undertale cant have more than one timeline like its counterpart? now, understandably this is a moot point on its own, but considering everything else, I think its worth taking into consideration.

Well, Asriel and Chara were raised together, fused together, Flowey inherited his evil views & what he wanted to do to the world from Chara, Flowey told Chara what they were doing to do to the world in the Geno run. Asriel/Flowey does use it always in the same context as he has done many times, if he even once didn't and meant "the multiverse", his actions as Asriel would be contradicted because he's not doing to the multiverse what he said he would. Chara somehow didn't mean the same the few times they could say "the world", as such, it is fair to say that it doesn't make sense for Chara to not mean "the timeline" when saying "the world", it's not just a case of this being a bit odd, the dialogue misleading, or "timeline" taking less speculation than "multiverse" when saying "world".

They still are quite different, I believe, even when they where fused they both had completely different intentions on what to do with the human village, and in some of the dialogue, I don't think they are exactly referring to just the timeline, specifically.

Don’t you get it?
This is all just a GAME.
If you leave the underground satisfied, you’ll “win” the game.
If you “win,” you won’t want to “play” with me anymore.
And what would I do then?

I’ve done everything this world has to offer.
I’ve read every book. I’ve burned every book.
I’ve won every game. I’ve lost every game.
I’ve appeased everyone. I’ve killed everyone.
Sets of numbers… Lines of dialogue… I’ve seen them all.

Here is a good example, i'd say.

 

[Eficiente]

The timelines jumping left and right probably refers to LOADing, considering with loading you can change the past and go back to a certain points in time, which in the process causes the timeline to jump (just before the sans fight, flowey converses with frisk/chara about his experience with SAVE and LOAD, and how he did pretty much everything in the underground with it, which should hopefully help solidify this point.

For your timelines point, I could go back to the car explanation again. You can stop a running car, and than start it up again (Like starting at FUN 90, going to FUN 70 or smthn, then back to FUN 90, which is possible) Probably isn't the best example but you get what I mean, yea? RESETs also have the ability to mess with time of course, so the timeline you started up again will not be in the same state as it was when you left it, as mentioned above.

It's pretty odd to word "timelines" when he doesn't mean timelines & what he says isn't happening to the timelines but the people in them. But again, what he says does fit this interpretation.

I want to clarify on what I think sans means by "everything ends" btw. Sans says it as if it has happened before, which may imply “everything ends” refers to a reset. However, I feel it could just be that 'everything ends' is a prediction of sorts that sans noticed in the reports, and not something he experienced first hand. He doesn’t seem to be fighting the resets.



As seen here. He is aware of the resets happening, so it is noteworthy that it is only in the genocide route he would try to stop frisk from completing it. This also seems to support the interpretation that “timelines jumping left and right, stopping and starting” refers to loads and resets. Thus, I don't think “everything ends” refers to a reset or smthn.

I know that.

“seeing what comes next” implies that sans saw something in the report that concerned him enough to stop frisk from completing there mission. It’s not merely finishing the game that has Sans worried. He allows Frisk to reach the end multiple times in a neutral run, and even if try to do a genocide route, kill everyone but spare one random monster he will still let you go. Resets seem to be the cause of his depression but it still brings back papyrus and everyone. The destruction of everything, though, is much more dire.

That's part of his motivation sure but I don't think this matters to this thread in any way?

The gaster take doesn't seem very likely to me tbh, yes he looks like a gaster follower but he dosent exactly have all of their traits, as said above frisk is capable of using the phone in his room, of which you cant in a gaster followers room, nor does goner kid mention gaster at all, of which every gaster follower shown mentions gaster by name).

He doesn't have all the traits but he has traits other Gaster followers have that regular monsters do not. You would need to look really deep into it to know that about the phone, and the fact that you can't use it with the followers doesn't tell us anything concrete about them as followers. Not saying Gaster by name is the point of his difference with the other followers; the fact that he may be saying something that could apply to Gaster w/o naming him directly. It is speculation, yes, and it coming from appearance and comparisons to similar characters makes it pretty straightforward on that.

The 'he is a ghost' take and 'this is just what a kid thinks' take doesn't have much backing it as well, me thinks. We cant really go into the mind of goner kid to be completely sure. Goner kid being a ghost im kinda ehh about as well, as rethpo said I don't think it would be very relevant to what goner kid said, and even if 'maybe he is a different kind of ghost' theres not much to really back that up.

It's ok if you don't buy him being a ghost, but that too is a pretty straightforward thing to say. There are things to back it up as he looks undead and seems to be able to disappear in a supernatural way, if he doesn't just walk away when we don't see him.

What he says being what he thinks is the standard thing to take from his word, that takes no speculation/0 speculation to interpret, so you can't say it doesn't have things to back it up.

aye, can you clarify more about what you mean about 'wasteland timelines'? what im getting from this is that a wasteland timeline is a timeline left behind and unchanged, just with the characters completely removed from it, if so I feel my timelines 'stopping and starting' point above hopefully answers that.

That is the biggest point against your take, it's a logical issue that pops up pretty quickly when you think of the worldbuilding rules you went with (Well, you quoted someone else and I had to pick them up: )

• All timelines already exist in UT
• There are up to 100 of them
• LOADs and Resets change the characters from 1 timeline to another and they may end up in the same timeline more than once
• There is only 1 of every character

Meaning; Let's say all characters are in timeline 1, so timelines 2 up to 100 don't have anyone in them (They're wastelands). If someone creates a house in timeline 1, how does this house get made in timeline 2 (and the rest of the timelines)? If someone moves a chair in timeline 1, how does this chair move in timeline 2? And so on, living beings (and ghosts that exist in UT) interact and change the world around them all the time, and this power moves all characters from 1 timeline to another timeline that will somehow be the same at any time. This utterly doesn't make any sense, it's completely nonsensical.

Could there exist a verse with this rules? Sure thing, but look at the evidence that makes you reach this conclusion in UT's case;

• You only know about the fun values by editing the game, that doesn't count
• The most generous take on what Goner Kid said doesn't fully do it on its own, it would only mean "there may be another world"
• And then, at last, we have how Sans & Flowey refer to LOADs/Resets as "everyone being ripped from the timeline back in time with no memory", THAT leads to the idea of timelines existing with no one in them, but what they said is clearly poetic, all the living beings in the universe aren't being warped into another universe, it's just a dramatic way of saying "turning back time makes others don't remember their actions in the time that was turned back". I cannot understate how much this was blown out of proportion, are you able to see the immense leap in logic done for UT to be a multiverse by this worldbuilding rules?

One unrelated point that I feel might be worthy of bringing up, somewhat, is that deltarune can contain more than one timeline at once, evidently, and if we consider that deltarune and undertale exist in the same multiverse, whats to say that undertale cant have more than one timeline like its counterpart? now, understandably this is a moot point on its own, but considering everything else, I think its worth taking into consideration.

The future game with its full story not having been finished yet having a bigger cosmology while maybe dealing with that in the future of its story doesn't matter to the old game and its self-contained story having a smaller setting. Since it doesn't matter, it's not worth bringing up.

They still are quite different, I believe, even when they where fused they both had completely different intentions on what to do with the human village

That is completely irrelevant to how they use 1 word every time they used that word. Edit: Also that was Asriel before inheriting Chara's views and evil desires for the world, before sharing their "In this world, it's kill or be killed" view on the world. So there is that.

, and in some of the dialogue, I don't think they are exactly referring to just the timeline, specifically.



Here is a good example, i'd say.

That's because world and timeline are pretty synonymous, Flowey did all that in the same timeline being changed by himself. If they weren't synonymous, Asriel saying that he would nuke the timeline and take control of it should be him saying that he would nuke all timelines and take control of all timelines from Frisk, not just the timeline they're in. You're using the premise that the world is already a multiverse.

 

[Eficiente]

While I still think 2-B is possible

I know that was mentioned, but it would be a case of a "possibly" being asked without it being earned as the reasons that make it impossible are still there. A compromise isn't good just because it's a compromise.

 

[Deleted member 16409]

Is 2c possibly anyway???

 

[Eficiente]

It is literally impossible, sorry.

 

[InfiniteDay]

What's the current vote tally?

 

[Roachman40]

Mostly the same, it seems.

Agree with 2-B: Transcending, Darkdragonmedeus, Originlima, Saikou, Chariot (although seems to prefer a '2-C, likely 2-B' rating), Wagy, Mav, Strym, Infiniteday (9)

Agree with 2-C: Charmander, Esseso

Neutral: Foxysonicmaster, Rethpo, Presumably James?

Disagree: Eficiente, Moritza (Likely dosent disagree anymore, although gonna keep her on the disagree list until im completely sure)

Otherwise, I will respond to your post in a bit eficiente, my apologies for keeping ye wait.

 

[Eficiente]

That isn't an honest vote tally, there isn't any valid vote tally, the arguments & mechanics for possibly 2-C were first put on this comment a short time ago whereas they should have been in the op, the reasons that make 2-B impossible were still never touched.

 

[InfiniteDay]

That isn't an honest vote tally, there isn't any valid vote tally, the arguments & mechanics for possibly 2-C were first put on this comment a short time ago whereas they should have been in the op, the reasons that make 2-B impossible were still never touched.

What do you mean it isn't honest. How can counting people's votes not be honest? We could try and get everybody who votes here to confirm if they want to change their vote or not based off new discussion, but as it is the CRT will pass.

 

[Roachman40]

That isn't an honest vote tally, there isn't any valid vote tally, the arguments & mechanics for possibly 2-C were first put on this comment a short time ago whereas they should have been in the op, the reasons that make 2-B impossible were still never touched.

Before I get into my response of your above post, I am actually quite curious. Could you please restate the reasons for why you think 2-B is 'impossible'? or perhaps, point me to them?

 

[Eficiente]

What do you mean it isn't honest. How can counting people's votes not be honest? We could try and get everybody who votes here to confirm if they want to change their vote or not based off new discussion, but as it is the CRT will pass.

If you are really aware of the "new discussion" then you should be aware of how it isn't honest, if you were just aware of the vague idea that there was new discussion but don't know what information it brings then you should also be aware of how it isn't honest. To point out how the arguments & mechanics for what the CRT argues were first put a few comments ago means that the people agreeing with them did so from before the arguments & mechanics for what they agree with where first told. The last thing I said was just too self-explanatory. There is no "as it is the CRT will pass" because this whole thread is evidently fraudulent, people will obviously want to do things like agree with possibly 2-B w/o caring to argue against its issues.

Before I get into my response of your above post, I am actually quite curious. Could you please restate the reasons for why you think 2-B is 'impossible'? or perhaps, point me to them?

You already claimed to have read my blog tho, and I already got false claims on me for pointing out how users like you didn't undertood it properly. I don't remember saying anything new that you can't look up in my blog (aside from 1 take on Goner Kid that's over the "possibly 2-C" take, not "possibly 2-B"), so, you can just see it in my blog.

 

[InfiniteDay]

If you are really aware of the "new discussion" then you should be aware of how it isn't honest, if you were just aware of the vague idea that there was new discussion but don't know what information it brings then you should also be aware of how it isn't honest. To point out how the arguments & mechanics for what the CRT argues were first put a few comments ago means that the people agreeing with them did so from before the arguments & mechanics for what they agree with where first told. The last thing I said was just too self-explanatory. There is no "as it is the CRT will pass" because this whole thread is evidently fraudulent, people will obviously want to do things like agree with possibly 2-B w/o caring to argue against its issues.

Homie, you can't invalidate votes because they voted before you became fully invested in the CRT (even though you admit in your next post that you haven't said anything new from your blog) and believe your points to be superior. This isn't how we do things. Your also putting your personal opinions (such as "[the discussion] isn't honest" and "this whole thread is evidently fraudulent) into this as if your opinion is the only one that matters, which just makes your posts tiring to read.

I won't be responding further because this is honestly just derailing, and my vote hasn't changed since you became active, although your free to message those who voted before to see if they would like to come back.

 

[RethPo]

Mostly the same, it seems.

Agree with 2-B: Transcending, Darkdragonmedeus, Originlima, Saikou, Chariot (although seems to prefer a '2-C, likely 2-B' rating), Wagy, Mav, Strym, Infiniteday (9)

Agree with 2-C: Charmander, Esseso

Neutral: Foxysonicmaster, Rethpo, Presumably James?

Disagree: Eficiente, Moritza (Likely dosent disagree anymore, although gonna keep her on the disagree list until im completely sure)

Otherwise, I will respond to your post in a bit eficiente, my apologies for keeping ye wait.

To specify i do currently support low 2-C, possibly 2-C.

 

[Eficiente]

Homie, you can't invalidate votes because they voted before you became fully invested in the CRT (even though you admit in your next post that you haven't said anything new from your blog) and believe your points to be superior. This isn't how we do things. Your also putting your personal opinions (such as "[the discussion] isn't honest" and "this whole thread is evidently fraudulent) into this as if your opinion is the only one that matters, which just makes your posts tiring to read.

I won't be responding further because this is honestly just derailing, and my vote hasn't changed since you became active, although your free to message those who voted before to see if they would like to come back.

You can't just try to control the narrative like that, you don't actually have any argument to say against what I said, you are against your idea of me believing my "points to be superior" and assumed that I wasn't fully invested in the CRT with nothing to back it up, you're just grabbing into whatever you can. You can't just dismiss someone saying those things as "personal opinions" w/o touching their reasons for it because people is free to say those things should they have the reason to say so, obviously anyone who faces invalid votes will be need both say they are invalid and their reasons for it, with the fact that they did so not being something that should not happen, same if something is fraudulent.

 

[Robo432343]

Yo i found a good debunk for Undertale

 

[Comiphorous]

Yo i found a good debunk for Undertale

the only part that mentioned the multiversal part, tried to say chara isn't even universal because theres a wind sound effect playing. none of that is even close to a 'good' debunk. chara threw it INTO YOUR FACE they destroyed the game, and everything apart of it. that would include timelines.

 

[Robo432343]

the only part that mentioned the multiversal part, tried to say chara isn't even universal because theres a wind sound effect playing. none of that is even close to a 'good' debunk. chara threw it INTO YOUR FACE they destroyed the game, and everything apart of it. that would include timelines.

idk man it seems pretty solid ngl

 

[Comiphorous]

idk man it seems pretty solid ngl

Well it's not. using the fact a sound effect was playing doesn't prove that they didn't destroy everything when you're sitting in a void of nothing.

 

[Greatsage13th]

Well it's not. using the fact a sound effect was playing doesn't prove that they didn't destroy everything when you're sitting in a void of nothing.

He's just joking

 

[Robo432343]

He's just joking

agreed

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

It is not advised to just find some random article and post it as your argument. That is like an epitome of laziness; furthermore, if the title is "Stop Wanking" that comes off as very condescending. Not to mention CR in general is often filled with extremely controversial debaters who are usually too extreme to consider the most reliable.

 

[Eficiente]

Let's go back a bit and try this part again.

Before I get into my response of your above post, I am actually quite curious. Could you please restate the reasons for why you think 2-B is 'impossible'? or perhaps, point me to them?

At this point, I see myself as being obliged in a negative way to always answer to questions like this in a way far more elaborated than what you're intenting me to, given how the thread developed.

Let's first go over the worldbuilding rules on "possibly 2-B", which you should have laid down before asking what makes it "impossible":

• The timelines are made via each LOADs & Resets
• There are thousands of them due to the number of LOADs & Resets
• There are as many versions of each character as the number of timelines, including Frisk, Chara, and the player

So the issues:

• From my blog, this comment, : Sans states the timelines to stop and that everything ends for them in the process of LOADs & Resets, yet in the "possibly 2-B" take they still exist. Since this isn't the "possibly 2-C" take, you can't argue that this simply refers to the actions in those timelines stopping while the ambients that are those timelines remain as they are.
• From my blog, this comment, this comment, : If all timelines have a Frisk then they would all have a player, which they can't given what the player is; a being from outside the game that there is only 1 of and whose all actions we always take & see displayed in 1 timeline. The lore states pretty clearly that the player gives Frisk their powers over the timeline.
• From this comment: If other universes have other same versions of the events of the game then how the hell can they copy O. Flowey messing with the game for us to see.This is not something that "can" happen across many timelines as that doesn't make any sense, the notion of there being many Floweys/Asriels having done the same as our Flowey/Asriel in general makes no sense.
• From my blog, this comment, this comment, this comment, this comment: Why do Chara and Asriel use "world" in conversations together but then one uses it as in "the timeline" and the other as in "the game", is the game not the multiverse?-Why does Chara refer to the game as "the world" when Asriel uses "the world" to refer to the timeline? I would think those 2 "kids" raised together to be in line with the meaning they have for it, especially when Flowey talks about his plans for the world to Chara.-Well, Asriel and Chara were raised together, fused together, Flowey inherited his evil views & what he wanted to do to the world from Chara, Flowey told Chara what they were doing to do to the world in the Geno run. Asriel/Flowey does use it always in the same context as he has done many times, if he even once didn't and meant "the multiverse", his actions as Asriel would be contradicted because he's not doing to the multiverse what he said he would. Chara somehow didn't mean the same the few times they could say "the world", as such, it is fair to say that it doesn't make sense for Chara to not mean "the timeline" when saying "the world", it's not just a case of this being a bit odd, the dialogue misleading, or "timeline" taking less speculation than "multiverse" when saying "world".
• From my blog, this comment: The whole deal with Sans' reasoning for his laziness and depression; he goes over how he knows how everything everyone does can simply amount to nothing on a LOAD or Reset sending them all back in time with no memory of their actions, thus fuelling his decision to not put all his best effort in his own actions, but then all of this is bs if he's saying in the very same conversation that there are many timelines, as this would mean nothing is pointless and everyone always gets the results of their actions, only the "current" timeline being the one where this isn't the case. You would need to pretty much edit out Sans' dialogue here and there for it to be more accurate on the idea of there being multiverse and how he still has roughly similar reasons for his laziness in that scenario, but as it is his dialogue is made for a world where there is always 1 timeline.
• From my blog, this comment: Flowey at the end of the true pasicist run says something similar, that that timeline will NOT remain as it is somewhere in a multiverse, but that the timeline will be modified at your whim if you want to, doing so making pointles everything everyone fought hard to achieve because they're being sent back to the start. The whole point here only makes sense in a world where where is only 1 timeline.

What do you mean it isn't honest. How can counting people's votes not be honest? We could try and get everybody who votes here to confirm if they want to change their vote or not based off new discussion, but as it is the CRT will pass.

The first sentence of my reply to this already had all the information you needed, the following sentences being extra while I was trying to be helpful. In a less neglectful CRT staff would have noted how your following comment accusing me of

• not having been fully invested in the CRT before,
• believing my points to be superior
• how the massive claim that is votes are invalid is my personal opinions
• and acting as if my opinion is the only one that matters

Is complete nonsense. Wtf is going on here? Either they agree with you and they do nothing on me for those accusations or (more likely) they don't agree simpy because they lack the time to see in the logic behind those accusations and who is right or wrong, so they purposely allow this false accusations to happen. Which is terrible of their part. I already had to fend off alone a similar list of random false accusations earlier in the thread, the standard for the wiki is for staff to do something before even that happens, not leave things as they are now.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

Homie, you can't invalidate votes because they voted before you became fully invested in the CRT (even though you admit in your next post that you haven't said anything new from your blog) and believe your points to be superior. This isn't how we do things.

In a less accusatory way, this is how we do things. If new important points are presented in a thread, and people only voted before that information became noticed, then the votes weren't for the entirety of the matter and people should vote again so the results will be more reliable. Although Eficiente wrote so, it's not actually true that what he wrote doesn't go beyond his blog post. Him answering the points of specific people here using information you can find in his blog post does go beyond the blog post since the information is slightly more personalized to suit the matter at hand. Occassionally Eficiente did elaborate on ideas with details that aren't in his blog post too.

 

[It_is_i_wyatt]

sorry if this is a dumb question but why would each frisk need its own player, are frisk and the player the same person?

 

[Greatsage13th]

sorry if this is a dumb question but why would each frisk need its own player, are frisk and the player the same person?

No, frisk and the player are separate